Re: Podokesauridae, Problems of Nomenclature Returned

["Jaime A. Headden" <qilongia@yahoo.com>]

Mike Keesey (tmk@dinosauricon.com) wrote:

<I am not following the ICZN in this matter. In my classification
philosophy, and that of others, there is no such thing as a "family-level"
taxon. There are only clades an species. _Coelophysidae_ has been defined
as a clade. Podokesauridae has not.>

  It doesn't really matter. Well, sure, in a world where only names that
had such a definition applied to them this would be true. But this is not
so, and while definitions allow us to relate taxa to one another,
Podokesauridae has been used in content for the same clade as
Coelophysidae. They have content establish, even though one was defined
first. However, again, it's all irrelevant. The ICZN dictates that
priority is a matter of publication, not definition. Let the PhyloCode
worry about which taxon gets the definition. As long as *Podokesaurus* can
be referred to any relation with *Coelophysis*, then Podokesauridae is the
valid taxon. I'm not saying you must use this taxon, I am arguing that the
priority issue is one of publication, not of definition.

<If it is undefined, how can you be sure how to use it?>

  This seems to look like a problem of considering taxa and definitions
the same thing. They aren't a taxon is a group, a definition is how one
relates the group to other groups. Nothing more. But the taxon has use
even without a definition. While the advocacy of deQuieroz and Gauthier
may be followed, it need not be explicitly, and a taxon may be defined by
content. It may seem to skid-doodly in getting around some problems, but
hey, the PhyloCode hasn't been firmly established, and may not for many
years. Until then, we can use it as recommendations, but it lacks
authority.

<You can't really synonymize undefined taxa because they are not
explicit.>

  It's very easy to synonymize taxa, simply based on content or inclusion
of hypodigm. Definition is just another way of doing it, probably
preferred by some. But why, O why can taxa only be synonymized if the
definitions are congruent, i.e., homodefinitional?

=====
Jaime A. Headden

  Little steps are often the hardest to take.  We are too used to making leaps 
in the face of adversity, that a simple skip is so hard to do.  We should all 
learn to walk soft, walk small, see the world around us rather than zoom by it.

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send FREE video emails in Yahoo! Mail!
http://promo.yahoo.com/videomail/