[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Magnapaulia, "new" lambeosaurine from Baja California, Mexico
Thomas Yazbeck <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> Well, 'ease of use' is really what I was aiming for anyways.
"Ease of use" to whom?
> It's hard to keep track of new genera, so one might as well combine two very
> similar genera. And by 'average man', I meant paleontologist, not any dude
> off the street. Keeping the # of dinosaur genera to a
> conservative, but not over-lumped, amount is what I'm aiming for here (a sort
> of comprehensive taxonomic clean-up).
But if the total number of species remains unchanged, what's the
point? As an example, why is lumping _Microraptor zhaoianus_ into
_Sinornithosaurus_ a positive step? _S. millenii_ and _S. zhaoianus_
are still two separate species.
Raptorial Talon is right: it's just bookkeeping. Lumping species will
reduce the number of genus-level "labels", but it has no scientific