At the other extreme, a few workers, such as Jacques Gauthier in his 1986 study of theropod-bird relationships,(walking dinosaur costume) hold forth that a taxonomic system should be based solely on phylogeny. (realistic dinosaur costume)In this system grade is avoided, so there are no classes, families, or the like; each name merely designates a major phylogenetic splitting point. Supposedly this is less arbitrary than the Linnaen system. But this is really true only if every two species are given a narne, something we just saw is not workable. If instead reasonable judgments are made as to what splitting points will be named, then the system is really as arbitrary as any other. Even then, phylogeny-only classification systems are hard to understand because they lack equivalent rankings to guide one by. Most importantly, as we more traditional (at least in this area) workers like to say, “grade is as important as clade.” So grade should and can be formally recognized in classification, as outlined above.
Finally, there is a procedure to be followed when uniting taxa. (animatronic dinosaur)Basically, the first named title has priority. For example,lYronnoscurus was named by Osborn in 1905, Torbosouirus by Maleev in 1955. So when these are unite d, Torbosauns is “sunk. ” This means that some fine names, often the more properly descriptive or better known ones, are lost. But it is important to prevent wholesale chaos. There are exceptions, such as when a not fully proper name is so well established that changing it would result in undue confusion.