[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
From: firstname.lastname@example.org (William Ashworth)
>From recent listmail I see that Gorgosaurus libratus seems to be preferred
> now to Albertosaurus libratus. How did this come about--I obviously missed
> it? ...
There are two aspects to this. First, it turned out that
_Albertosaurus_ as broadly defined (including _libratus_) is
almost certainly paraphyletic. Since phylogenetic taxonomy
rejects paraphyletic taxa, this requires the rejection of
the boradly defined _Albertosaurus_. For those that prefer
evolutionary taxonomy, this is insufficient reason to split
the two species into seperate genera.
Secondly, it has been claimed that _libratus_ differs as much
from the type species of _Albertosaurus_ as _Daspletosaurus_
does from _Tyrannosaurus_. If this is so, then this suggest that
either the two latter genera should be merged or that _Gorgosaurus_
should be split from _Albertosaurus_. (Though, personally, I would
like to see a published analysis of this issue before making up
my mind - anybody have a good literature reference on the matter???)
The peace of God be with you.