Re: Status of _Caudipteryx_

[fredericus ruhe <fredruhe@xs4all.nl>]

At 11:14 31-12-2000 -0600, you wrote:
>
>Quoting Dinogeorge@aol.com:
>
>> Caudipterygidae is etymologically correct, but under current rules 
>> Caudipteridae has to stick; see article 29.4 of the 4th edition of the
>> ICZN. 
>> As I recall, the family name was created in 2000 (that is, after 1999).
>> 
>
>Unfortunately yes. In my opinion, the ICZN has gotten rather slack of late. I 
>know the reason why proper etymology was dropped from the family requirements, 
>but I don't find it a convincing reason to allow such constructions as 
>Caudipteridae. The problem was in cases like the Synodontidae in which the 
>family was first erected for a genus like Synodus (the lizardfish), 

This genus should have hade a family called Synodidae

but there 
>exists a different genus Synodon (a catfish)which is also the name-bearing 
>genus of a family, which in this case was forced to be the etymologically-
>incorrect Synodidae (which, if anything, would be preferable for Synodus,
if we 
>sort of look the other way regarding its original construction and choose to 
>gaze only on the "us" ending :-).


And this family could be called Synodonidae, I don't see the problem.


 I'm not sure if this situation required an 
>ICZN ruling at some point, but it is likely that it did. By allowing any 
>variant on the generic root for the family, you can have a Synodontidae, a 
>Synodidae, a Synodusidae, a Synodontididae, a Synodirthidifidae or any manner 
>of names to accomodate genera with the same roots but slightly different 
>suffixes. HOWEVER, this situation occurs so rarely (relatively speaking)
that I 
>feel the need for petitioning the ICZN from time to time is far more
preferable 
>to being stuck with such monstrosities as "Yangdangithidae" for _Yandangornis_ 
>(which thank goodness was published pre-2000!). Oh well, taxonomy rant over. 

What about Songzidae for a family name based on the genus Songzia, why not
simply Songziidae. I know, foreign languages are difficult, even for Chinese
people, or for people that translate their papers into your language!


Fred Ruhe


>
>Oh, and to address whoever inquired about the existence of a "teen dino-list", 
>I think you'd be surprised how many of us on the current list fit that bill.
>
>Sincerely,
>Christian Kammerer
>
>