[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Ceratosauria vs. Neotheropoda?
Mike Taylor <email@example.com> wrote:
> In short: taste, judgement and an
> understanding of the historical
> background are required. Any fool can define a clade,
> but doing it
> well is not as easy as it looks. Caveat author!
Well said. By the time PhyloCode is enacted, clade definitions should have
arrived at the point that they ensure stability, as well as reflect historical
However, sometimes compromises have to be made: Dinosauria now includes birds
(Aves), even though this would make Richard Owen spin in his grave. But the
nesting of birds inside Dinosauria is a phylogenetic reality, and so overrides
historical usage. Ditto for nesting tetrapods inside Osteichthyes, or putting
mammals inside Therapsida.