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

Re: Avgodectes and Phobetor questions



Christopher Taylor wrote:

   According to the new edition of the ICZN, incorrect derivation does not
preclude a name from being valid. So even if the name doesn't mean exactly
what Dave intended, it still stands.

Yep, you only get one bite of the cherry. Like incorrect spelling or bad gramma, incorrect etymology is not considered a justification for re-naming a taxon.


However, one could claim that _Agyodectes_ is not a valid name, given the method of publication (which may not conform to ICZN rules). Thus, Peters could publish his new genus in a peer-reviewed scientific publication, and get a second 'crack' at naming it - this time with the correct etymology. BTW, I'm not criticizing Peters or the publication that the name of his 'egg-biting' pterosaur appeared in; I'm just putting the idea 'out there'.

Cheers

Tim