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

Re: Taxonomy

Speaking of taxonomy, a recent issue of Skeptic magazine (Vol. 6 No. 4   
1998) has an interview with Jack Horner in which he briefly discusses   
what he sees as a problem historical and current classification systems   
have dealing with transitional forms.  Many on this list have probably   
spoken with JH about this and have far more insight into his thinking   
than I, but the article suggests that he's proposing to account for   
transitional forms by showing hypothesized ancestor-descendent   
relationships as "versions" of a taxon (Tyrannosaurus 1.0, Tyrannosaurus   
1.5, 1.6, etc.) in a cladogram.  An example he offers of transition (his   
words) begins with Styracosaurs from the Judith River Formation in   
Alberta (75 Ma), through 3 transitional forms found in the Two Medicine   
formation of Montana, to Pachyrhynosaurus of the Horseshoe Canyon   
Formation in Alberta (68 Ma).  Versions 1.0 through 1.5 of Styracosaurus?

This article is all of read of this idea, and it certainly seems to have   
problems of its own.  Anyone heard any more about this?