Confusion about cf. and indet. in labeling of specimens

[-Andy-]

Hi all, in what situation would we use the following naming conventions?

 

1) Tyrannosaurid sp.

 

2) Tyrannosaurid indet. sp. OR  Tyrannosaurid indet. (which is correct?)

 

3) cf. Tyrannosaurid sp.

[gigantoraptor]

1: A species of Tyrannosaurid. 

2: I think the second one. When a fossil cannot be, or has not been, determined

3: When a fossil has similarities with (in this case) a Tyrannosaurid species, but is not the same or is not yet described.

 

This is the way I learned it, If I am wrong, I would be interested in the right answers also.

[Troodon]

Just had a similar topic 

 

[Macrophyseter]

As far as I know, using the term Tyrannosaurid only is applied in sentences like this ("T-rex is a tyrannosaurid"; "Tyrannosaurids include T-rex" (What kind of grammar is this called? I really don't know the term for that type of grammar)) . So in this case, Tyrannosauridae would be the proper term.

 

I agree with gigantoraptor on the literal meanings, but however I think some of the usages are improper.

 

1. As far as I know, sp. is applied only to a confirmed genus but indeterminable species. So saying Tyrannosauridae sp. is invalid, as Tyrannosauridae is a family.

2. I think Tyrannosauridae indet. is the correct one. Because sp. applies to a genus with an indeterminable species, there would be no point of adding one if only the family is certain anyways. I think this is the proper alternative to Tyrannosauridae sp.

3. I think that this would be invalid, as both cf. and sp. requires at least a guess on what the genus might be (cf. works on both genus or species; cf. Tyrannosaurus sp. would mean that it is comparable with the genus Tyrannosaurus, but the species is indeterminable, Tyrannosaurus cf. rex would mean that it's a Tyrannosaurus, but the species is comparable with rex.).

 

I might be wrong, so feel free to correct me if you see any errors.

[erose]

I've never seen cf. placed before a genus. Did you see this in a technical publication?

 

When a genus is in question I usually see simply a question mark placed either before or after the closest guess. Not sure the difference that makes.

 

I think the Code of Zoological Nomenclature includes some explanation for these terms.

[Harry Pristis]

4 hours ago, -Andy- said:

Hi all, in what situation would we use the following naming conventions?

 

1) Tyrannosaurid sp.

 

2) Tyrannosaurid indet. sp. OR  Tyrannosaurid indet. (which is correct?)

 

3) cf. Tyrannosaurid sp.

Macrophyseter was off to a good start by pointing out that "Tyrannosaurid" refers to the Family TYRANNOSAURIDAE.  It is taxonomic shorthand, not formal taxonomic usage. 

In example 1) above, the correct taxo-speak would be  "Tyrannosaurus sp."

 

In example 2), the correct taxo-speak is "Family TYRANNOSAURIDAE Gen. et sp. indet."

 

In example 3), the logical taxo-speak is "cf. Tyrannosaurus sp."  More useful might be "Family TYRANNOSAURIDAE cf. Tyrannosaurus" or "Tyrannosaurus cf. T. rex".

 

 

[-Andy-]

15 hours ago, Troodon said:

Just had a similar topic 

 

 

How did I miss this? Funny how he used a tyrannosaur as an example too.

 

14 hours ago, Harry Pristis said:

Macrophyseter was off to a good start by pointing out that "Tyrannosaurid" refers to the Family TYRANNOSAURIDAE.  It is taxonomic shorthand, not formal taxonomic usage. 

In example 1) above, the correct taxo-speak would be  "Tyrannosaurus sp."

 

In example 2), the correct taxo-speak is "Family TYRANNOSAURIDAE Gen. et sp. indet."

 

In example 3), the logical taxo-speak is "cf. Tyrannosaurus sp."  More useful might be "Family TYRANNOSAURIDAE cf. Tyrannosaurus" or "Tyrannosaurus cf. T. rex".

 

 

 

Thanks for clarifying!

 

1) Let's say I have a dino tooth I believe is likely the Daspletosaurus genus, with no way of determining the species, should I put:

 

cf. Daspletosaurus sp. OR ? Daspletosaurus sp.

 

2) Let's say the only species of Daspletosaurus in the area is D. horneri, should I put horneri species name behind, or can I only put sp. 

 

3) Let's say I have a croc tooth that I know for sure belongs to the Borealosuchus genus, but no species has ever been described from this formation, do I put:

 

Borealosuchus indet. OR Borealosuchus sp.

 

 

[Macrophyseter]

7 hours ago, -Andy- said:

Thanks for clarifying!

 

1) Let's say I have a dino tooth I believe is likely the Daspletosaurus genus, with no way of determining the species, should I put:

 

cf. Daspletosaurus sp. OR ? Daspletosaurus sp.

 

2) Let's say the only species of Daspletosaurus in the area is D. horneri, should I put horneri species name behind, or can I only put sp. 

 

3) Let's say I have a croc tooth that I know for sure belongs to the Borealosuchus genus, but no species has ever been described from this formation, do I put:

 

Borealosuchus indet. OR Borealosuchus sp.

1. It kind of depends on what you mean by likely. If the tooth can be very comparable to that of Daspletosaurus but you're not fully sure if it is one, then you should use cf. Daspletosaurus sp. If you are sure (or very, very, very likely?) that it is a within the Daspletosaurus genus, but you cannot determine the exact species, then it is best to use Daspletosaurus sp. If the tooth is indeed a Daspletosaurus, but the species can be comparable to that to torosus, then Daspletosaurus cf. torosus is used.

2. As far as I know, because new species are always possible, it is always best not to simply assume the species without some close examination of the tooth itself. In this situation, if you think that the tooth is that of horneri, then go ahead and label it that way. But if you are uncertain if it is one, then rather than simply labeling it horneri because it is the only species described in the area, it is best to use Daspletosaurus sp.

3. For this, I think Borealosuchus sp. is the correct one. Indet. would only be used if you are sure that it is a crocodile tooth (hence, order Crocodilia), but cannot describe anything further than that, and hence would use Crocodilia indet. (indet. is not used for genus). If you are sure that it is a Borealosuchus, then why label it as an indeterminable crocodile? It should be remembered that new discoveries are always possible.

 

This is just what I think based on what I know, but you should wait for someone like Harry Pristis to confirm this.

[Harry Pristis]

 

Don't you see the contradiction in saying "Canidae indet"?  You KNOW it's a canid, so what's indeterminate?!  You have to represent what you DON'T know.  Formallly, you would say "Canidae Gen. et sp. indet."  Read these symbols/abbreviations as full sentences:  "This is Family Canidae [but] the genus and species are undetermined."  

 

When you use "cf." or "aff." formally, you should repeat the genus name to which you are comparing your specimen.  It is acceptable to abbreviate that repetition. That is, write "Tapirus cf. T. polkensis."  Read this: "This is genus Tapirus to be compared with Tapirus polkensis."

 

Informally, you cannot go wrong ignoring the trivial name in favor of "Tapirus sp." or "Alligator sp." or  "Daspletosaurus sp."  Formally, you may say "Tapirus sp. indet."  Read: "This is genus Tapirus [but] the species is undetermined."

 

[-Andy-]

8 hours ago, Macrophyseter said:

1. It kind of depends on what you mean by likely. If the tooth can be very comparable to that of Daspletosaurus but you're not fully sure if it is one, then you should use cf. Daspletosaurus sp. If you are sure (or very, very, very likely?) that it is a within the Daspletosaurus genus, but you cannot determine the exact species, then it is best to use Daspletosaurus sp. If the tooth is indeed a Daspletosaurus, but the species can be comparable to that to torosus, then Daspletosaurus cf. torosus is used.

2. As far as I know, because new species are always possible, it is always best not to simply assume the species without some close examination of the tooth itself. In this situation, if you think that the tooth is that of horneri, then go ahead and label it that way. But if you are uncertain if it is one, then rather than simply labeling it horneri because it is the only species described in the area, it is best to use Daspletosaurus sp.

3. For this, I think Borealosuchus sp. is the correct one. Indet. would only be used if you are sure that it is a crocodile tooth (hence, order Crocodilia), but cannot describe anything further than that, and hence would use Crocodilia indet. (indet. is not used for genus). If you are sure that it is a Borealosuchus, then why label it as an indeterminable crocodile? It should be remembered that new discoveries are always possible.

 

This is just what I think based on what I know, but you should wait for someone like Harry Pristis to confirm this.

 

Thanks.

 

Actually, my question on (1) was whether I should use cf. or ?

 

I've seen both labels used:

 

cf. Daspletosaurus sp.

? Daspletosaurus sp.

 

2. Thanks, will take this into consideration. I read that it's somewhat acceptable to use Daspletosaurus cf. horneri

 

3. Good point!

 

5 hours ago, Harry Pristis said:

 

Don't you see the contradiction in saying "Canidae indet"?  You KNOW it's a canid, so what's indeterminate?!  You have to represent what you DON'T know.  Formallly, you would say "Canidae Gen. et sp. indet."  Read these symbols/abbreviations as full sentences:  "This is Family Canidae [but] the genus and species are undetermined."  

 

When you use "cf." or "aff." formally, you should repeat the genus name to which you are comparing your specimen.  It is acceptable to abbreviate that repetition. That is, write "Tapirus cf. T. polkensis."  Read this: "This is genus Tapirus to be compared with Tapirus polkensis."

 

Informally, you cannot go wrong ignoring the trivial name in favor of "Tapirus sp." or "Alligator sp." or  "Daspletosaurus sp."  Formally, you may say "Tapirus sp. indet."  Read: "This is genus Tapirus [but] the species is undetermined."

 

 

Thanks! Would you use:

 

cf. Daspletosaurus sp.

 

OR

 

? Daspletosaurus sp.

[-Andy-]

Anyway, in regards to:

 

cf. Daspletosaurus sp.

 

OR

 

? Daspletosaurus sp.

 

@hxmendoza said a simplistic way to explain it is: 

 

(?)When you’re really not sure if it’s that genus

 

But if you know it matches up well with a particular genus though not 100 % sure then you use cf. “compares favorably to”