Re: tiny-armed theropods

[David Marjanovic <david.marjanovic@gmx.at>]

Am 12.10.2011 15:25, schrieb Matthew Martyniuk:

>  On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 9:11 AM, Mike Taylor <mike@indexdata.com>
>  wrote:
>
> > The PhyloCode's rules for citing a name say to give the name of the
> > nominal author, not that of the definitional author. So after the
> > PhyloCode companion volume FINALLY comes out with its phylogenetic
> > definition of Sauropoda, it will still be Sauropoda Marsh 1878, not
> > Sauropoda Taylor et al. 200x (for some value of x > 10). This is
> > as it should be, of course.
>
>  Fair enough, though it will be hard to determine which name has
>  priority without referring to a secondary source to figure out the
>  definitional author/date as well. I suppose we'll have to start
>  citing two authors for every name, so we know "Diplodocoidae Marsh
>  1884 (Taylor et al. 2012)" has priority over "Atlantosauridae Marsh
>  1877 (Martyniuk 2013)".

This will be taken care of by registration (Article 8 
http://www.ohio.edu/phylocode/art8.html ).

> > Nevertheness, there is some fear of a PhyloCode land-rush. I
> > don't see it happening, though: everyone knows the difference
> > between properly worked definitions and land-grabs, and no-one
> > would do their reputation any good with the latter.
>
>  Unless it's inadvertent, and someone defines a name while unaware
>  that a different name is traditionally used for that group.

This should be taken care of by peer review.

>  Hopefully the appeals process in the ICPN will be more efficient than
>  the ICZN ;)

Again registration will help.