[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Ceratopsian Systematics [was: Avaceratops and Ceratops (was Re: THE NEW I...
In a message dated 1/26/00 1:12:26 PM EST, znc14@TTACS.TTU.EDU writes:
<< Actually, according to PT, "Ceratopidae" and "Ceratopinae" have
never been defined. >>
Yes, but I think only recently, in Sereno's paper "A rationale for
phylogenetic definitions, with application to the higher-level taxonomy of
Dinosauria," N. Jb. Geol. Palaeont. Abh. 210(1): 41-83, Oct. 1998.
Ceratopsidae: Pachyrhinosaurus, Triceratops, their most recent common
ancestor and all descendants
Ceratopsinae: All ceratopsids closer to Triceratops than to Pachyrhinosaurus
Note that if Triceratops is outside "Chasmosaurinae," this definition of
Ceratopsinae might exclude the chasmosaurines from the subfamily. And even
the genus Ceratops, such as it is.
The ICZN takes the long view of definitions and diagnoses, including
phylogenetic taxonomy: they're all just passing fads. Only the names are
stable and will exist for as long as there is zoological taxonomy, not the
groups nor their definitions, which change whenever there is a new