Re: New name for Megalosaurus hesperis

["T. Michael Keesey" <keesey@gmail.com>]

On Thu, Nov 20, 2008 at 2:40 PM, Tim Williams <tijawi@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> Yes, exactly.  Arctoidea and Ursoidea represent totally different cases, 
> owing to the way these names were established.  The fact that Arctoidea is 
> "derived from no family name whatsoever" means that the ICZN's Principle of 
> Coordination does not apply, and the taxon Arctoidea is exempt from Article 
> 36 of the Code.  By contrast, Ursoidea and Ursidae are coordinate taxa, and 
> both have _Ursus_ as their type genus.  Thus, the ICZN can get its claws into 
> Ursidae/Ursoidea, but not Arctoidea.

Something of a tangent:

Although the system that the rank-based codes (such as the ICZN)
follow is often called "Linnaean", Linnaeus himself (and other 18th
century taxonomists) never required that a change in rank affect a
change in name, or that names at any rank be required to have an
eponymous type of a lower rank. (Suprafamilial ranks in zoology, which
are largely ungoverned, still work like this--thus, "Archosauria" is
"Archosauria" whether it's a class or an infraorder, and whether or
not it includes Ornithodira or is included by it.) The rank-based
systems are arguably less stable than a true Linnaean system. Good
paper on the subject:
http://si-pddr.si.edu/dspace/bitstream/10088/4506/1/VZ_2005deQueirozSymBotUps.pdf

Thus, if we were really using a true Linnaean system, none of this
would matter. Family Microraptorinae could include Subfamily
Dromaeosauridae if so desired.

-- 
T. Michael Keesey
Technical Consultant and Developer, Internet Technologies
Glendale, California