On the doctrine of ichnotaxonomic conservatism: the differences between ichnotaxa and biotaxa
Abstract:If the aim of ichnotaxonomy is to develop a practical and biologically realistic system of delimiting and naming trace fossils, it is important to keep five precepts, or guiding principles, clearly in view: (1) ichnotaxonomy (in general representing behavioral records) and biologic taxonomy (representing evolutionary products such as species and clades) are never equivalent; (2) ichnogenera stand for major structural themes of preserved behavioral patterns or patterns of substrate modification (defined using exclusive, essential characters or primary ichnotaxobases); (3) ichnospecies stand for (intergrading or discontinuous) variations on these major themes (defined using characters or ichnotaxobases of secondary rank); (4) just enough ichnotaxa should be delimited and named to fill out the possibilities of character space (resulting in a nomenclatural system that is both realistic and neither over-divided nor impoverished – the 'middle path' of naming trace fossils); and (5) descriptions and interpretations of ichnotaxa must be kept absolutely separate (to the point of isolating them in different sections of publications). Most ichnologists already follow these guidelines; losing sight of them, however, has resulted in blurring of ichnotaxa and evolutionary units, excessive lumping or splitting that obscures actual diversity, and a reputation for a largely arbitrary system of delimitation and naming of trace fossils.
Document Type: Research Article
Publication date: September 1, 2012
More about this publication?
- Neues Jahrbuch für Geologie und Paläontologie continuously publishes current original contributions from all fields of geology, ever since its foundation in 1807. All published contributions are in the English language.
- Editorial Board
- Information for Authors
- Subscribe to this Title
- ingentaconnect is not responsible for the content or availability of external websites