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

Re: Horns and Beaks: New taxa and descriptions

----- Original Message ----
From: David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>

>Maybe keeping both in *Iguanodon* would make *I.* paraphyletic? In that case 
>separate genus names -- actually clade names -- make sense. 

As far as I am aware, there isn't any evidence for Iguanodon being 
paraphyletic, so it's not a valid argument. There is certainly a good rack of 
morphological differences between I. atherfieldensis and I. bernissartensis, 
but it's merely a matter of preference as to whether you want to split them 
into separate genera or not. Leaving things as advocated by David Norman is my 
preference, but you can see that as equivocal. The real issue is that there are 
plenty of other Iguanodon species knocking about, some of which, in all 
liklihood, are either ancestral or descendent from I. atherfieldensis, so the 
repercussions of changing one taxon's name has important implications for the 


Try the all-new Yahoo! Mail. "The New Version is radically easier to use" – The 
Wall Street Journal