[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Darwin's young dead pet from Messel
Not only does the PhyloCode not compete with the ICZN
(and ICBN), it DEPENDS on it -- because it needs species
to use as the specifiers in clade definitions
This is not always correct: you can use a specimen directly as a specifier,
provided it doesn't belong to an already named species (...translation:
provided you can get away with claiming that it doesn't).
Given the fact that most of the 146-upwards species concepts are not
applicable to small samples of fossils, I intend to make use of this
provision if I'll ever get into that situation.
There are already several ICZN-invalid names for small taxa out there that
nobody bothers to get upset about. I'm talking about all those things that
look like binominals but are followed by "new taxon" in the original
description, in the complete absence of anything similar to "new genus and
species". IIRC, most or all of the names coined by Julia Clarke and
coauthors are such cases.