[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Fossil species
On Mon, 4 Feb 2002 20:40:10
KiernanCR wrote:
>In a message dated 2/4/02 7:09:11 PM, dinoland@lycos.com writes:
>
><< >Too bad there is no real scientific method for determining what belongs to
>>a genus.
>
>Certainly. Every Linnaean rank above species, as mentioned in a previous
>post, is completely arbitrary and based on the observer. >>
>
>I don't really see *fossil* species as being much, if any, less arbitrary
>than genera.
Unfortunately, when dealing with fossils, what you allude to is correct. But,
the enigmatic concept of a genus applies to everything living and extinct.
However, it certainly seems easier to differentiate between say,
_Psittacosaurus mongoliensis_ and _P. sinensis_, than to divide the
_Psittacosaurus_ species into distinct genera. This was discussed onlist a few
months or so ago, with no one able to come up with a distinct set of characters
to divide _Psittacosaurus_ into two genera (of course, some may have missed the
post...in which case I would be interested in hearing suggestions).
I don't see cladistics as an end to all means, but the idea of a clade is
certainly much more stable than something like a "genus."
Steve
---
***************************************************************
Steve Brusatte-DINO LAND PALEONTOLOGY
SITE: http://www.geocities.com/stegob
ONLINE CLUB: http://clubs.yahoo.com/clubs/thedinolanddinosaurdigsite
WEBRING: http://www.geocities.com/stegob/dlwr.html
INTERNATIONAL LANGUAGE SITE: http://www.geocities.com/stegob/international.html
****************************************************************