[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: The PhyloCode will not address the naming of species (Was The Papers That Ate Cincinnati)
On 5/10/07, Tim Williams <email@example.com> wrote:
Mike Keesey wrote:
>What's the definition of Mirandornithes?
The least inclusive clade comprising _Phoenicopterus ruber_ and_Podiceps
In: Sangster, G. (2005). A name for the flamingo--grebe clade. _Ibis_
(As an aside, Sangster did not include any external specifiers in this
definition. However, Livezey and Zusi (2006) found no close relationship
between grebes and flamingoes - meaning that [under Sangster's definition]
Mirandornithes would be equivalent in content to Neoaves!)
Well, in that case it would become a junior heterodefinitional synonym
of _Neoaves_. Problem solved.
But, on another note, if we understand "Mirandornithes" to *mean* "the
flamingo-grebe clade", then the recognition that other groups also
belong should not invalidate it. The only thing that should invalidate
it would be flamingoes and grebes not having any common ancestors. And
if "the flamingo-grebe clade" turns out to inlcude passeriforms,
ciconiiforms, strigiforms, etc., well, so be it.
A proud member of the echidna-kookaburra clade,