[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: twilliams_alpha@hotmail.com
 > >
 > > 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    <mike@indexdata.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.