[Previous by date - Re: [Making Up Names _versus_ Emending Names]]
[Next by date - Re: [Making Up Names _versus_ Emending Names]
[Previous by subject - Re: [Making Up Names _versus_ Emending Names]]
[Next by subject - Re: [Re: Subscribers]]
Date: Sat, 12 May 2001 00:51:09 +0200
From: David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>
To: PhyloCode mailing list <phylocode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu>
Subject: Re: [Making Up Names _versus_ Emending Names]
> I did not need to emend order names for plants (-ales has long been
the
> mandated suffix). The Treatise has emended invertebrate order names
to -ida,
> except for the volumes on insects. The majority of chordate orders (fish
and
> birds) were standardized with the -iformes suffix many decades ago. I
just
> finished up the job for insects, mammals & herps.
-ida does not end confusion, however. Catenulida is, according to what I'm
taught at the university, a class (of flatworms), and Echiurida,
Sipunculida, Gnathostomulida etc. are phyla (though I have rarely seen them
with -a only) -- for a time I thought that -ida was meant to be a standard
ending for phyla. Fossil clades like Halkieriida and Tullimonsterida
confirmed this view (see http://dinosauricon.com/taxa/animalia.html). Is
the -ida of Annelida an ending, or does it just look that way (like
Phoronida, which is derived from *Phoronis*)?
Same for -iformes. Archosauriformes, Lepidosauriformes, Dinosauriformes
and lots of others are nodes that have never been orders. Dinosauriformes is
even a member of Archosauriformes.