rules for family citations

[Colin McHenry <cmchenry@westserv.net.au>]

Dear all,

I know this came up in a thread last year, but I can't find it in the 
archives - apologies for the repetition.

My question concerns the nomenclatural rules for citing a family when 
the original use of the name was in a context other than the classical 
family level - i..e. when the name was originally coined as a subfamily, 
superfamily, tribe etc.  Specifically;

The citation for the plesiosaur Family Rhomaleosauridae is usually given 
in recent literature as Kuhn 1961.  However, as Ben Creisler points out 
in his plesiosaur pronunciation guide 
<http://www.dinosauria.com/dml/names/ples.html> the name 
Rhomaleosaurinae was coined by Nopsca in 1928.  Ben lists the citation 
as "Rhomaleosauridae Kuhn 1961 (ex Rhomaleosaurinae Nopsca 1928) ", but 
given what I remember from the discussion on the list last year about 
this sort of thing, should the citation be instead;
" Rhomaleosauridae Nopsca 1928", or even;
"Rhomaleosauridae Nopsca 1928 (sensu Kuhn 1961).

Also, I presume the Nopsca reference was
NOPSCA, BARON F. 1928. The genera of reptiles. Palæobiol., 1:163-188

Thanks for any help on this.

Cheers
Colin

--
Colin McHenry
School of Environmental and Life Sciences (Geology)
University of Newcastle
Callaghan NSW 2308
Australia
Tel: +61 2 4921 5404
Fax: + 61 2 4921 6925

******************
Colin McHenry & Sarah Johnston
14 Summer Place
Merewether Heights NSW 2291
Australia
+61 2 4963 2340
mob: 0423 081683

cmchenry@westserv.net.au
Colin.Mchenry@newcastle.edu.au


Sent from 'Heart of Gold' using Netscape 7