[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
RE: Informal names (was RE: Meet me & see my website)
> From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com]On Behalf Of
> Mickey Mortimer
> This is all I was trying to get at. A higher taxonomic name can only be
> "unofficially" invalid. I'm happy to end the debate at this
> point. I think
> we've both summed up our positions well.
> > A coining (if nothing else) in a peer reviewed papers are still, in the
> > of most researchers, a minimum necessity for any formal
> taxonomic name in
> > any system. Enigmosauria doesn't get that, yet. (And Darren
> admits that
> > the inclusion in the figure is a mistake).
> The volume wasn't peer reviewed?
The volume was peer reviewed, but the inclusion of the name in the figures
was a mistake. (Sort of the equivalent to genus or species names that
prematurely make it into a faunal list before the taxa are described). The
story is told at:
P.S. I'd be interested in this paper too:
KELLNER, A.W.A. & CAMPOS, D. A. 2002. On a theropod dinosaur (Abelisauria)
from the continental Cretaceous of Brazil. Arquivos do Museu Nacional, 60
(3): 163-170. ISSN-0365-4508.
The UMd library only got Arquivos do Museu Nacional through 1962... :-S
Thomas R. Holtz, Jr.
Department of Geology Director, Earth, Life & Time Program
University of Maryland College Park Scholars
College Park, MD 20742
Phone: 301-405-4084 Email: firstname.lastname@example.org
Fax (Geol): 301-314-9661 Fax (CPS-ELT): 301-405-0796