[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
RE: New Chinese Early Cretaceous bird taxa...
Michael Mortimer wrote:
Yandangornis' description is said to show "no diagnosis of birds", thus the
authors ignore it. At least it's finally mentioned again in the
literature.
Small consolation.
No reason is given for sinking Jixiangornis into Shenzhouraptor/Jeholornis,
so while I view this as possibly correct, I don't think the synonymy should
be viewed as secure yet.
Interestingly, the authors also assert that _Jeholornis_ has priority over
_Shenzhouraptor_, because the two genera were named in the same month, and
_Jeholornis_ was published in a weekly journal (Nature), but
_Shenzhouraptor_ was published in a monthly journal (Chinese Geological
Science Bulletin). Zhou and Zhang claim this is "according to international
nomenclature rule". I'll have a look at the ICZN rules, and see if they're
on to something.
Among the taxonomic/phylogenetic problems- Confuciusornis suniae is
presented as a valid species, Jibeinia is a protopterygid, Cathayornis and
Sinornis are kept separate, Liaoxiornis is kept in its own order, and
Chaoyangia is still placed in Ornithurae sensu BAND.
Also, in Table 1, _Gansus_ is put in the family "Gansuiornithidae" and order
"Gansuiornithiformes". Similarly, _Chaoyangia_ and _Songlingornis_ are put
in the family "Chaoyangornithidae" and order "Chaoyangithiformes". These
horrible improperly formed orders and families are also mentioned in the
text. Surely, "Gansuiornithidae" and "Chaoyangornithidae" are invalid under
ICZN rules - especially since Gansuidae and Chaoyangidae are already named.
Cheers
Tim