[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Type material: does it have to look pretty?

> bettyc@captivation.com writes:
> << How then are the same species designated when there are recognised (or
> assumed) to be two morphs, such as male and female characteristic dimorphism.
>  If the type (say one of the good 'ol Oviraptors) has a big crest and is a
> large animal but another from the same local and horizon is pretty dang close
> in
> looks and MUCH of the diagnostic features, but the crest aint so big or as
> fancy
> and that other one is considereably more petite...how does one indicate this 
> is
> a  supposed same species but different sex?>>

So DinoGeorge wrote:<<Only after a reasonably large sample size is available can
one do the

> statistical morphometric analyses to see whether the specimens fall into two
> sets, or as they say, "form a bimodal cluster." If the specimens are
> sympatric, seem closely related, are of roughly equal numbers, and are split
> into species diagnosed primarily by features that likely had a display
> function, then one can argue plausibly that one has two sexes in hand rather
> than two taxa. This is essentially how Dodson argued his analysis of the
> numerous sympatric species of _Lambeosaurus_, _Corythosaurus_, and
> _Procheneosaurus_, showing them to be "male," "female," and juvenile of
> either _Lambeosaurus lambei_ or _Corythosaurus casuarius_. >>

So what happens to the 'type' of the absorbed species?
Since it (lets call it the haraldosaur type specimen) used to have diagnostic
features enough to identify it as the prior species (haraldosaurs) and separate
from the newly-absorbing species (geraldosaurs sounds good),  when the two are
tucked in under geraldosaur shouldn't the diagnostic set of features from the 
type of heraldosaur remain as a type specimen?  Do they become a bimodal 
holodigm after the fact or is this one of those cases where you might have more
than one type specimein, a set for each morph, or do you reduce the new set of
features absorbed into geraldosaur by removing the 'type' designation from the
the hrealdosaur specimen?