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

Holotype of Sunosuchus cf. thailandicus ?!

Is there anyone able to tell me what it means ?

Holliday et al. (In press) just referred PIN 4174-1 to "Sunosuchus" cf. thailandicus Buffetaut, 1980... and treat it as a new species (p. 2). This specimen is explicitely designated as a holotype and there are information about the the type locality and horizon, as well as a diagnosis.

And later, in the same paper:
"There is no diagnostic feature that separates it from
the extremely fragmentary S. thailandicus, suggesting that
PIN 4174‒1 could be considered a synonym of S. thailandicus." (p. 7)

Excuse my French*, but... what the heck !?

Among the four authors of the papers, there are three fully fledged taxonomists who could not have missed - at least, I hope - such an aberration. I do not know the first author so I will refrain from hasty judgements, but he MUST choose between erecting a new genus and species and keeping the former referral to "Sunosuchus" cf. thailandicus. Both options are defendible, given the data and results that are presented in the paper, so the final decision needs to be made by the taxonomist. By the authors.

There is NO alternative.

Taxonomy is a science, not some kind of funny hobby for old people visiting museums. And biological nomenclature is not for angry grammar nazis that likes to annoy scientists. There are some things that can be done and there are some others that must not.

Sorry for being a bit abrupt, but I feel like screaming when I see people treating taxonomy and nomenclature like this. Especially because other people - including me - have to clean the waste they leave afterwards...


*: yes, I'm French. Hence the colourful language.

Le 11/09/2013 16:22, Ben Creisler a écrit :
From: Ben Creisler

Two new papers of interest about Mesozoic crocodilians:


Thomas J.D. Halliday, Marco Brandalise De Andrade, Michael J. Benton,
and Mikhail B. Efimov (2013)
A re-evaluation of goniopholidid crocodylomorph material from Central
Asia: Biogeographic and phylogenetic implications.
Acta Palaeontologica Polonica (in press)
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.4202/app.2013.0018

Central Asia is a key area for crocodylomorph evolution, lying midway
between the highly documented deposits in Europe and North America,
but crocodylomorph fossils from this part of the world are rare.
Included among these are specimens collected in the 1970s and 1980s by
the Soviet-Mongolian Expeditions in the Jurassic and Cretaceous of
Mongolia, Tajikistan, and Kazakhstan. Three species, “Sunosuchus”
shartegensis, Kansajsuchus extensus, and Turanosuchus aralensis are
redescribed and subjected to phylogenetic analysis for the first time.
“Sunosuchus” shartegensis and Kansajsuchus are relatively derived
goniopholidids, and part of a pan-east-Laurasian radiation of
goniopholidids from which the European goniopholidids subsequently
radiated. Turanosuchus aralensis is here considered a nomen dubium.
Cladistic analysis suggests that Sunosuchus is polyphyletic,
indicating a higher degree of diversification than was previously
thought, but also pointing to the need for further systematic

"As a Professor of Science, I assure you we did in fact evolve from filthy monkey men." Hubert J. Farnworth.