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

Re: what's a "nomen vanum"?



On Fri, 15 Oct 1999 Dinogeorge@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 10/15/99 6:52:36 PM EST, tkeese1@gl.umbc.edu writes:
> 
> << I'd weed it out of my data files, but I don't know whether to make them
>  _nuda_ or _dubia_... >>
> 
> I note all generic nomina nuda at my Web site's Dinosaur Genera List. Since 
> designating a nomen dubium is largely a matter of opinion, I didn't annotate 
> nomina dubia there. So--if you have a generic nomen vanum, check my list. If 
> I have it as a nomen nudum, change it to nomen nudum; if it's not annotated 
> as a nomen nudum, make it a nomen dubium. Questions, additions, corrections 
> about the Dinosaur Genera List: always interested in hearing them.

Duh! Why didn't I think of that? But, handy as that was for fixing my
list, there are a few non-type species in my files that somehow got
listed as _nomina vana_. Can anyone tell me whether these names...

_Coelurus gracilis_ (=_Dromaeosaurus gracilis_)
_Saurolophus krystofovichi_
_Stegosaurus affinis_

... are properly _nomina nuda_ or _nomina dubia_?

--T. Michael Keesey
tkeese1@gl.umbc.edu | THE DINOSAURICON: http://dinosaur.umbc.edu/
AOL IM:   RicBlayze | WORLDS:    http://www.gl.umbc.edu/~tkeese1/