Message 2005-12-0024: BioCode and PhyloCode conflicts

Tue, 11 Oct 2005 20:25:04 -0700 (PDT)

[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/

  

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