[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, Michael Mortimer <mickey_mortimer111@msn.com> wrote:
Tim Williams wrote-

>>What's the definition of Mirandornithes?
>The least inclusive clade comprising _Phoenicopterus ruber_ and_Podiceps
>cristatus_ (node-based).
>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!)

Actually, Livezey and Zusi found grebes and flamingos to both be members of
their waterbird clade Natatores inside Neoaves, though with very weak
support.  Natatores (Baird, 1858) has a much earlier publication date than
Mirandornithes, though no phylogenetic definition.  Nor do I know how Baird
and later authors used the group.

Sounds like someone should define "Natatores".

As for Mirandornithes: "Recommendation 9B. Establishment of names for
poorly supported clades should be done with careful consideration of
possible nomenclatural consequences if the phylogenetic hypothesis
turns out to be incorrect. It may frequently be advisable to use only
informal names for poorly supported clades."

Mike Keesey