首页> 外文期刊>Alcheringa: An Australasian Journal of Palaeontology >Taxonomy and historical inertia: Clidastes (Squamata: Mosasauridae) as a case study of problematic paleobiological taxonomy
【24h】

Taxonomy and historical inertia: Clidastes (Squamata: Mosasauridae) as a case study of problematic paleobiological taxonomy

机译:分类学和历史惯性:Clidastes(Squamata:MosaSauridae)作为病态古生物学分类的案例研究

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

I review the taxonomic history of two problematic mosasaur species, Clidastes liodontus and Clidastes moorevillensis. The genus Clidastes is thought to represent an early radiation of a diverse clade known as the Mosasaurinae. However, most phylogenetic analyses recover the genus as paraphyletic with respect to more highly nested mosasaurines such as Mosasaurus, Prognathodon, and Globidens. The fragmentary holotype of Clidastes liodontus was never figured or fully described, and was destroyed in World War II. Over 20 years after destruction of the holotype, relatively complete specimens were referred to Clidastes liodontus based upon a single, variable character. Another taxon, originally designated Clidastes liodontus moorevillensis in a master's thesis and then elevated to Clidastes moorevillensis in a separate dissertation, has never been formally described and lacks definitive diagnostic characters that differentiate it from the contemporary concept of Clidastes liodontus. Clidastes provides an excellent example of how historical inertia in taxonomic nomenclature can build over decades and skew our interpretations of the diversity, paleobiology, biogeography, and biostratigraphy of a taxon. Clidastes liodontus is a nomen dubium and Clidastes moorevillensis a nomen nudum. I recommend that both names be abandoned. Removal of those names frees us from a burdensome taxonomy and eliminates cognitive biases that hinder objective understanding and exploration of early-diverging mosasaurines, and is a necessary first step toward a taxonomic revision of the lineage(s) involved.
机译:我审查了两种有问题的mosasaur种类的分类历史,Cleidontus和Clecastes Moorevillensis。克里克利夫斯本世纪被认为代表了一种被称为Mosasaurinae的各种思工的早期辐射。然而,大多数系统发育分析是恢复属于更高度嵌套的Mosasaurines,如Mosasaurus,prognathodon和Globindens的解剖学。氯地蒂斯的碎片全型从未想过或完全描述过,并在第二次世界大战中被摧毁。在销毁全型后20多年后,基于单个可变特征,称为相对完整的标本。另一个分类群,最初指定的克里奥托斯Moorevillensis在硕士论文中,然后在一个单独的论文中升高到氯化莫罗斯,从未被正式描述过,缺乏将其区分离氯代蒂的当代概念的明确诊断性状。 Clidastes提供了一个很好的例子,即分类学命令的历史惯性如何建造几十年来,并歪斜我们对分类的多样性,古生物学,生物地理和生物数据库和生物数据库的解释。 Clidastes Liodontus是一个名称糖果和克莱夫·莫罗氏菌的名称纽姆。我建议抛弃两个名称。删除这些名称从繁琐的分类中释放我们,消除了对早期分歧和早期偏离Mosasaurines的客观理解和探索的认知偏见,并且是涉及血统的分类改革的必要第一步。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号