Message 2004-10-0154: Re: Monotypic genera and the PhyloCode

Sat, 25 Sep 2004 19:55:22 -0500

[Previous by date - Fw: Monotypic genera and the PhyloCode]
[Next by date - Re: Monotypic genera and the PhyloCode [was: Re: Lumping Spi=]
[Previous by subject - Re: Monotypic genera and the PhyloCode]
[Next by subject - Re: Monotypic genera and the PhyloCode]

Date: Sat, 25 Sep 2004 19:55:22 -0500
From: [unknown]
To: stygimoloch81@hotmail.com
Cc: DML <dinosaur@usc.edu>, PML <phylocode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu>
Subject: Re: Monotypic genera and the PhyloCode

I think many people would agree with the idea that a name that=20
traditionally refers to a species should be used for a species, and a=
 name=20
that has traditionally NOT been used for a species should NOT be used=
 for a=20
species. Regardless of how much easier it is to remember one or the o=
ther,=20
swapping names between two different categories of taxa (clades and=
=20
populations) is a pretty bad idea.

Jon



  

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