[Previous by date - Re: REPOST: Crowns, Panstems, and their Correspondence to ea=]
[Next by date - Re: Another Possible Problem with Naming Conventions for Pan=]
[Previous by subject - And now my quarterly nitpicking...]
[Next by subject - Another example]
Date: Sat, 11 Sep 2004 23:07:07 -0700 (PDT)
From: [unknown]
To: Mailing List - PhyloCode <phylocode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu>
Subject: Another Possible Problem with Naming Conventions for Panstem=
This one occurred to me during a discussion with Jaime Headden and Mi=
ckey=20
Mortimer.
Hypothetical situation:
CLADOGRAM (requires monospaced font)
--+--Alpha (extant)
`--+--Beta (extinct)
`--+--Gamma (extant)
`--Delta (extant)
Suppose someone names:
_Betoidea_ =3D Clade(_Beta_ <- _Alpha_)
Later, someone names a panstem/crown pair:
_Gammadelta_ =3D Clade(_Gamma_ + _Delta_)
_Pangammadelta_ =3D Clade(_Gammadelta_ <- extant non-gammadeltans=
)
As can be seen, _Pangammadelta_ would be a junor heterodefinitional s=
ynonym of
_Betoidea_. The convention of having the total group starting with "P=
an-" would
be ruined, because the proper name for the clade (assuming the cladog=
ram is
ccorrect) is _Betoidea_.
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D> T. Michael Keesey <http://dino.lm.com/contact>
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D> The Dinosauricon <http://dinosauricon.com>
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D> Instant Messenger <Ric Blayze>
=3D=3D=3D=3D=3D
=09=09
_______________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Shop for Back-to-School deals on Yahoo! Shopping.
http://shopping.yahoo.com/backtoschool