[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: [dinosaur] Plateosaurus species
> It's my understanding that _P. engelhardti_ is currently regarded as a
> nomen dubium. As such, it should have no taxonomic standing.
The trick is that taxonomic standing and nomenclatural standing are two
different things. "Nomen dubium" is about taxonomic standing; it is unrelated
to nomenclatural standing, and therefore not used in any rule of the ICZN (it
just appears in the glossary).
> So in the event that _P. trossingensis_ and _P. engelhardti_ are
> demonstrated to be conspecific.... this is a tricky one. My
> interpretation is that because _P. trossingensis_ was declared by fiat
> to be the type species, and that _P. engelhardti was specifically set
> aside as type species in the same decision, that _P. trossingensis_
> would therefore have priority over _P. engelhardti_.
No. There is no problem if the name of a type species is a junior synonym. If
*P. trossingensis* and *P. engelhardti* are subjective (as opposed to
objective) synonyms, or taxonomic (as opposed to nomenclatural) synonyms as the
botanical code calls them, then *P. trossingensis* is de jure the type species
for nomenclatural purposes, and *P. engelhardti* is de facto the _name_ of the
type species for taxonomic purposes because we think *P. engelhardti* is what
*P. trossingensis* actually is. This is being done right with *Tarbosaurus*.
A genus whose type species is a junior synonym is no different from a family
whose type genus bears a name that is a junior synonym â and there are lots
of those. In my field there are Gymnarthridae, named after *Gymnarthrus*, a
junior synonym of *Cardiocephalus*, and Brachystelechidae, named after
*Brachystelechus*, a junior synoym of... a preoccupied name that had to be
replaced by *Batropetes*.