[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Rob Gay's print-on-demand publication of Kayentavenator elysiae
Phillip Bigelow <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> George Olshevsky's book series, "Mesozoic Meanderings" also
> experienced similar scrutiny by the Zoological scientific
> community. Interestingly, that scrutiny occurred over
> a decade ago.
> I guess these disputes take a lot of time to get resolved.
Yes, and as Mike and I have said, the proof of the pudding is in whether the
scientific community actually accepts the new names. There may not be
unanimity on this point. At least not initially.
In 1995, when Olshevsky, an amateur, erected several new tyrannosaurid genera
(_Dinotyrannus_, _Jenghizkhan_, _Stygivenator_) - not in "Mesozoic Meanderings"
but in a Japanese dinosaur magazine (not a scientific journal) - it was highly
controversial. Some professional paleontologists were extremely irate. Yet,
now these names are generally accepted as valid in the nomenclatural sense.
(But not in the taxonomic sense: all are regarded as junior synonyms of other
tyrannosaurid genera, so the names have effectively disappeared from usage.)
This lack of agreement happens with other nomenclatural issues. For example,
although it is recognized that _Jeholornis_ and _Shenzhouraptor_ are probably
the same taxon, there is disagreement over which name has priority. Because
both names were validly published, it comes down to which name was published
first (_Jeholornis_ or _Shenzhouraptor_), which in this particular case is not
clear-cut. Unless one or the other name takes hold as the 'valid' name through
usage (I've got my money on _Jeholornis_), then it will require a formal
petition to the ICZN in order to resolve this issue. It's only when a matter
is formally brought to the attention of the ICZN that the ICZN will act. Until
that point, the process is rather messy.