You're right David. A redescription of Protorosaurus by Annalisa Gottman-Quesada and Martin Sander was published a few months ago in Palaeontolographica A. In their phylogenetic analysis:> That's not how it works. In the ICZN, precedence does not apply > above the family group of ranks; the PhyloCode still isn't > implemented and won't be retroactive. So, do what you want.
True. But it's still at least _polite_ to follow priority of clade definitions in the absence of a compelling reason not to.
Yes. I should have added "but think long and hard about what you really want".
For example, it's not even clear whether *Prolacerta* and *Protorosaurus* form a clade that excludes the archosaurs...
____Youngina |____Gephyrosaurus | |__Squamata |_____Champsosaurus |______Megalancosaurus | |____Protorosaurus |_______Tanystropheus | |_____Macrocnemus |________Trilophosaurus | |_______Mesosuchus | |______Rhynchosaurus |________Pamelaria |_______Prolacerta |_______Euparkeria |______Proterosuchus
-- Jocelyn FALCONNET PhD student -> The early radiation of amniotes Supervisors -> J-C Rage and J-S Steyer (MNHN)
CR2P, UMR 7207, CNRS Département Histoire de la Terre Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle Case Postale 38 57 rue Cuvier 75231 Paris cedex 05, France tel : +33 (0)1 40 79 53 79