Re: Avaceratops and Ceratops (was Re: THE NEW ISH OF JVP)

["Timothy Williams" <twilliams_alpha@hotmail.com>]

George Olshevsky wrote:

> If you're going to include Ceratops in the subfamily Chasmosaurinae, then 
> the
> name of the subfamily must change to Ceratopinae (or, less correctly,
> Ceratopsinae), because Ceratops is the type genus of the family 
> Ceratopidae.

IF, yes.  Unless new material has surfaced, there's no good evidence that 
_Ceratops_ is indeed in the subfamily as _Chasmosaurus_ and _Torosaurus_.  
Indeed the _Avaceratops_ paper in the last issue strongly implies it's not.

> The rule is that, if a family is subdivided into subfamilies, tribes, etc.,
> any subdivision that contains the type genus must have the same name as the
> family, with the appropriate change in ending.

Interestingly, if _Ceratops_ is neither a chasmosaurine nor a centrosaurine, 
then it may be removed from the Ceratopsidae altogether (like Wolf and 
Kirkland did with _Zuniceratops_).  Now, that would really screw things 
up!!!


Tim

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com