[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Fwd: NMMNH Bulletin 46 (Drepanosaurs) available
At 20.57 25/01/2010, you wrote:
> Megalancosaurinae = Drepanosaurus + Megalancosaurus.
Wrong under ICZN Article 36.1.
When Drepanosauridae was coined,
Drepanosaurinae, -ini, -ina, and -oidea were
automatically coined with it, so Drepanosaurinae
already exists and has priority over
Megalancosaurinae. In other words, whichever
subfamily of Drepanosauridae that contains
*Drepanosaurus* must be called Drepanosaurinae.
It does not matter at all whether the name
Drepanosaurinae has ever been used in a publication.
This was considered, but in the paper it has been
made explicit reference to PhyloCode, not ICZN,
for ICZN Drepanosaurinae and Megalancosaurinae
may well be synonyms, and Drepanosaurinae has
priority, but in a context of phylogenetic
nomenclature it should be reported as
Megalancosaurinae. Only by referring to PhyloCode
the clade (Drepanosaurus + Megalancosaurus) can
be considered hypothesis-specific (i. e. the
clade is both a formal group and a relationships
hypothesis). even if, in a future, it will
include other genera, it shall always include the
two specifier genera used at the moment of defining the clade.
Thus Drepanosaurinae (ICZN) can exist containing only Drepanosaurus;
Megalancosaurinae (PhyloCode) cannot exist
without compresence of both Drepanosaurus and
Megalancosaurus,it can never be a monolithic taxon.
" Men take in great consideration what falls
within their sphere of knowledge, but they don't
realize how much it depends from what is beyond that""
Prof. Silvio Renesto
Department of Structural and Functional Biology
Università degli Studi dell' Insubria
via Dunant 3, 21100 Varese
see my Triassic website at http://dipbsf.uninsubria.it/paleo/
see my outdoor-nature photography website at