[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Paratypothorac[...]ini was Re: Chromogisaurus novasi, new guaibasaurid (basal sauropodomorph)
2010/8/4 David Marjanovic <email@example.com>:
> Warning: ICZN pedantry ahead. Skip this message if that's not your thing.
>> I named the clade Paratypothoracisini in 2007
> The only way I can see that this incorrectly formed name could be valid in
> the first place is Article 29.5:
> "Maintenance of current spellings. If a spelling of a family-group name was
> not formed in accordance with Article 29.3 but is in prevailing usage, that
> spelling is to be maintained, whether or not it is the original spelling and
> whether or not its derivation from the name of the type genus is in
> accordance with the grammatical procedures in Articles 29.3.1
> <page.jsp?nfv=&article=29#3.1> and 29.3.2 <page.jsp?nfv=&article=24#32>."
Checked in Parker (2007:42): Typothoracisinae and Paratypothoracisini
are erected as new clades on a incorrect Greek root (thorax, thoracos
+ inae/ini => -thoracinae/thoracini).
> Is it "in prevailing usage"? How often has it been used at all?
There is no prevailing usage of those names. According to GS (a fast
proxy for bibliographic search), the name Typothoracisinae has been
used once by Nesbitt & Stoker (2008:1066). The clade
Paratypothoracisini was mentioned by Martz (2008) in his PhD
dissertation which is unpublished according to the Code. This name was
used by Heckert et al. (2007:51) with the corrected spelling
> I don't think the ICZN defines "prevailing usage" anywhere. It's not in the
> glossary either.
It is, actually, but I don't think the definition could have been more
vague. In any case, those names have not been used by a "substantial
majority of the most recent authors concerned with the relevant