Re: New taxon (and taxonomy) from Sereno's Science paper

[Dinogeorge@aol.com]

In a message dated 6/26/99 12:33:12 PM EST, tkeese1@gl.umbc.edu writes:

<< Wasn't the name Oviraptorosauria already applied to this clade?
 Personally, I'd prefer Oviraptorosauria as a stem taxon of some sort --
 priority issues seem kinda muddled, as I recall from the list's last
 discussion -- uncertainty as to whether {_Oviraptor_ + _Chirostenotes_
 (=_Caenagnathus_)} or {_Oviraptor_ > Neornithes} had priority. >>

Yes, Oviraptorosauria would be the stem clade including Oviraptoroidea, and 
Oviraptoroidea would be the superfamily comprising Caenagnathidae and 
Oviraptoridae. However, I just discovered that Oviraptoroidea is the wrong 
name. Should be Caenagnathoidea, because Caenagnathidae Sternberg 1940 has 
considerable priority over Oviraptoridae Barsbold 1976. Caenagnathoidea is 
the correct name for an oviraptorosaurian superfamily containing 
Caenagnathus. Time for another letter to Science. (Did this to Paul before, 
for Spinosauroidea versus Torvosauroidea.)