[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Yay! Cladobabble! :-)
--- Nick Pharris <email@example.com> wrote:
> Quoting "T. Michael Keesey" <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> > This doesn't work, though.
> > What genus does the ancestral species of a larger clade belong to?
> Its own.
Then almost every single species that has ever existed would have to have its
own genus (and genera would not always be monophyletic -- or, at least,
sometimes they would be clades, and sometimes they would be species).
> > PhyloCode's solution to this is to make it so the eponymous taxa actually
> > rest on the type species of the genus, not the genus itself.
> Fine. Doesn't change my contention that the genus has a special status in
> the nomenclatural system.
All is harmonious, then.
=====> T. Michael Keesey <email@example.com>
=====> The Dinosauricon <http://dinosauricon.com>
=====> BloodySteak <http://bloodysteak.com>
=====> Instant Messenger <Ric Blayze>
Do you Yahoo!?
SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month!