[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Labrosaurus (was RE: birds and dinosaurs)

Jaime Headden wrote:

At this point, if the lectotype
is rendered "diagnostic," then the neotype would revert back to the next
valid name as a holotype, IF it ever had one, or could be distinguished as
one after the fact. Then *Rioarribasaurus* could be recognized as valid,
if also treated as a separate clade from *Coelophysis.*

Jaime, I have to disagree with you here. The name _Rioarribasaurus_ was rejected by fiat of the ICZN. For _Rioarribasaurus_ to be EVER considered valid would require that this decision be overturned.

Unless the ICZN is reversed, the Ghost Ranch theropods (including AMNH 7224) will continue to be called _Coelophysis bauri_, irrespective of whether or not the original _C. bauri_ material is diagnostic.



Tim



Tim

_________________________________________________________________
Check out the latest news, polls and tools in the MSN 2004 Election Guide! http://special.msn.com/msn/election2004.armx