[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
In a message dated 5/4/00 0:21:50 AM EST, firstname.lastname@example.org writes:
<< Strictly this makes the second paper the formal definition. The relevant
rule in ICZN says a species or genus definition must contain a differential
diagnosis *or* *refer* to one.
Lawson 1975b appears to meet this requirement, provided it actually refers
to Lawson 1975a.
So, I think we have
_Quetzalcoatlus northropi_ Lawson, 1975 >>
There is one further factor to consider. Under the 1985 ICZN (and,
presumably, under the latest edition, 2000) this does work and permits us to
remove the nomen nudum from the name Quetzalcoatlus northropi. But in 1975,
when the name was created, the ICZN edition in force was the one issued at
the beginning of 1964, the second edition, and, although I don't have a copy
of that code to check, it may have been stricter about what was an acceptable
format for the publication of a new genus and species than the code now in
effect. I distinctly recall several pterosaur workers being miffed that
Quetzalcoatlus was "technically" not a validly published name.