[Previous by date - =3D?ISO-8859-1?Q?Re:_Stormbergia_dangershoeki,_new_Early_Jurassic_or=]
[Next by date - Fwd: Re: Multiple definitions? was Re: Stormbergia dangersho=]
[Previous by subject - Benton's paper]
[Next by subject - Call for nominations, PN meeting]
Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2005 20:25:04 -0700 (PDT)
From: [unknown]
To: Phylocode <phylocode@ouvaxa.cats.ohiou.edu>
Subject: BioCode and PhyloCode conflicts
Today in the _New York Times_ (Oct. 11, 2005), Carol Yaesuk Yoon writ= es on "In The Classification Kingdom, Only the Fittest Survives" on the nature = of the naming still to be done as science marches on: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/11/science/11name.html (subscription required). While Yoon does not mention the PhyloCode, she does mention the Bio= Code, which would serve to restrict how and where and when a name can be co= ined, as does the PhyloCode. So, for the sake of discussion, what will happen = if both Codes are established, and a name is coined in one, but not the other= ? Will the name need to be published in two different formats to exists as "vali= d"? Will the ICZN recognize the PhyloCode? Or will all that is needed is a def= inition applied to a BioCode name to make a name published valid in PhyloCode standards? If there are competing Codes, what does a scientist do whe= n analyzing data and taxa rendered from a study not "accepted" by the C= ode that person chooses to use? Cheers, Jaime A. Headden "Innocent, unbiased observation is a myth." --- P.B. Medawar (1969) =09=09 __________________________________=20 Yahoo! Music Unlimited=20 Access over 1 million songs. Try it free. http://music.yahoo.com/unlimited/