[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