[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Ichthyornis paper
Julia has mis-interpreted this. _Ichthyornis dispar_ does indeed remain the
type species of _Ichthyornis_, and will always be the type species. However,
as _dispar_ is a junior synonym of _Graculavus anceps_, the name _anceps_
still takes priority. Note that under the ICZN, genus and species names are
separate units - the validity of a species name is not dependent on its
generic assignment (beyond that it must have one). Another example of this
is _Eohippus validus_ Marsh 1876, the type species of _Eohippus_ Marsh,
1876. This is a junior synonym of _Hyracotherium angustidens_ Cope, 1875.
The correct name of the species is _Eohippus angustidens_; nevertheless, the
type species is still _E. validus_.
On 2/9/04 10:14 am, "Tim Williams" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Christopher Taylor wrote:
>> Note, however, that under the ICZN, the
>> correct name for this species would be _I. anceps_, not _I. dispar_ - while
>> _I. dispar_ is the type species of the genus, _anceps_ was named earlier,
>> and so takes priority even though it was originally in a different genus.
> Julia begs to differ, and gives her reasons on p.21. Citing Article 67.2 of
> the ICZN and Article 11.8 of the draft PhyloCode, she claims that because
> _I. anceps_ was not one of the original nominal species of the genus
> _Ichthyornis_ (its original name was _Graculavus anceps_, before Marsh
> shifted it over to _Ichthyornis_), _I. dispar_ is the valid name of the
> single _Ichthyornis_ species, as well as the type species.