Message 2004-10-0110: Re: PROPOSED ARTICLE X - autonyms

Thu, 16 Sep 2004 22:46:35 +0200

[Previous by date - PROPOSED ARTICLE X - autonyms]
[Next by date - Re: PROPOSED ARTICLE X - autonyms]
[Previous by subject - Re: PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE PHYLOCODE: Article 10.2]
[Next by subject - Re: PROPOSED ARTICLE X - autonyms]

Date: Thu, 16 Sep 2004 22:46:35 +0200
From: [unknown]
To: PML <>
Subject: Re: PROPOSED ARTICLE X - autonyms

Considering the fact that Article 10 is being rewritten, I might have=
retract the following... but so far it sounds ingenious to me.

----- Original Message -----
=46rom: <>
Sent: Thursday, September 16, 2004 8:08 PM

> X.5 Autonyms do not compete with non-autonymous names for priority.
> of a particular autonym or non-autonymous clade name is dependent s=
on the
> choice of the author of the work in question.

The evolutionary approach! Let natural selection, or at least genetic=
fix it! :o) Well -- it certainly works on this list.

> Example X3. Pan-Mammalia in example X1 might be a synonym of Synaps=
> name may be used for the corresponding clade. Neither has priority.
> [...]
> Example X5. Corono-; prefix; the most recent common ancestor of all=
> members of the base clade, and all of its descendants; no qualifyin=
> the term based on the name of the most inclusive base clade has pri=
> Headden and Keesey; 2004.

(Should be replaced with genuine examples once the contents of the co=
volume will be fixed. Or alternatively, it should be marked in the Co=
which examples are genuine and which are hypothetical. The ICZN conta=
ins a
disclaimer near the beginning which say that its examples are not par=
t of
the Code, because each of them could be wrong.)

> X.8 Autonymous affices are registered under the PhyloCode in a data=
> from the clade name database.

Or entries in the database will just be marked "affix", "clade name",
"species name" or whatever.

I have one question. Assuming Example X.5 were genuine, *Corono-Dinos=
and *Corono-Theropoda* would be synonyms. Would they just be treated =
heterodefinitional synonyms would be treated, means, whichever of
*Dinosauria* and *Theropoda* would have priority would be eligible fo=
r use
with the prefix?


Feedback to <> is welcome!