RE: Vitakridrinda publication validity

[Jaime Headden <qi_leong@hotmail.com>]

  It would helpt to establish first if it was ever published as a valid taxon, 
first, perhaps. Of course, knowing if it's a real fossil, and what it is, helps 
tremendously.

Cheers,

  Jaime A. Headden
  The Bite Stuff (site v2)
  http://qilong.wordpress.com/

"Innocent, unbiased observation is a myth." --- P.B. Medawar (1969)


"Ever since man first left his cave and met a stranger with a
different language and a new way of looking at things, the human race
has had a dream: to kill him, so we don't have to learn his language or
his new way of looking at things." --- Zapp Brannigan (Beast With a Billion 
Backs)


----------------------------------------
> Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 22:00:59 -0500
> From: archosauromorph2@hotmail.com
> To: dinosaur@usc.edu
> Subject: RE: Vitakridrinda publication validity
>
>
> Has the hypothesis of it being a non-fossil rock made it into the literature 
> yet?
>
> ----------------------------------------
> > Date: Wed, 22 Feb 2012 18:37:53 -0800
> > From: mickey_mortimer111@msn.com
> > To: dinosaur@usc.edu
> > Subject: Vitakridrinda publication validity
> >
> >
> > In trying to track down the first valid use of Malkani's rock/abelisaurid 
> > Vitakridrinda, I noticed both Malkani (2006) and the Paleobiology Database 
> > cite the following reference-
> >
> > Malkani, 2004a. Saurischian Dinosaurs from Late Cretaceous of Pakistan. In 
> > Hussain and Akbar (eds.). Fifth Pakistan Geological Congress, 14-15 April, 
> > Islamabad, National Geological Society of Pakistan, Pakistan Museum of 
> > Natural History (Pakistan Science Foundation), Islamabad. 71-73.
> >
> > Now I don't have this paper (please send if you do!), but I'm wondering if 
> > as a three page paper issued for a congress, it runs afoul of ICZN Article 
> > 9.9-
> >
> > "abstracts of articles, papers, posters, texts of lectures, and similar
> > material when issued primarily to participants at meetings, symposia,
> > colloquia or congresses."
> >
> > If so, the next available publication may be-
> >
> > Malkani, 2005. Saurischian dinosaurs from the Late Cretaceous Pab Formation 
> > of Pakistan. Geological Survey of Pakistan, Information Release. 823, 1-117.
> >
> > Except I don't have that either, and the oh-so-anonymous .docstoc 
> > bibliography of Malkani's papers 
> > (http://www.docstoc.com/docs/15668843/From-first-ever-fossil-found-from-Pakistan-during-early-2000-to-so)
> >  lists it as unpublished. As far as I know, only Malkani himself has 
> > referenced it, but that's standard for his papers. Can anyone confirm?
> >
> > Finally, if neither of those counts, I can at least say for sure that 
> > Malkani (2006) validly names the taxon. ICZN Article 16.1 almost dooms it, 
> > since Malkani generally indicates it to be named two years earlier and thus 
> > not a new taxon, yet on page 138 in the Conclusions he confusingly says 
> > "One genus and species of Abelisaurids Theropod dinosaur Vitakridrinda 
> > sulaimani is erected."
> >
> > Malkani, 2006. Biodiversity of saurischian dinosaurs from the Latest 
> > Cretaceous park of Pakistan. Journal of Applied and Emerging Sciences. 
> > 1(3), 108-140.
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > Mickey Mortimer
> >
>