[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Horns and Beaks: New taxa and descriptions
----- Original Message ----
From: David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>
>Maybe keeping both in *Iguanodon* would make *I.* paraphyletic? In that case
>separate genus names -- actually clade names -- make sense.
As far as I am aware, there isn't any evidence for Iguanodon being
paraphyletic, so it's not a valid argument. There is certainly a good rack of
morphological differences between I. atherfieldensis and I. bernissartensis,
but it's merely a matter of preference as to whether you want to split them
into separate genera or not. Leaving things as advocated by David Norman is my
preference, but you can see that as equivocal. The real issue is that there are
plenty of other Iguanodon species knocking about, some of which, in all
liklihood, are either ancestral or descendent from I. atherfieldensis, so the
repercussions of changing one taxon's name has important implications for the
others.
D.
___________________________________________________________
Try the all-new Yahoo! Mail. "The New Version is radically easier to use" – The
Wall Street Journal
http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html