[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: New Shandong Dinosaur Discoveries
David Marjanovic wrote:
> A ceratopsid* in Asia is already cool enough!
Yes, especially as it seems to be incontrovertibly ceratopsid. Not sure where
the Uzbek "ceratopsid"_Turanoceratops_ fits these days. Alifanov (2008)
maintains it as a valid ceratopsid, but other workers have treated is as a
non-ceratopsid neoceratopsian (as well as a nomen dubium). The material is
probably too meager to be confident either way.
> * Which reminds me: the temnospondyl workers switched all
> -opsidae/-opsoidea names to -opidae/-opoidea maybe 10 or 15
> years ago, and nobody seems to complain...
I'm not too bothered by etymological correctness. I'll just settle for
consistency. It's a little off-putting to see Ceratopsidae and
Leptoceratopsidae alongside Bagaceratopidae (no 's'). For the same reason,
having both Archaeopterygidae and Caudipteridae is unfortunate. I just call
the latter clade Caudipterygidae, and the ICZN be blown.