Re: Coelurosaur Phylogeny

["T. Michael Keesey" <mightyodinn@yahoo.com>]

--- Dinogeorge@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 5/3/03 4:44:31 PM Pacific Daylight Time, 
> mightyodinn@yahoo.com writes:
> 
> << This *was* debunked onlist.
>  If you're using phylogenetic taxonomy, then you should use
> _Therizinosauria_,
>  since Segnosauria has never been explicitly defined. Synonymy cannot be 
> shown.
>  If PhyloCode overturns this, fine. Until then.... >>
> 
> Segnosauria was defined by listing its contents way back in the early 1980s 
> (was it Barsbold's 1983 dissertation? I think so). This is good enough to 
> establish the name. ICZN does not rule on taxa above family level, so it will
> be usage that ultimately determines whether or not Segnosauria is accepted. 
> Therizinosauria is a latecomer name and I prefer Segnosauria, having used it 
> with some frequency for the past 20-odd years.

The contents did not include _Beipiaosaurus_, _Alxasaurus_, etc. Therefore it 
is not definitely synonymous with _Therizinosauria_.


=====
=====> T. Michael Keesey <keesey@bigfoot.com>
=====> The Dinosauricon <http://dinosauricon.com>
=====> BloodySteak <http://bloodysteak.com>
=====> Instant Messenger <Ric Blayze>
=====

__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.
http://search.yahoo.com