[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Adios, "Brachiosaurus" brancai
Mike Taylor <mike@indexdata.com> wrote:
> I guess you'd be happy with the
> generic name
> Giraffatitan if my phylogenetic analysis had recovered it
> as a
> somphospondylian; but then what do you do when Jeff
> Wilson's analysis
> comes along and recovers it closer to Brachiosaurus after
> all --
> rename it back to B. brancai? And if it is recovered
> as the sister
> taxon to Euhelopus zdanskyi, are we going to rename it
> Euhelopus
> brancai? Let's just not go there. Monospecific genera, please! Keep
> phylogeny and nomenclature separate.
I do think Mike makes a good case for making the east African _brancai_ a
separate genus from the North American _altithorax_. Apart from the reasons
stated in Taylor (2009), this also dispels the much vaunted faunal association
between the Tendaguru and Morrison Formations. For a long time, these two
formations were thought to share a common fauna, which (in turn) was cited in
support of a privileged connection between east Africa and western North
America during the later Jurassic. With other "common" Tendaguru-Morrison
genera likewise split up (_Barosaurus_/_Tornieria_,
_Dryosaurus_/_Dysalotosaurus_), it was only a matter of time before
_Brachiosaurus_ went the same way.
However, I certainly don't agree that all genera should be monospecific. Using
that logic, _Psittacosaurus_ would have to be split up into six or seven (or
whatever) genera, which does not seem justified.
> If you want, you can put Giraffatitan and Sauroposeidon --
> and
> Cedarosaurus and Venenosaurus -- all into
> Brachiosaurus. And you can
> put Opisthocoelicaudia into Saltasaurus, and Nemegtosaurus
> into
> Rapetosaurus; and then you can put Rapetosaurus into
> Saltasaurus too,
> since they are now sister taxa, and so on back down
> the tree till we
> put Brachiosaurus (i.e. what we now call Brachiosauridae)
> into
> Saltasaurus, too.
The phylogeny featured in Taylor (2009) (Figure 6) only includes two
traditional brachiosaurid OTU's: _altithorax_ and _brancai_. This isn't a comp
relationship would still be recovered for _altithorax_+_brancai_ if a larger
sample of taxa were included in the analysis, including those genera mentioned
by Mike (_Sauroposeidon_, _Cedarosaurus_, _Venenosaurus_).
Cheers
Tim