Message 2004-06-0038: Re: Pan-clades, good or bad?

Wed, 16 Jun 2004 22:52:31 +0200

[Previous by date - Re: First International Phylogenetic Nomenclature Meeting]
[Next by date - Re: Pan-clades, good or bad?]
[Previous by subject - Re: Pan-clades, good or bad?]
[Next by subject - Re: Pan-clades, good or bad?]

Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 22:52:31 +0200
From: David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>
To: DML <dinosaur@usc.edu>
Cc: PML <phylocode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu>
Subject: Re: Pan-clades, good or bad?

> > (*Oplosaurus* exists, though only in synonymy lists.)
>
> Synonymous with what?  The only older sauropod genus from Early Cretaceous
> Europe is Pelorosaurus (assuming oxoniensis is made the neotype of
> Cetiosaurus by the ICZN), and it's not comparable AND from the Hastings
> Beds, not the Upper Weald Clay.  I see no reason to assume Oplosaurus is a
> synonym of Pelorosaurus.
>
> Mickey Mortimer

Oopsie. I forgot what it was -- one of the numerous non-synonyms of
*Pelorosaurus*...


  

Feedback to <mike@indexdata.com> is welcome!