[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Iguanodon (was Re: Saltasauridae (was Re: new titanosaur paper)
> (Oh, for the record, I think that Charig & Chapman should have used
> _Iguanodon aetherfieldensis_ rather than _I. bernissartensis_ for the new
> type species: it would at least have still been a British type!).
I can see a few Poms ...er, I mean British folk being a little upset
at that. I can think of two reasons why Charig and Chapman may have
chosen _bernissartensis_ over _atherfieldensis_ as the new type.
Of the valid species of _Iguanodon_ (and excluding the poorly-
known _I. hoggi_), _I. bernissartensis_ was the next species to be
named after _anglicus_. Secondly, strictly speaking _I.
atherfieldensis_ may have to be renamed if _Vectisaurus valdensis_ is
considered a junior synonym (as David Norman and others believe).
_V. valdensis_ was named in 1879, predating _I. atherfieldensis
First the EU government, now _Iguanodon_. At least Belgium makes