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

RE: VERY Stupid question, but I dont know the answer...

On Wed, 20 Feb 2002, Williams, Tim wrote:

> _Deinodon horridus_ Leidy 1856 is based on indeterminate teeth, and so is a
> _nomen dubium_.  Hence, the family Deinodontidae is "fruit of the poisonous
> tree", and cannot be considered a valid name either.  Tyrannosauridae Osborn
> 1905 is therefore the first available name for the family containing
> _Tyrannosaurus_ and its close relatives.

Designation of _nomen dubium_ is a subjective decision, and hence cannot
be used to invalidate a name. As you note, Ceratopsidae, Hadrosauridae,
and Titanosauridae are all in use, despite the eponymous genera usually
being considered dubious.

> Hopefully PhyloCode will sort all this out.

 The Dinosauricon        <http://dinosauricon.com>
  BloodySteak             <http://www.bloodysteak.com>
   personal                <keesey@bigfoot.com> --> <tmk@dinosauricon.com>
    Dinosauricon-related    <dinosaur@dinosauricon.com>
     AOL Instant Messenger   <Ric Blayze>
      ICQ                     <77314901>
       Yahoo! Messenger        <Mighty Odinn>