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

Name priorities


While reviewing a list of dinosaur  species names, I found a number of 
occurrences where older specific names were  apparently sunk into newer ones, 
unless I am quite astray, is in  violation of one of the most fundamental 
ICZN rules. Yet authoritative works  like The Dinosauria II, to cite only one, 
tend to accept some of these  referrals.
Just two examples: 
1) Manospondylys gigas (Cope 1892) sunk  into Tyrannosaurus rex (Osborn 
1905). I suppose M. gigas is strictly speaking a  nomen dubium. If it is 
and conspecific with T. rex, the only way to  save the name T. rex is to 
petition the ICZN, etc. Has it been done? Or is this  referral just another 
example of floppy systematics?
2) Thescelosaurus  garbanii (Morris 1976) sunk into Bugenasaura infernalis 
(Galton 1995). If the T.  garbanii material is diagnostic, why is it not 
Bugenasaura garbanii?
Have I  missed some important taxonomic principle here?

Thanks in  advance,

Félix Landry
150 rue de Vaugirard 75015 Paris, France
01  45 67 04 65 / 06 26 39 29 03
Elève de l'Ecole normale  supérieure, département de Sciences sociales
45 rue d'Ulm 75005 Paris, France