[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: "carnosaur" classification (ABC)
Yes, that does help. I think I'll go with Megalosauridae, and hope it
gets phylocode priority rather than Torvosauridae.
As for it having a "wastebasket image", I think "Carnosauria" beats it
by a country mile. The short story is that Carnosauria was a polyphyletic
wastebasket, until they took tyrannosaurs out. That basically left a
paraphyletic Carnosauria (as you noted), so then all the spinosaurs and
megalosaurs were thrown out as well, leaving Carnosauria (sensu stricto)
which is basically the same thing as Allosauria/Allosauroidea (sensu lato).
With that kind of wastebasket history and different meanings, I would
much rather get rid of Carnosauria (as a taxon of any kind), whose
wastebasket-istics are far worse than those of Megalosauridae. Even if I
did want to keep the old paraphyletic "Carnosauria" (which I don't), I would
call it something else. On top of everything else, the name "carnosaur"
isn't even appropriate any more---actually come to think of it, it never was
ABC (Anything But Carnosauria)!!!!! Toss it on the junk pile with
Vermes and Insectivora.
From: "David Marjanovic" <David.Marjanovic@gmx.at>
To: "The Dinosaur Mailing List" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: "carnosaur" classification
Date: Sun, 7 Jan 2001 18:49:44 +0100
If you include Torvo-/Megalosauridae in Carnosauria, it is likely to become
> P.S. QUESTION: By the way, which has priority, Torvosauridae or
> Megalosauridae? Is it possible that one could have priority by the
> Zoological Code and the other priority by the PhyloCode???
Yes. If *Megalosaurus* belongs into Torvosauridae as currently understood,
and it surely looks like that, then under ICZN Megalosauridae has priority.
I have read somewhere (maybe I can dig the ref up, but...) that at least
some people prefer to use Torvosauridae because it is phylogenetically
defined (how actually? *Torvosaurus* > Neornithes?) and well-diagnosed
(how?). Under PhyloCode nothing has priority, because it is not yet
implemented. Either M. or T. will gain priority if it will be
phylogenetically defined _after_ PhyloCode will have been implemented.
Until then I'll prefer to use T. because M. has this wastebasket image.
Hope this helps!
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com