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

Re: Platecarpus tympaniticus - how to analyze a nomen dubium



 > OK, so that's a step in the right direction that addresses my last
 comment. But PhyloCode will STILL turn into a free-for-all contest
 to see who can get their name(s) attached to the most clade names,
 which is unproductive.

I suppose that's one reason why Art. 4.2 of the PhyloCode _requires_ peer review for the valid publication of any nomenclatural act.
http://www.ohio.edu/phylocode/art4-5.html

It is further likely that referees will take such things as Rec. 9B into account.
http://www.ohio.edu/phylocode/art9.html (scroll to the bottom)

 And if you think I'm wrong about how this will turn out, I give you
 TaxonSearch: great idea in concept, really poor in execution.

What has TaxonSearch got to do with the PhyloCode? It's Sereno's alternative to the PhyloCode.