A semi-hypothetical taxonomic conundrum -

[Panza, Robin]

It is my understanding that the name coined first should be the tribe name.
While priority may not be "regulated", its "rules" should (as opposed to
must) still be used.  All the cases of lumping that I know of use this
principle, even if it's not required.

just my opinion,
Robin

Robin K Panza                  panzar at carnegiemuseums.org
Collection Manager, Section of Birds      ph:  412-622-3255
Carnegie Museum of Natural History       fax: 412-622-8837
4400 Forbes Ave.
Pittsburgh  PA  15213-4080  USA




-----Original Message-----
If a subsequent author decides that Zabrini and Pterostichini are a
single group with the former making the latter paraphyletic, and only
wants to recognize a single group name, what is the preferred name to
recognize?

I am sure in this particular case that common usage and stability issues
make the choice fairly clear. However, since priority for family-group
names is not regulated, it would be possible that one could choose the
group based on the oldest genus or the oldest family-group name (even
though the genus it is based on is more recent).

In general does anyone have any thoughts on why one or the other
resolution should be preferred? How have similar situations been dealt
with?

Kip
--
---------------------
Kipling Will
2144 Comstock Hall
Dept. of Entomology
Cornell University
Ithaca, NY 14853
607-255-1351
http://henry.ento.cornell.edu/CUIC/will.htm
---------------------
The grand fact of the natural subordination of organic beings in groups
under groups, which, from its familiarity, does not always sufficiently
strike us, is in my judgement thus explained.  -Darwin