[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)

Hi Mickey,

I am indeed guilty of using a rank-based suffix on a rankless taxon.  The
reason I did this, and it may or may not have been a good thing, was to
provide individuals who do try to place these names into Linnaean ranks the
proper syntax to do so as I thought the taxa should be ranked under the
Linnaean system.  In a way I needed to do this because the National Park
Service uses a cataloguing system that is dependent on a ranked
classification and does not allow for "clades".  Thus the names I provided
would fit both systems rather well (I so I hoped) without a need to provide
two sets of names.  So essentially Paratypothoracisini (or
Paratypothoracini) would be a tribe under the Linnaean system. It is within
Typothoracisinae (or more properly Typothoracinae) which would essentially
be a subfamily within the Family Stagonolepididae.  It was not meant to be
confusing, but instead accomodating.

Unfortunately I was misled into thinking that the proper root for -thorax
was -thoracis, hence this misformed name.


Bill Parker
Vertebrate Paleontologist
Division of Resource Management
Petrified Forest National Park
P.O. Box 2217
1 Park Road
Petrified Forest, AZ 86028
(928) 524-6228 x262

             Michael Mortimer                                              
             11@msn.com>                                                To 
             Sent by:                  <dinosaur@usc.edu>                  
             owner-DINOSAUR@us                                          cc 
                                       RE: Paratypothorac[...]ini was Re:  
             08/04/2010 12:23          Chromogisaurus novasi, new          
             PM                        guaibasaurid (basal sauropodomorph) 
             Please respond to                                             

William Parker wrote-

> I have now been told by several individuals now that the name is
> formed. Unfortunately I was given bad information on how to form the name
> in the original publication. As the name is solely a clade name the ICZN
> has no bearing on the name as it has been used.

I feel the need to repeat my request (
) to not "use a Linnaean rank suffix if your intent is to name a rankless
taxon".  In this case, priority isn't an issue so it's a bit different than
the Silesauridae example (in which it turned out Lewisuchidae was a nomen
nudum anyway).  But still, why use a tribe suffix if you don't mean to name
a tribe?  It just confuses matters and everyone assumes it's a tribe anyway
as seen by the attempts to correct the spelling.  Just call it
Paratypothoracia or Paratypothoraces or something.

Mickey Mortimer