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

Re: tiny-armed theropods

Am 12.10.2011 15:11, schrieb Mike Taylor:

 On 12 October 2011 14:07, Matthew Martyniuk <martyniuk@gmail.com>
> Except that the ICZN doesn't govern any names above family level.

 True enough. In point of fact there seems to be NO code that
 governs the non-PN use of name such as Therizinosauria. Still,
 tradition treats them AS THOUGH they were governed by the ICZN.

Well, sort of. The ICZN does govern such things as the spelling. It's just that priority does not apply above the ranks of the family group. It applies to Therizinosauroidea (a superfamily), but neither to Therizinosauria nor to Segnosauria.

> It seems odd that a code would explicitly reject precedence of name
> over precedence of definition. What's to stop a huge land rush to
> supplant existing names and trump centuries old author priority in
> favor of ones self?

 The PhyloCode's rules for citing a name say to give the name of the
 nominal author, not that of the definitional author. So after the
 PhyloCode companion volume FINALLY comes out with its phylogenetic
 definition of Sauropoda, it will still be Sauropoda Marsh 1878, not
 Sauropoda Taylor et al. 200x (for some value of x > 10). This is as
 it should be, of course.

 Nevertheness, there is some fear of a PhyloCode land-rush. I don't
 see it happening, though: everyone knows the difference between
 properly worked definitions and land-grabs, and no-one would do
 their reputation any good with the latter.

 -- Mike.

And, very importantly, _peer review_ is _*REQUIRED*_ for valid publication of nomenclatural acts under the PhyloCode. If you submit crap, there's a chance the reviewers will catch it long before it could cause any trouble.

Article 4.2: "Publication, under this code, is defined as distribution of text (but not sound), with or without images. To qualify as published, works must be peer-reviewed [...]" Note 4.2.1: "If an entire book is not peer-reviewed or a periodical is not consistently peer-reviewed, the article or chapter in which a name or nomenclatural act appears must be peer-reviewed in order to qualify as published." Note 4.2.2: "Approval of a work by a thesis or dissertation committee does not constitute peer review."