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

Re: New taxa from the Lower-to-mid K volume



At 11:07 AM 10/28/98 -0500, Tim Williams wrote:
>> >
>> >Judging from another of the papers in the same volume, the name 
>> >proposed for this one is "Anamantarx ramaljonesi".  There also 
>> >appears another ankylosaurian nomen dubium - "Nodocephalosaurus 
>> >kirtlandi", from later in the Cretaceous.
>> 
>> I was REALLY HOPING to avoid having people post nomina dubia from this
>> volume.  Just wait the few friggin' more months and THEN start using the
names.
>
>
>Jeez, I sort of wondered - if these names are so off-limits, why are 
>they published in the first place?

Easy: because no one knows at the time the papers are written which one will
get published first.  There are months (years, sometimes) between submission
and publication.  Still, the wiser thing to do is not use the term until you
*know* the formal definition is out.

>Happens all the time.  Nothing to 
>get hot and bothered about, surely.

Can anyone say _Ultrasaurus_?  We can, but not for the Morrison brachiosaur,
not even as a junior synonym.  Because Kim thought that name was valid
(after all, everyone was using it) he referred some undiagnostic Korean
material to this genus.  Unfortunately, that name was a nomen nudum prior to
that, so the Korean specimen became the true "_Ultrasaurus_".  Now we can't
use that name for the big Morrison form, even as a junior synonym to
_Brachiosaurus_.

This is the most famous example of this in dinosaur paleontology.

>And George is right: the proper term is nomina nuda.

Correct.

Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
Vertebrate Paleontologist     Webpage: http://www.geol.umd.edu
Dept. of Geology              Email:tholtz@geol.umd.edu
University of Maryland        Phone:301-405-4084
College Park, MD  20742       Fax:  301-314-9661