[Previous by date - Re: Pan-clades, good or bad?]
[Next by date - Re: Pan-clades, good or bad?]
[Previous by subject - Re: First International Phylogenetic Nomenclature Meeting]
[Next by subject - Re: Fw: languages in PhyloCode]
Date: Wed, 16 Jun 2004 14:52:18 -0700
From: Mickey Mortimer <Mickey_Mortimer111@msn.com>
To: phylocode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu
Subject: Re: First International Phylogenetic Nomenclature Meeting
This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --Boundary_(ID_7rDy3+46d+83Hnda413mGQ) Content-type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Stephen Pickering wrote- > I have read and analyzed the IPNM abstracts as they pertain to = Vertebrata, and agree with Mickey > Mortimer, e.g., that some of the = names being adopted tentatively for converted clade names are=20 > oxymoronic. I never stated IPNM abstract definitions were oxymoronic, just poorly = thought out or contra Phylocode rules > One name cannot be used for one clade, then used for another, nor, I = should add, is it desirable to > erect often undefinable taxa on the = basis of bone scrap just to have a name. Spinostropheus is a > good = example of a nonsensical taxon with little, or no, diagnostic validity; = it remains a nomen=20 > dubium.=20 Why is Spinostropheus a nomen dubium? Name two other taxa that are = indistinguishable from it. > Puzzling to me is that living dinosaurs are not subject of papers. = Bradley Livezey's fascinating=20 > revisions promise to totally change how one looks at the phylogenies = of extant Theropoda, and I=20 > ask why he is not participating.=20 I am also puzzled by the absence of living avemetatarsalian talks at the = IPNM meeting. Were there no experts on living eusaurischians present?! = Surely a neo-maniraptoriformologist or two was in the audience? > Another abstract I seriously question is that of J.R. Wagner re: = ornithischians. He uses names=20 > which are not valid: Cetiosaurus medius and Ceratops montanus are not = valid, and never have=20 > been. Cetiosaurus needs to be removed from serious elucidations of = sauropod systematics. Unfortunately for you, a taxon doesn't need to be diagnosable in order = for it to be a valid specifier for a clade in Phylocode. Ceratops = montanus is the eponymous taxon for Ceratopsia, so should be used in its = definition. Cetiosaurus medius is a more complicated case. It is not = what traditional ideas on Cetiosaurus have been based on, and the ICZN = is being / will be petitioned to make C. oxoniensis the neotype species. = Cetiosaurus oxoniensis is valid (Upchurch and Martin, 2003). However, = C. medius IS the first named sauropod taxon, and is definitely sauropod, = so it's fine as a sauropod specifier. =20 > It remains to be seen what kind of stability will be perpetrated if, = as Julia Clarke et al. propose,=20 > one adopts the prefix Pan- to crown names. Objections raised to her = methodology -- again,=20 > stressing one is dealing with an abstract, and not a full-length = exegesis -- should be muted.=20 Abstracts are representative of future work, so if we are to stop Pan- = stems, we need to start now before they become valid. > Paul Sereno's abstract, while interesting, sustains some of the = taxonomic problems encountered > in his phylogeny papers. The ongoing = analyses of Mickey Mortimer re: coelurosaur lineages=20 > should be used, not Sereno, and I think Mickey Mortimer should have = been approached to submit > in absentia a paper to this important = meeting. While I do think my analysis is superior to Sereno's, the point of = Phylocode is to have definitions that are valid under many alternate = topologies, not to cater to one topology. As a virtual unknown = undergraduate in the biological community, it's obvious why I was not = approached, though if Marjanovic submitted an abstract, I suppose I = could have as well. Then again, authors might not be able to provide = abstracts if they cannot attend. Needless to say, I lack the funds or = time to get to Paris. Mickey Mortimer Undergraduate, Earth and Space Sciences University of Washington The Theropod Database - = http://students.washington.edu/eoraptor/Home.html --Boundary_(ID_7rDy3+46d+83Hnda413mGQ) Content-type: text/html; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <HTML><HEAD> <META http-equiv=3DContent-Type content=3D"text/html; = charset=3Diso-8859-1"> <META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2737.800" name=3DGENERATOR> <STYLE></STYLE> </HEAD> <BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff> <DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial size=3D3=20 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"12">Stephen Pickering = wrote-</FONT></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT lang=3D0 face=3DArial size=3D3=20 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"12"></FONT></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT lang=3D0 = style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff"=20 face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"12" = BACK=3D"#ffffff">> I have read and analyzed the IPNM abstracts as = they pertain=20 to Vertebrata, and agree with Mickey > Mortimer, e.g., that some of = the names=20 being adopted tentatively for converted clade names are = </FONT></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT lang=3D0 = style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff"=20 face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"12" = BACK=3D"#ffffff">> oxymoronic.</FONT></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT lang=3D0 = style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff"=20 face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"12" = BACK=3D"#ffffff"></FONT></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT lang=3D0 = style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff"=20 face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"12" = BACK=3D"#ffffff">I=20 never stated IPNM abstract definitions were oxymoronic, just poorly = thought out=20 or contra Phylocode rules</FONT></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT lang=3D0 = style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff"=20 face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"12" = BACK=3D"#ffffff"></FONT></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT lang=3D0 = style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff"=20 face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"12" = BACK=3D"#ffffff">> One name cannot be used for one clade, then used = for=20 another, </FONT></FONT><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT lang=3D0=20 style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff" face=3DArial color=3D#000000 = size=3D3=20 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"12" BACK=3D"#ffffff">nor, I should add, = is it desirable=20 to > erect often undefinable taxa on the basis of bone scrap just to = have a=20 name. <I>Spinostropheus</I> is a > good example of a nonsensical = taxon with=20 little, or no, diagnostic validity; it remains a <I>nomen=20 </I></FONT></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT lang=3D0 = style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff"=20 face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"12" = BACK=3D"#ffffff"><I>> dubium. </I></FONT></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT lang=3D0 = style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff"=20 face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"12" = BACK=3D"#ffffff"></FONT></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT lang=3D0 = style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff"=20 face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"12" = BACK=3D"#ffffff">Why is Spinostropheus a nomen dubium? Name two = other taxa=20 that are indistinguishable from it.</FONT></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT lang=3D0 = style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff"=20 face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"12" = BACK=3D"#ffffff"></FONT></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT lang=3D0 = style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff"=20 face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"12" = BACK=3D"#ffffff">> Puzzling to me is that living dinosaurs are not = subject of=20 papers. Bradley Livezey's fascinating </FONT></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT lang=3D0 = style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff"=20 face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"12" = BACK=3D"#ffffff">> revisions promise to totally change how one looks = at the=20 phylogenies of extant Theropoda, and I </FONT></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT lang=3D0 = style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff"=20 face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"12" = BACK=3D"#ffffff">> ask why he is not = participating. </FONT></FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT lang=3D0 = style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff"=20 face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"12" = BACK=3D"#ffffff"></FONT></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT face=3Darial,helvetica><FONT lang=3D0 = style=3D"BACKGROUND-COLOR: #ffffff"=20 face=3DArial color=3D#000000 size=3D3 FAMILY=3D"SANSSERIF" PTSIZE=3D"12" = BACK=3D"#ffffff">I=20 am also puzzled by the absence of living = avemetatarsalian talks at the=20 IPNM meeting. Were there no experts on living eusaurischians=20 present?! Surely a neo-maniraptoriformologist or two was in the=20 audience?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3D2>> </FONT>Another abstract I seriously question is = that of=20 J.R. Wagner re: ornithischians. He uses names </DIV> <DIV>> which are not valid: <I>Cetiosaurus medius </I>and <I>Ceratops = montanus </I>are not valid, and never have </DIV> <DIV>> been. <I>Cetiosaurus </I>needs to be removed from serious = elucidations=20 of sauropod systematics.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3D2>Unfortunately for you, a taxon doesn't need to be = diagnosable=20 in order for it to be a valid specifier for a clade in Phylocode. = Ceratops=20 montanus is the eponymous taxon for Ceratopsia, so should be used in its = definition. Cetiosaurus medius is a more complicated case. = It is not=20 what traditional ideas on Cetiosaurus have been based on, and the ICZN = is being=20 / will be petitioned to make C. oxoniensis the neotype species. =20 Cetiosaurus oxoniensis is valid (Upchurch and Martin, 2003). = However, C.=20 medius IS the first named sauropod taxon, and is definitely sauropod, so = it's=20 fine as a sauropod specifier.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>> It remains to be seen what kind of stability will be = perpetrated=20 if, as Julia Clarke et al. propose, </DIV> <DIV>> one adopts the prefix <I>Pan- </I>to crown names. Objections = raised to=20 her methodology -- again, </DIV> <DIV>> stressing one is dealing with an abstract, and not a = full-length=20 exegesis -- should be muted. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3D2>Abstracts are representative of future work, so if = we are to=20 stop Pan- stems, we need to start now before they become = valid.</FONT></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3D2>> </FONT>Paul Sereno's abstract, while = interesting,=20 sustains some of the taxonomic problems encountered > in his = phylogeny=20 papers. The ongoing analyses of Mickey Mortimer re: coelurosaur lineages = </DIV> <DIV>> should be used, not Sereno, and I think Mickey Mortimer should = have=20 been approached to submit <I>> in absentia</I> a paper to this = important=20 meeting.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3D2>While I do think my analysis is superior to = Sereno's, the=20 point of Phylocode is to have definitions that are valid under many = alternate=20 topologies, not to cater to one topology. As a virtual unknown=20 undergraduate in the biological community, it's obvious why I was not=20 approached, though if Marjanovic submitted an abstract, I suppose I = could have=20 as well. Then again, authors might not be able to provide = abstracts if=20 they cannot attend. Needless to say, I lack the funds or time to = get to=20 Paris.</FONT></DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3D2></FONT> </DIV> <DIV><FONT size=3D2>Mickey Mortimer<BR>Undergraduate, Earth and Space=20 Sciences<BR>University of Washington<BR>The Theropod Database - <A=20 href=3D"http://students.washington.edu/eoraptor/Home.html">http://student= s.washington.edu/eoraptor/Home.html</A></FONT><BR></DIV></FONT></FONT></B= ODY></HTML> --Boundary_(ID_7rDy3+46d+83Hnda413mGQ)--