[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Fwd: NMMNH Bulletin 46 (Drepanosaurs) available

On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 6:42 AM, silvio.renesto
<silvio.renesto@uninsubria.it> wrote:
> 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). Âeven 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
> ÂDrepanosaurus and Megalancosaurus,it can never be a monolithic taxon.

The PhyloCode is still a draft. It will not be enacted until 1) the
companion volume ("Phylonyms") is published, and 2) the registration
database ("RegNum") is made available. Indeed, it cannot possibly be
enacted without the registration database, since registration is a
requirement for establishment. (And, although early predictions of
enactment in "200x" obviously did not come true, "201x" is looking
quite good.)

The PhyloCode is meant to work in harmony with the other codes. Thus,
using ICZN suffixes like "-inae" in a manner inconsistent with the
ICZN should be avoided. Fortunately, since the code is not yet
enacted, there is time to avoid such a conflict. The PhyloCode has no
specific provisions against naming a clade including Drepanosaurus
"Megalancosaurinae", but that does go against the spirit expressed in
the Preamble: "3. This code may be used concurrently with the
rank-based codes." I'd recommend avoiding the issue by using a
different suffix, e.g., "Megalancosauria". Why confuse matters by
having Drepanosaurus be both a drepanosaurine and a megalancosaurine?

Not that it's a huge issue, of course. Great to see these little
weirdos getting detailed treatment.
T. Michael Keesey
Technical Consultant and Developer, Internet Technologies
Glendale, California