Message 2004-10-0144: Fwd: Re: Fwd: Re: Fwd: PROPOSED ARTICLE X - autonyms

Tue, 21 Sep 2004 11:14:28 -0400

[Previous by date - Re: Fwd: Re: IGNORE THAT LAST MESSAGE: Fwd: PROPOSED ARTICL=]
[Next by date - Re: Lumping Spinosauridae Redux]
[Previous by subject - Fwd: Re: Fwd: Re: Fwd: PROPOSED ARTICLE X - autonyms]
[Next by subject - Fwd: Re: Fwd: Re: Fwd: Re: Fwd: PROPOSED ARTICLE X - autonym=]

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 2004 11:14:28 -0400
From: [unknown]
To: cantino@ohiou.edu, phylocode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu
Subject: Fwd: Re: Fwd: Re: Fwd: PROPOSED ARTICLE X - autonyms

 Philip Cantino wrote - 9/18/04 7:05 PM:

Magnoliophyta could be defined as applying to the panstem, but this=
=3D20
would likely confuse people because Magnoliophyta and Angiospermae=
=3D20
are widely understood by botanists to be alternative names for the=
=3D20
same clade.  The same applies to other pairs of typified versus=3D20
untypified names (e.g., Equisetophyta and Sphenophyta, Pinophyta and=
=3D20
Coniferophyta, Lamiaceae and Labiatae).

>While it's true that these names have traditionally been considered =
to =3D
refer to the same clades, an analogous situation existed in zoology w=
ith =3D
the names that someone (perhaps David Marjanovic) mentioned earlier (=
e.g., =3D
Anura and Salientia, Urodela and Caudata, Serpentes and Ophidia, Gymn=
ophion=3D
a and Apoda).  We zoologists reassigned one name of each pair to the =
crown =3D
and the other to the panstem, and many people have found this change =
=3D
useful.<

Kevin

  

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