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

Re: Archosauromorph Questions

On Fri, 5 Feb 1999 15:33:04 -0500 "Larry Febo" <larryf@capital.net>
>I have two questions...first, upon looking for info about 
>(the prolacertiform) I am encountering much non-applicable stuff about
>"Protorosaurus" (the dinosaur). Is this sort of stuff legal in 
>taxonomy (I
>mean two beasts with the same name), ...or did somebody just spell 
   I think the dinosaur *Protorosaurus* you're describing is an old name
for *Chasmosaurus*.   *Protorosaurus* was the first new generic name
Lambe wanted to use for what is now called *Chasmosaurus*.  He originally
described what would become the type species *C. belli* as *Monoclonius
belli*, back in 1902, but then renamed it when it became clear "M. belli"
was not *Monoclonius*.  So, he coined the name *Protorosaurus belli* in
1914, the name coming from his belief that it was the ancestor of
*Torosaurus*.  So far, so good.  Then, it turned out *Protorosaurus* was
already in use, so he had to rename it, choosing *Chasmosaurus* later in
   It is not legal for a generic name to be used twice.  This does happen
on occasion accidently, though, necessitating a name change for the
younger claimant to it.  *Camptosaurus*, for example, started out as
*Camptonotus*, which was already in use ("Aha," said the Inspector, "a
case of Preoccupation!"), necessitating the new name.  *Anchisaurus* had
an even worse time of it.  It took three tries to give it a name not
already in use.
    "Augustia", the sauropod impersonating a stegosaurian, is a recent
example; a bug already has the generic name *Augustia*, so the sauropod
will need a new generic name. 
    So, there's the twisted story of a ceratopid and its many

You don't need to buy Internet access to use free Internet e-mail.
Get completely free e-mail from Juno at http://www.juno.com/getjuno.html
or call Juno at (800) 654-JUNO [654-5866]