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

Re: SVP Preview



----- Original Message -----
From: <Dinogeorge@aol.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 28, 2002 9:32 AM

> In a message dated 9/28/02 12:08:08 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
> mightyodinn@yahoo.com writes:
>
> << [...] As with species, priority should be assigned by date of explicit
>  definition, not by date of coinage. >>

Dates of definition start with January 1, 200n under PhyloCode, n > 2. :-)

> In the long run, phylogenetic taxonomy
> will be viewed as yet another taxonomic fad in an ever lengthening list of
> such fads and methodologies.

On the whole, the list has the impressive length of... 2 (Linnaean and
phylogenetic). 3 if you count the Kinman System, 4 if you take Ax's way of
doing things, which has so few rules it can hardly be called a nomenclature
(he doesn't deal with species or low-level taxonomy in general, and he
refuses to name clades with fossil types/anchors/...). Any that I forgot?
Yeah, the quinarian system (a special case of the Linnaean one AFAIK), but
that's out of use. Any else?

> For example, defining Dinosauria as the common ancestor
> of some modern bird or other and Triceratops, plus all its descendants,
> is definitely >not< what Owen had in mind in 1842 [...]

Exactly this is included in the current draft of the PhyloCode as an
example, and it's very likely to stay: www.ohiou.edu/phylocode/art11.html,
Example 1 to Recommendation 11A, right under Article 11.10... scroll up from
the bottom.

*******************************
Sometimes the lesser-known biographical details of famous personalities
_are_ unsurprising. Just found a book by coincidence that states that Karl
Marx's favorite color was red. :-)