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

Re: Ricardoestia or Richardestia?



In a message dated 1/4/99 9:07:08 PM EST, DINOBOY@worldnet.att.net writes:

<< The name is Ricardoestesia gilmorei(Currie ,Rigby &Sloan, 1990 ) known only
 by a pair of dentaries with unerupted and germ teeth. These teeth were
 found in the Judith River Formation (according to Currie , et.al.).However
 ,in the same paper there is Richardoestesia n. gen. , evidently from the
 Milk River,Scollard,Frenchman,Hell Creek& Lance Formations . The name of
 the former was changed within the past year , I think . Hope this helps
 (confusing as it may be !). >>

The officially correct spelling of the name is _Ricardoestesia gilmorei_. The
incorrect spelling _Richardoestesia_ for the generic name appears throughout
the original article (Currie, Rigby & Sloan, 1990) because of a typographical
error propagated globally by the word processing program (R. Sloan, pers.
comm.). Fortunately, the spelling _Ricardoestesia_ appears in one caption in
the original article, and this became the basis for the first revisor (yours
truly) choosing the spelling without the H (the way the authors originally
intended it to be spelled; R. Sloan, pers. comm.). This revision was done in
the second printing of Mesozoic Meanderings #2, 1992. Of course, many people
haven't seen the revision yet(!), which is why the name continues to appear in
the subsequent literature incorrectly spelled as _Richardoestesia_.