[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