[Previous by date - Addendum 1b: Clade names from apomorphy names]
[Next by date - species and clades]
[Previous by subject - Gender of species names?]
[Next by subject - Genus names]
Date: Thu, 08 Feb 2001 15:51:24 -0500 (EST)
From: "T. Mike Keesey" <tmk@dinosauricon.com>
To: -PhyloCode Mailing List- <PhyloCode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu>
Subject: Genera as Clades
My website, the Dinosauricon, is an attempt to catalogue all non-neornithean Ornithodira. The site is generated programmatically from databases. For the next version of my site (which will largely adhere to PhyloCode), I am planning to implement a new system for genera. I'm not proposing it as a solution that PhyloCode should adopt, but I thought it might spark some discussion. Basically, every genus is seen as a stem-based clade with its type species as the internal specifier and *every single other type species* as external specifiers. ICZN rules will be used to determine what is and isn't a valid type species. If I left it at this, the system would be fairly objective, but would lend itself to oversplitting. Hence, I'm going to (regrettably) add the capability to arbitrarily suppress certain generic names. Some species may not fall into any generic clades. These will be cited with the original genus they were published under, with the generic name in quotes. Examples: I. Higher Tyrannosaurini _Tyrannosaurus rex_ Osborn 1905 is a type species by ICZN rules. _Tyrannosaurus bataar_ Maleev 1955 is the type species of _Jenghizkhan_ Olshevsky _vide_ Olshevsky, Ford & Yamamoto 1995. _Tarbosaurus efremovi_ Maleev 1955 is also a type species. _Jenghizkhan_ will be arbitrarily suppressed to prevent oversplitting. _Tyrannosaurus_ becomes Clade(_T. rex_ <-- all other unsuppressed type species), and _Tarbosaurus_ becomes Clade(_T. efremovi_ <-- all other unsuppressed type species). Under most present phylogenies, this would make _T. bataar_ a species of _Tarbosaurus_, not _Tyrannosaurus_ as originally thought. (I may decide to suppress _Tarbosaurus_ as well, in which case all three of these species would fall under _Tyrannosaurus_.) II. Mononykini _Mononykus olecranus_ (Perle, Norrell, Chiappe & Clark 1993), _Parvicursor remotus_ Karhu & Rautian 1996, and _Shuvuuia deserti_ Chiappe, Norell & Clark 1998 are all type species. _Ornithomimus minutus_ Marsh 1892 is not. (_O. velox_ Marsh 1890 is the type species of _Ornithomimus_.) Given this phylogeny (which _O. velox_ is a distant outgroup to): --+--_M. olecranus_ |--_O. minutus_ |--_P. remotus_ `--_S. deserti_ _O. minutus_ does not belong to any of the stem-based generic clades, so it is cited with quotes around its original genus: _"Ornithomimus" minutus_. Note: further resolution to the above phylogeny could conceivably result in _"O." minutus_ being assigned to _Mononykus_, _Parvicursor_, or _Shuvuuia_. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Again, I don't intend this as a serious proposal. The arbitrary nature of the suppressions goes against the spirit of PhyloCode. But perhaps the suppressions are not as necessary as I make out? Has anything similar been proposed? _____________________________________________________________________________ T. MICHAEL KEESEY Home Page <http://dinosauricon.com/keesey> The Dinosauricon <http://dinosauricon.com> personal <keesey@bigfoot.com> --> <tmk@dinosauricon.com> Dinosauricon-related <dinosaur@dinosauricon.com> AOL Instant Messenger <Ric Blayze> ICQ <77314901> Yahoo! Messenger <Mighty Odinn>