[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
RE: Correction/update #3 - Mesozoic dinosaur species)
Brad McFeeters writes:
> > Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 00:43:53 -0500
> > From: firstname.lastname@example.org
> > I don't know how Mike Taylor feels about this, but Apesteguía
> > (2007) also erects a new clade Rebbachisauroidea, and defines it
> > as such:
> > "Definition (node-based): The most inclusive clade containing WN-V6
> > (_Histriasaurus boscarollii_, see Appendix A), _Rebbachisaurus garasbae_
> > Lavocat, 1954, and _Limaysaurus tessonei_ (Calvo and Salgado, 1995), and
> > MACN PV N35."
> I assume what was meant is "least inclusive clade." The most
> inclusive clade containing those sauropods is Biota.
Oh dear. Good spot by Brad -- I'd missed that. As evidently did
Sebastian, Virginia Tidwell and Ralph Molnar. Good job the PhyloCode
registration database isn't running yet :-)
> > There are a couple of problems with this definition, both real
> > and potential.
I admit that when I first saw the word "rebbachisauroid" in the
abstract I was a bit puzzled as to what that taxon might refer to. It
would be great to know what Sebastian's motivation was -- IIRC, he
does read this list so maybe he'll chip in. Having seen the
definition I admit I am at a loss to see what it would bring to the
party, even were it not for the problem of its being a subset of the
coordinated family-level taxon.
/o ) \/ Mike Taylor <email@example.com> http://www.miketaylor.org.uk
)_v__/\ If two decades of commercial programming have taught me anything,
it's NEVER to trust dual CPUs, "uninterruptible" power supplies
or RAID disks.