[Previous by date - Re: Pan-clades, good or bad?]
[Next by date - Re: First International Phylogenetic Nomenclature Meeting]
[Previous by subject - Re: Pan-clades, good or bad?]
[Next by subject - Re: Pan-clades, good or bad?]
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 21:42:34 +0200
From: David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>
To: PML <phylocode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu>
Cc: "Jonathan R. Wagner" <jonathan.r.wagner@mail.utexas.edu>
Subject: Re: Pan-clades, good or bad?
----- Original Message ----- From: "Jaime A. Headden" <qilongia@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 4:13 AM > 1. Theropsida over Synapsida when referring to a Pan-stem, or as in > Amphibia over Panlissamphibia, is unlikely. How do you mean, "unlikely"? Theropsida was specifically invented in 1930 for what would today be called the node-stem triplet *Amniota*-*Theropsida*-*Sauropsida*. It is the one logical candidate for the name of "*Panmammalia*" and even has some limited use in at least the secondary, tertiary and popular literature. > A) Amphibia refers to an > alternate clade and probably applies to temnospondyls and the known > fossil: it is likely a "stem" in the sense of all it's used as, but it > isn't "Panamphibia." One would likely use this, if you use ANY "pan-" > name. If you read the entire abstract volume, you have found that Amphibia is defined there twice in two different ways. > B) Theropsida is hardly ever in use, much as Hesperornithes, and has > classically been referred to the node contained BY Synapsida, having a > more historical use. You have confused Theropsida and Therapsida. Theropsida contains (or is synonymous with) Synapsida, and both contain Therapsida. > varanopseid "pelycosaurs" Have seemingly been emended to Varanopidae. > Mammalia is traditionally used for the crown, Pardon? Traditionally it's used for a bigger group. The idea of restricting it to the crown-group comes from 1988 and has only very recently caught on. > even so that it excludes "certain" mammals such as *Zhangeotherium.* *Zhangheotherium* (named after a certain Zhang He) is far inside. It's a spalacotheriid ( = Real True Symmetrodont). > Otherwise, a new stem-affixe, > "Corono-" as suggested by Keesey, might be warranted. If, then rather Neo-. > Then there's a possible node-based clade for > *Pan* + *Homo* which, under some conventions, would be "Panhomo" or > "Homopan" (see, Galloanseres, Picopasseriformes, Euarchontoglires, etc.): This is why I prefer the name Supraprimates instead of Euarchontoglires, coined (but _likewise_ not defined) in Peter J. Waddell, Hirohisa Kishino, Rissa Ota: A Phylogenetic Foundation for Comparative Mammalian Genomics, Genome Informatics 12, 141 -- 154 (December 2001)