Re: Re-use a name?

[Dinogeorge@aol.com]

In a message dated 97-06-28 08:11:22 EDT, jwoolf@erinet.com (Jonathon Woolf)
writes:

<< "In the absence of an ICZN ruling"?  Does this mean that the rules on
 this point aren't automatic and questions like this are decided by the
 equivalent of a judge's court ruling?   >>

Right. Someone who cares about this sort of thing petitions the ICZN by
letter to perform the appropriate nomenclatural act. The letter is published
with a case number in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature and replies are
invited. After enough of these accumulate, the Commission puts the issue to a
vote among its members, of which there are about 20-30, and the majority
decision becomes established as an Opinion.

Exactly this happened in the recent problem of the correct name for the Ghost
Ranch theropods. Although these had originally been referred to Coelophysis,
it subsequently turned out that the material could not be matched to Cope's
original type specimen of Coelophysis bauri, and Lucas & Hunt (or was it Hunt
& Lucas?) properly proposed the new name Rioarribasaurus colberti for the
Ghost Ranch theropods. Unfortunately, because the name Coelophysis bauri had
been applied for many years to the Ghost Ranch theropods, it had become well
established among dinosaurologists. There was also considerable unsaid
politicking involved, because some dinosaurologists simply didn't like the
name Rioarribasaurus or didn't like Lucas & Hunt. So shortly after the
replacement name came along, a number of them petitioned the ICZN to change
the type specimen of Coelophysis bauri from Cope's material to the type
specimen proposed for Rioarribasaurus colberti. After several years of
publishing opinions pro and con, the ICZN put the matter to a vote, and in
the end the Commission voted to reassign the type specimen of Coelophyis
bauri as petitioned and thus to suppress Rioarribasaurus colberti as a junior
objective synonym of the former species. This action, incidentally, leaves
the original Cope material nameless, and I believe some of the people that
stood behind Rioarribasaurus may eventually propose a new name for Cope's
material, or at least describe a better specimen under a name different from
Coelophysis bauri and then refer Cope's material to it.