What's in a Name? Nomenclature, Systematics, Ichnotaxonomy
DOI | 10.1016/B978-044452949-7/50131-5 |
---|---|
Aasta | 2007 |
Raamat | Trace Fossils: Concepts, Problems, Prospects |
Toimetaja(d) | Miller, W. III |
Kirjastus | Elsevier |
Kirjastuse koht | Amsterdam |
Kuulub kogumikku | Miller, 2007 (ed) |
Leheküljed | 81-91 |
Tüüp | peatükk raamatus |
Keel | inglise |
Id | 9020 |
Abstrakt
Trace fossil diagnoses are subject to the principles of ichnotaxonomy, which seemingly lacks a standardized theoretical basis. The existing problems of this science, such as insufficient diagnoses of ichnotaxa or inadequate ichnotaxobases for newly introduced trace fossil names, are classified and solutions are suggested. A plea is made for a comprehensive two-level approach: similar trace fossils should have identical ichnotaxobases, and a universally acceptable framework of morphology-based ichnotaxobases should be sought. In both cases, a hierarchically organized system containing only geometrical criteria and principal types of substrate should be pursued. Biological affinity of trace makers, spatio-temporal distribution and other extrinsic factors, as well as inferences about the behaviour of the producers of trace fossils are to be avoided as criteria in ichnotaxonomy.