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

Re: [...] Archaeopteryx 10

David Marjanovic wrote:

*Archaeopteryx macrura*, junior objective homonym of *Archaeopteryx lithographica*. The latter name was unambiguously applied to the skeleton in the paper that described the feather.

I have a slightly different understanding. I though that _Archaeopteryx macrura_ was explicitly applied by Owen (in 1862) to the London specimen (a skeleton). Then as now, there was doubt over which specimen (the feather or the skeleton) von Meyer actually applied the name _Archaeopteryx lithographica_ to. In 1964, the ICZN settled the issue (without resolving the question) and decided to affix the name _Archaeopteryx lithographica_ to the London specimen. Thus, _Archaeopteryx macrura_ officially became a junior objective *synonym* of _Archaeopteryx lithographica_. To be a homonym would require that Owen was erecting a new genus that happened to have the same name as von Meyer's _Archaeopteryx_, and I don't think this was the case. The ICZN suppressed the name _Archaeopteryx macrura_, along with _Griphosaurus_ and _Griphornis_ and their respective species.



but for the Berlin specimen, it's a tad clearer. Dames (1897) named the species
*siemensi* as a species of *A.*, followed by Petronievics (in Petronievics and
Woodward, 1917, in a footnote) who coined *Archaeornis* and designated
*siemensi* the type species.

Correct. Sorry for having confused genus and species!

FREE online classifieds from Windows Live Expo ? buy and sell with people you know http://clk.atdmt.com/MSN/go/msnnkwex0010000001msn/direct/01/?href=http://expo.live.com?s_cid=Hotmail_tagline_12/06