The problem I have with this is that it creates unnecessary taxonomic confusion. Despite being a nomen nudum, there is still a chance that subsequent authors may mistakenly treat it as valid (what happened with Malkani's and Ulansky's taxa comes to mind). Another thing to note is that despite allegedly being registered on ZooBank, I could find no results for this taxon.On Sat, Dec 21, 2019 at 5:10 PM Mike Taylor <sauropoda@gmail.com> wrote:I'm pretty relaxed about this. No, the ICZN doesn't recognise it. But a preprint is a great placeholder until the actual paper comes out. If Bill Parker had done something similar with Heliocanthus, it's unlikely Lucas et al. would have scooped his taxon with their name Rioarribasuchus.-- Mike.On Sat, 21 Dec 2019 at 23:04, <tgreenfield999@gmail.com> wrote:Since this is a preprint on a website made for hosting manuscripts and not published in a peer-reviewed journal, I donât think this constitutes a valid naming. The author should have known better than to attempt to name a new taxon in a preprint.Ben CreislerA new paper with free pdf:Parirau ataroa gen. et sp. nov.
Carlos Albuquerque (2019)
A Late Cretaceous Lonchodectid?
bioRxiv (preprint)
doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2019.12.17.879783
https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2019.12.17.879783v1
A pterosaur ulnar specimen (NZMS CD 467) from the Mangahouanga Stream of New Zealand s North Island has been first described by Wiffen et al 1988. Assumed to belong to a Santanadactylus-like pterosaur, this taxon has not since been extensively described, with only a few tentative claims that it represents an azhdarchid. Here, I re-examine the specimen and compare it to other pterodactyloid taxa, noting peculiar features such as its plug-like (obdurate) ulnar end. Christened Parirau ataroa, this taxon is found to be a lonchodectid, which alongside the North American Navajodactylus boerei extends this clade into the world s youngest pterosaur faunas.