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

Undefined names

Mickey Mortimer wrote:

I must yet again question this practice. Compsognathidae isn't defined, but
we don't go putting it in quotes. Nor are many families- Ceratosauridae,
Iliosuchidae, Dryptosauridae, Itemiridae

What is Itemirus anyway... I've heard suggestions from dromaeosaurid to tyrannosaurid...

Coeluridae, Archaeornithoididae,
Harpyimimidae, Garudimimidae, Deinocheiridae, Avimimidae, Caudipterygidae,

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only published group for Caudipteryx, is not "Caudipterygidae", but instead, the poorly named "Caudipteriidae".

Alxasauridae, Scansoriopterygidae, Archaeopterygidae, Yandangornidae,
Omnivoropterygidae, every enantiornithine group except Euenantiornithes and
Avisauridae.  The same goes for higher taxa.  Is Charadriiformes defined
anywhere?  Is any modern bird order?  There are no rules for defining
family-level taxa in the ICZN, and it doesn't cover higher taxa.  Virtually
nothing is defined in accordance to Phylocode rules, which would only cover
taxa defined on or after January 1 200x anyway.  There is no reason to
recognize varying validity of names of higher taxonomic groups yet.

I agree. Someone needs to publish and define a new name for the oviraptorosaur-segnosaur stem. As asked earlier, is it possible to define a stem like this, Clade{Taxon A, Taxon B <-- Taxon C}?

Nick Gardner
aim s/n Eoraptor22

"Reasoning is never, like poetry, judged from the outside at all." - C.S. Lewis

Add photos to your messages with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail