Sinosauropteryx prima proper?
From: Dinogeorge@aol.com
Phil Currie informs me that the feathered theropod from China was formally named and preliminarily described in the following paper:
Ji Qiang & Ji Shuan, 1996. On discovery of the earliest bird fossil in China and the origin of birds. Chinese Geology 10 (233): 30-33.
[The journal is a Chinese language publication.]
I have yet to see the paper, but the feathered theropod is, as noted in numerous news accounts, named Sinosauropteryx prima. Its publication date evidently precedes the news releases I noted in my previous post on this species, so the genus was not a nomen nudum in those news releases. Too bad none of them cited the paper itself. A longer, more detailed description is in preparation.
In addition, the genus was placed in its own family, Sinosauropterygidae, and order, Sinosauropterygiformes, as if it were some kind of paleobird genus rather than a theropod dinosaur.
From: Dinogeorge@aol.com
In a message dated 97-01-26 03:07:05 EST, Jeff Poling writes:Yes, this is exactly what it means. The only ways the name can be changed are (1) to synonymize the genus with a genus named earlier (Compsognathus is a possibility, but from the photos I've seen, this is unlikely) or (2) petition the ICZN to suppress/change the name on the grounds that it is inappropriate (by, say, being morally offensive to some people: very difficult to establish!).Since George announced that a paper has been published on Sinosauropteryx, a thought suddenly crossed my mind (I know, it scared me, too): does this mean that Sinosauropteryx prima is the proper name of the animal, and a more "suitable" name cannot be applied to it?
Copyright © 1997 by respective authors. The message texts above were public posts to the Dinosaur Mailing List.
Revised January 27, 1997