RE: Diceratops

[Christopher Taylor <gerarus@westnet.com.au>]

    I realise you probably weren't being serious, but you should
probably avoid coining replacement names flippantly. People may get
confused.
    Nomenclator Zoologicus (http://uio.mbl.edu/NomenclatorZoologicus/)
confirms the homonymy, and indicates said homonymy as unresolved [Aside:
I was directed to this website about a week ago, and it's a fantastic
resource. Enter any generic name and it'll come back with author,
publication, and any homonyms and objective synonyms.] Ideally, a
replacement name should be coined as part of a review of the genus in
question. Note that _Diceratops_ only requires a replacement name if it
is regarded as a valid genus (no point in coining a new name if it's
never going to be used), which in this case is a whole different
cauldron of mullet.

    Cheers,

        Christopher Taylor

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-dinosaur@usc.edu [mailto:owner-dinosaur@usc.edu] On Behalf
Of Sergio D. Rios (sent by Nabble.com)
Sent: Friday, 13 January 2006 7:04 AM
To: dinosaur@usc.edu
Subject: Diceratops


  I was searching in google information about the chasmosaurine
Diceratops when i found a page about Ichneumonidae (Hymenoptera) insects
that have a Diceratops genre (whit many species), but this diceratops
whas described by Förster in 1869 vs. Hatcher 1905.
  So, we have to say good bye to Diceratops (in the ceratopsid way). I´m
the first that note this preoccupation? hello to Hatcherceratops, Rios
2006.... : o )
  All the best..
                                   Sergio Rios
--
View this message in context:
http://www.nabble.com/Diceratops-t907042.html#a2351929
Sent from the Dinosaur forum at Nabble.com.

-- 
No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.15/223 - Release Date:
6/01/2006
 

-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.371 / Virus Database: 267.14.15/223 - Release Date:
6/01/2006