[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Ceratops (was RE: Pterosaur diversity (was: Re: Waimanu))
On 6/2/06, Tim Williams <email@example.com> wrote:
I agree. It is not the fault of either the _Ceratops_ or _Titanosaurus_
type material that their significance was eclipsed by later discoveries.
But if we want stability in phylogenetic usage, then we should be anchoring
our clades in the genera that we name them after. (This only applies to
Is the parenthetical statement to suggest that higher clades like
Titanosauria should be kept?
Why can't you be a non-conformist just like everybody else?