[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
At 09:09 PM 06/03/02 +0000, fabian Abu-Nasser wrote:
just saw the reuters news item on feathers in a non-avian dinosaur. Does
this mean that the original archeopteryx specimen could be from a dinosaur
rather than a bird? If so does it render the name archaeopteryx obsolete?
Archaeopteryx has long been regarded by most authorities as, in effect,
both a dinosaur and a bird (especially if birds are, as they certainly seem
to be, derived dinosaurs). This has nothing to do with the name
"Archaeopteryx". Scientific names do not change because a species'
classification changes, unless the species is transferred to a different
genus. For example, the extinct horned turtle Meiolania was originally
described as a carnivorous lizard (its name means "lesser ripper"). Once
it was realized that it was, in fact, a turtle, its classification changed
- but the name "Meiolania" did not.
Anyway, rules aside, the name "Archaeopteryx", which means "ancient wing",
remains wholly appropriate.
Ronald I. Orenstein Phone: (905) 820-7886
International Wildlife Coalition Fax/Modem: (905) 569-0116
1825 Shady Creek Court
Mississauga, Ontario, Canada L5L 3W2 mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org
- [no subject]
- From: "fabian Abu-Nasser" <email@example.com>