[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Sauropodz r kewl WAS silly ramble
On 17 April 2012 11:20, David Marjanovic <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> In short, the _biologically interesting_ species concepts cannot be
> applied to most of the fossil record; what we usually do is find LITUs and
> call them "species".
One clarification: we can't *find* LITUs, only define them. Because
the moment we define a subclade of a LITU, it's not LI any more. So
calling something a LITU only means "we haven't bothered to define a
subclade of this yet, perhaps because we don't have the specimens".