Re: di-NO!-tyrannus

["Tim Williams" <twilliams_alpha@hotmail.com>]

Dinogeorge@aol.com wrote:

> I would strongly disagree(!) with making Daspletosaurus and Tarbosaurus 
> subgenera of Tyrannosaurus.

I have to agree with George here.  In general,  I think erecting subgenera 
is bad policy for fossil taxa; if a species is good enough to be a subgenus, 
why not go the whole hog and give it its own genus?

Of course, it all comes down to how finely calibrated your "generico-meter" 
is, but _Daspletosaurus_ and _Tarbosaurus_ look like "good" genera to me.  
On a subjective note, I wouldn't be sad to see _Jenghizkhan_ resurrected as 
a genus, since it's a darn cool name IMHO, especially when juxtaposed with 
_bataar_.    In the same vein, I despised the name _Dinotyrannus_.  
(Terrible tyrant??!!  Is there any other kind of tyrant?)



:-)


Tim

_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus