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

of taxonomic suffixies

Hi all,

Tim, unfortunately -ida suffix is commonly used to designate orders or 
superorders... :(

Especially in paleoichthyology and paleoentomology.


Panderichthyida, Osteolepida, Thyestiida, etc.
Panorpida, Dermopterida, Orthopterida, etc.

Other commonly used suffixes include -odea, -acea 

Unfortunately there is no hierarchy-free usage of established suffixes. They 
always have some previous package or implications with them.
I'm not sure if inventing new ones does any good. In my opinion it just worsens 
the situation by adding taxonomic glutter.
Simple, short names are always easier to remember that a monster >10 letter 
words (this from a person who's native language relishes such monsters... :) )

My 2 âc at 9 o'clock in the morning... ;P

--Mikko H.


Mikko K. Haaramo, M.Sc.

Vertebrate paleontologist
Department of Geology
P.O.Box 64 [Gustaf HÃllstrÃmin katu 2a]
FIN-00014  University of Helsinki

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-DINOSAUR@usc.edu [mailto:owner-DINOSAUR@usc.edu] On Behalf
> Of Tim Williams
> Sent: Monday, August 31, 2009 5:28 AM
> To: dinosaur@usc.edu
> Cc: tijawi@yahoo.com
> Subject: Re: Inglourious New Papers

> I'm in favor of abandoning all rank-associated suffixes, and replacing
> 'families' like Sinraptoridae with non-ranked taxa, such as
> Sinraptorida or Sinraptoria.  I know this is a radical idea, but it
> means that clades can expand or contract without stepping on the toes
> of the ICZN (such as having one family inside another, which is an ICZN
> no-no).  This trend has already started, with recent clades such as
> Turiasauria and Elasmaria erected to receive a very small number of
> taxa.  In times past these would have been family-level taxa (like
> Turiasauridae or Macrogryphosauridae), but these days many authors shy
> away from erecting taxa ending in -idae.  You can see why.

--Snip ends--