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

Re: Yay! Cladobabble! :-)

--- Nick Pharris <npharris@umich.edu> wrote:
> Quoting "T. Michael Keesey" <mightyodinn@yahoo.com>:
> > 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 <keesey@bigfoot.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!