|
"I'd say that for any genus that
contains multiple species, each individual species should bediagnostic at the species level - including the type species."
"When we say _D. longus_ is a separate species to _D. carnegii_, it
should be because we have anatomical evidence that they represented distinct species in the Late Jurassic." But that's just saying things should be how you feel they should be, without appealing to any specific consequence. You and Tschopp need to be able to say that "If we allow a type species to be indeterminate within its genus, then if we have problem X
it would be more difficult to solve." I've yet to hear a valid problem X for the ICZN, Phylocode or any other logical construct. Just vague "insecurities and confusion" or in your case it being "bad."
Mickey Mortimer
From: dinosaur-l-request@mymaillists.usc.edu <dinosaur-l-request@mymaillists.usc.edu> on behalf of Tim Williams <tijawi@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2020 11:26 PM To: dinosaur-l@usc.edu <dinosaur-l@usc.edu> Subject: Re: [dinosaur] Diplodocus status John D'Angelo <dangelojohne@gmail.com> wrote:
> Since you brought up the distinction between nomenclature and taxonomy, bear in mind that the concept of a type species is a nomenclatural concept, not a taxonomic one. Yes, but it is still a *species*. A type species is a type AND a species. Which brings me to... Mickey Mortimer <mickey_mortimer111@msn.com> wrote: > Since when are undiagnostic species not species? Are you saying the Diplodocus longus type individual wasn't part of an interbreeding population of organisms, or > whatever species concept you follow? No, I'm not saying that - that would be silly. The type of _D. longus_ certainly came from a once-living species. (Actually, the same is true of any fossil that came from a living organism - even _Aachenosaurus_, a 'dinosaur' based on petrified wood). But I don't see how your question is relevant. I'd say that for any genus that contains multiple species, each individual species should be diagnostic at the species level - including the type species. This should be true irrespective of whichever species concept you prefer. When we say _D. longus_ is a separate species to _D. carnegii_, it should be because we have anatomical evidence that they represented distinct species in the Late Jurassic. |