Re: Dinofest Report #2 (and final)

[Jonathon Woolf <jwoolf@erinet.com>]

Jeffrey Martz wrote:

>     The rationalization for keeping the original taxon name
> "Arctometatarsalia" is no different then for prioritizing at the genus and
> species level.  Would you propose going back and changing all the genus
> and species names ever assigned so that they apply perfectly to the
> specimen they describe?  _Apatosaurus_ may or may not be a nicer name then
> _Brontosaurus_, but it has priority for that species.  _Hyracotherium_ may
> not have the elegance and accuracy of _Eohippus_, but that is beside the
> point.

Indeed it is, but not for the reason you think.  There are rules for naming 
species,
rules enforced by the ICZN.  The first name published has seniority.  Period.

There are, however, apparently no rules at all for naming clades.  If there 
were, then
the naming and usage patterns would make some sense.  They don't.

-- JSW