Message 2004-10-0120: Re: Fwd: PROPOSED ARTICLE X - autonyms

Sat, 18 Sep 2004 13:25:57 -0700 (PDT)

[Previous by date - Fwd: PROPOSED ARTICLE X - autonyms]
[Next by date - Fwd: Re: Fwd: PROPOSED ARTICLE X - autonyms]
[Previous by subject - Re: Fwd: Gender of species names?]
[Next by subject - Re: Fwd: PROPOSED ARTICLE X - autonyms]

Date: Sat, 18 Sep 2004 13:25:57 -0700 (PDT)
From: [unknown]
To: Mailing List - PhyloCode <phylocode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu>
Subject: Re: Fwd: PROPOSED ARTICLE X - autonyms

--- Philip Cantino <cantino@ohiou.edu> wrote:

> I like Jon's autonym idea in principle but I am still working throu=
gh=20
> the ramifications.  For example, if this approach were adopted, Pan=
-=20
> will presumably be one of the affixes that would be used.  Will=
=20
> registering Pan- as an autonymous prefix for panstem clades prevent=
=20
> me from using a name beginning with Pan- as the formal name for a=
=20
> panstem clade?
[...]
> I suppose the names could take a different format so that people=
=20
> woule easily recognize whicha re autonyms.  For example, use of the=
=20
> connecting hyphen could be restricted to autonyms.  If this is=20
> acceptable, I could choose to use Panangiospermae as the official=
=20
> name of the panstem of Angiospermae without people thinking it is a=
n=20
> autonym.

But why would you need _Panangiospermae_ as a taxon when _Pan-Angiosp=
ermae_
would already exist?
=20
> What about competition between different affixes with different=
=20
> definitions?  For example, would Pan-Mammalia compete for priority=
=20
> with Corona-Synapsida?

_Corono-Synapsida_ would be a heterodefinitional synonym of _Mammalia=
_, not
_Pan-Mammalia_.

> >Example X5. Corono-; prefix; the most recent common ancestor of al=
l extant
> >members of the base clade, and all of its descendants; no qualifyi=
ng clause;
> >the term based on the name of the most inclusive base clade has pr=
iority;
> >Headden and Keesey; 2004.
>=20
> I don't understand "the term based on the name of the most inclusiv=
e=20
> base clade has priority". Would you give an example of how this rul=
e=20
> for priority determination would be used?

As I understand it, _Corono-Synapsida_ would be given priority (or pe=
rhaps
primacy or preference would be better terms here) over _Corono-Therap=
sida_,
_Corono-Cynodontia_, etc.

=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!?
Yahoo! Mail is new and improved - Check it out!
http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail

  

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