[tdwg-content] DwC review: comments
ncellinese at flmnh.ufl.edu
Sat Aug 8 19:09:21 CEST 2009
I am kind of late with this but I think still in time to drop a couple
of comments about nomenclature before the review deadline. I think
that phylogenetic nomenclature is not well accounted for. Clade names
could be well accommodated right now, however, the types of
phylogenetic definitions are not (node-based, branch-based, apomorphy-
based and variations). There could be a few options on how to handle
these (e.g., with annotations) , but I wanted to make sure that there
is a will to take the PhyloCode into consideration. The phylogenetics
community is using these names that are now slowly being published.
Next year, after the Code will be published, many more names will be
formally recognized and used in databases. This issue will have to be
faced at some point, so why not right away. Any comments on this?
Nico Cellinese, Ph.D.
Assistant Curator, Herbarium & Informatics
Adjunct Assistant Professor, Department of Biology
Florida Museum of Natural History
University of Florida
354 Dickinson Hall, PO Box 117800
Gainesville, FL 32611-7800, U.S.A.
More information about the tdwg-content