| Intro | | Search taxa | | Taxon tree | | Search literature | | Taxon match | | Homonyms | | Statistics | | Webservice | | Manual | | FAQ | | LifeWatch | | Download | | Log in |
IRMNG taxon detailsCrassinervia M.F. Neuburg, 1934 †
fossil only
Not documented
Taxonomic remark Doweld, 2013 (Proposal 2253) proposed to conserve Crassinervia against the earlier published name Dolerophyllum claiming...
Taxonomic remark Doweld, 2013 (Proposal 2253) proposed to conserve Crassinervia against the earlier published name Dolerophyllum claiming that they were taxonomic synonyms, however this proposal was not accepted by the Nomenclature Committee on Fossils who stated that (contrary to Doweld's case) Dolerophyllum was in current use, and the synonymy between the two genus names had not been explicitly demonstrated (Herendeen, 2016). [details]
IRMNG (2022). Crassinervia M.F. Neuburg, 1934 †. Accessed at: https://www.irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1094627 on 2024-11-21
Date action by
additional source
Doweld, A. B. (2013). (2253) Proposal to conserve the name Crassinervia against Dolerophyllum (fossil Gymnospermae: Vojnovskyales). <em>Taxon.</em> 62(6): 1351-1353., available online at https://doi.org/10.12705/626.38
note: as nom. cons. prop. versus Dolerophyllum, a proposal that was rejected by the Nomenclature Committee on Fossils (Herendeen, 2016), refer note [details] verified source for family Doweld, A. B. (2013). (2252) Proposal to conserve the name Vojnovskyaceae against Dolerophyllaceae and Nephropsidaceae (fossil Gymnospermae: Vojnovskyales). <em>Taxon.</em> 62(6): 1350-1351., available online at https://doi.org/10.12705/626.37 [details] current name source Herendeen, P. S. (2016). Report of the Nomenclature Committee on Fossils: 10. <em>Taxon.</em> 65(2): 382-387., available online at https://doi.org/10.12705/652.18 [details] habitat flag source as per family [details] Unreviewed
Descriptive info Foliage; Carboniferous; Kuznetzk Basin, Russia. (Index Nominum Genericorum) [details]Taxonomic remark Doweld, 2013 (Proposal 2253) proposed to conserve Crassinervia against the earlier published name Dolerophyllum claiming that they were taxonomic synonyms, however this proposal was not accepted by the Nomenclature Committee on Fossils who stated that (contrary to Doweld's case) Dolerophyllum was in current use, and the synonymy between the two genus names had not been explicitly demonstrated (Herendeen, 2016). [details] |
