Aves vs. Avepectora
kinman at HOTMAIL.COM
Sun Oct 27 01:08:20 CDT 2002
Well, now that you have reminded me of this, I guess PhyloCode has no
redeeming values at all, and the news is all bad.
I have pointed out before how clade Arctometatarsalia (anchored on
ornithomimosaurs) now contains ONLY ornithomimosaurs. All the other taxa
with arctometatarsalian feet are not excluded, since it was based on a
character subject to multiple convergences.
Yet the taxon persists because it still has an official phylogenetic
definition, and the confusion in the literature will just multiply as long
as strict cladists stubbornly insist on using it. This taxon is no better
than Vermes. The only difference is that for every Vermes which we used to
have, PhyloCode is likely to create dozens of new ones, and many synonymies
will eventually grow ten times longer than they already are.
It is a nomenclatural Tower of Babel in the making, and in spite of
warnings (even by cladists like Benton and Platnick), the phylocodists
continue to market it as being some great achievement worth all the chaos it
--- Give me a break,
>From: Curtis Clark <jcclark at CSUPOMONA.EDU>
>Reply-To: Curtis Clark <jcclark at CSUPOMONA.EDU>
>To: TAXACOM at USOBI.ORG
>Subject: Re: Aves vs. Avepectora (was: sensu lato)
>Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2002 18:22:29 -0700
>At 08:26 2002.10.24, Ken Kinman wrote:
>> The idea behind PhyloCode is to establish a new authoritarianism, so
>>that all taxa (incl. Ornithurae) have only one (strictly phylogenetic)
>>meaning: Ornithurae "sensu PhyloCode Central Headquarters".
>All other issues concerning Phylocode aside, this is patently false. As you
>yourself have so often pointed out, different data can give different
>phylogenies, and each of these would be a different "sensu" of a Phylocode
Internet access plans that fit your lifestyle -- join MSN.
More information about the Taxacom