What were they thinking?
barry_roth at YAHOO.COM
Wed Dec 15 15:59:06 CST 2004
I see this as a problem of editorship. A journal editor who understands the
niceties of the International Codes would not let something pass that was
ambiguous in this way.
There was a point, some years ago, where TAXACOMers felt it necessary to
educate the editor of Nature regarding some issues about taxonomy. A search of
the archives on "Henry Gee" should turn up some messages. Perhaps a few
informative messages to the Science editors would be useful.
--- Julian H <humphries at MAIL.UTEXAS.EDU> wrote:
> This looks an awful lot like a valid new description (although the lack of
> a designation of holotype probably means it is just another nomen
> nudum). Pity the poor authors who submitted the news to Science. Why
> would they include the name they proposed to use?
> Julian Humphries
> Geological Sciences
> University of Texas at Austin
> Austin, TX 78712
Do you Yahoo!?
The all-new My Yahoo! - Get yours free!
More information about the Taxacom