<html>
      <head>
        <meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
          http-equiv="Content-Type">
      </head>
      <body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
        <div class="moz-cite-prefix">I vote for, even though I still think
          that there are imprecisions in the formulation of apomorphy-based
          definitions...<br>
          <br>
          &nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp; Michel<br>
          <br>
          On 26/07/13 20:43, Cantino, Philip wrote:<br>
        </div>
        <blockquote cite="mid:F55A6EB3-AAC3-4E84-B06B-B3977DA2D0CE@ohio.edu"
          type="cite">
          <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
            charset=ISO-8859-1">
          <div style="">
            <div>Dear CPN members,</div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>A new version of the proposal we have been discussing is
              attached (version 4d). &nbsp;This version includes parenthetical
              references to the old terminology, as requested by several of
              you, and addresses Kevin de Q's concern with a new footnote.
              &nbsp;The missing quotation mark pointed out by David has also been
              corrected.</div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>At this point, I'd like to call for a vote on this set of
              proposed changes. &nbsp; I assume that everyone has read it by now,
              but I also realize that there are various conferences going on
              right now, not to mention fieldwork and vacations, so I think
              we should give ourselves at least ten days. &nbsp; I'm going to set
              Monday, August 5 as the target date to conclude the voting,
              but if anyone feels this is insufficient time, please let me
              know.</div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>Your vote should be sent to the CPN listserv.</div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>Thank you.</div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
            <div>Phil</div>
            <div><br>
            </div>
          </div>
          <div style="">
            <div><br>
              <div><br>
                <div>Begin forwarded message:</div>
                <br class="x_Apple-interchange-newline">
                <blockquote type="cite">
                  <div style="margin-top:0px; margin-right:0px;
                    margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px">
                    <span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium"><b>From:
                      </b></span><span style="font-family:'Helvetica';
                      font-size:medium">"Cantino, Philip" &lt;<a
                        moz-do-not-send="true"
                        href="mailto:cantino@ohio.edu">cantino@ohio.edu</a>&gt;<br>
                    </span></div>
                  <div style="margin-top:0px; margin-right:0px;
                    margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px">
                    <span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium"><b>Date:
                      </b></span><span style="font-family:'Helvetica';
                      font-size:medium">July 25, 2013 9:41:38 AM EDT<br>
                    </span></div>
                  <div style="margin-top:0px; margin-right:0px;
                    margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px">
                    <span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium"><b>To:
                      </b></span><span style="font-family:'Helvetica';
                      font-size:medium">Committee on Phylogenetic
                      Nomenclature &lt;<a moz-do-not-send="true"
                        href="mailto:cpn@listserv.ohio.edu">cpn@listserv.ohio.edu</a>&gt;<br>
                    </span></div>
                  <div style="margin-top:0px; margin-right:0px;
                    margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px">
                    <span style="font-family:'Helvetica'; font-size:medium"><b>Subject:
                      </b></span><span style="font-family:'Helvetica';
                      font-size:medium"><b>Fwd: [CPN] Fwd: Proposal to
                        reorganize Note 9.3.1--COMMENTS DUE BY WEDNESDAY</b><br>
                    </span></div>
                  <br>
                  <div style="">&nbsp;I don't mind deleting the references to
                    "stem-based", but I agree with Brian, Jim and Michel
                    that the terms node-based and branch-based should be
                    referenced in some way in these articles. &nbsp;I'll have to
                    delay the vote on this set of proposals until Kevin and
                    I discuss this issue and hopefully come up with wording
                    that everyone can live with. &nbsp;
                    <div><br>
                    </div>
                    <div>Yesterday was the deadline for comments, so I am
                      going to assume that everyone has read the proposal
                      and, in the absence of other comments, the only issue
                      that needs further attention before we vote is the
                      referencing of the terms currently used for these
                      definition types.<br>
                      <div><br>
                        <div>Phil</div>
                        <div><br>
                          <div><br>
                            <div>Begin forwarded message:</div>
                            <br class="x_Apple-interchange-newline">
                            <blockquote type="cite">
                              <div style="margin-top:0px; margin-right:0px;
                                margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px">
                                <span style="font-family:'Helvetica';
                                  font-size:medium"><b>From: </b></span><span
                                  style="font-family:'Helvetica';
                                  font-size:medium">"de Queiroz, Kevin" &lt;<a
                                    moz-do-not-send="true"
                                    href="mailto:deQueirozK@si.edu">deQueirozK@si.edu</a>&gt;<br>
                                </span></div>
                              <div style="margin-top:0px; margin-right:0px;
                                margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px">
                                <span style="font-family:'Helvetica';
                                  font-size:medium"><b>Subject: </b></span><span
                                  style="font-family:'Helvetica';
                                  font-size:medium"><b>Re: [CPN] Fwd:
                                    Proposal to reorganize Note
                                    9.3.1--COMMENTS DUE BY WEDNESDAY</b><br>
                                </span></div>
                              <div style="margin-top:0px; margin-right:0px;
                                margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px">
                                <span style="font-family:'Helvetica';
                                  font-size:medium"><b>Date: </b></span><span
                                  style="font-family:'Helvetica';
                                  font-size:medium">July 24, 2013 3:14:35 PM
                                  EDT<br>
                                </span></div>
                              <div style="margin-top:0px; margin-right:0px;
                                margin-bottom:0px; margin-left:0px">
                                <span style="font-family:'Helvetica';
                                  font-size:medium"><b>To: </b></span><span
                                  style="font-family:'Helvetica';
                                  font-size:medium">"Cantino, Philip" &lt;<a
                                    moz-do-not-send="true"
                                    href="mailto:cantino@ohio.edu">cantino@ohio.edu</a>&gt;,
                                  Committee on Phylogenetic Nomenclature
                                  &lt;<a moz-do-not-send="true"
                                    href="mailto:cpn@listserv.ohio.edu">cpn@listserv.ohio.edu</a>&gt;<br>
                                </span></div>
                              <br>
                              <div>Well, as Phil noted, "nothing in a code
                                of rules is ever as simple as it first
                                appears." &nbsp;I have reservations about these
                                insertions, because they make it seem as
                                though the pairs of terms are equivalent
                                (i.e., that the newer terms are simply more
                                accurate descriptively, but that both sets
                                of terms are names for the same concepts).
                                &nbsp;In fact, the concepts themselves are not
                                strictly equivalent. &nbsp;This situation is
                                illustrated by the following examples: &nbsp;1) A
                                directly-specified-ancestor definition is a
                                special case of a minimum-clade definition,
                                but it is not necessarily a special case of
                                a node-based definition (it could also be
                                branch-based). &nbsp;2) A maximum-crown-clade
                                definition is a special case of a maximum
                                clade definition, but its supposed
                                equivalent, the branch-modified node-based
                                definition, is a special case of a
                                node-based (rather than branch-based)
                                definition. &nbsp;Because the concepts are not
                                strictly equivalent, I think it might cause
                                unanticipated future confusion to treat them
                                as if they are.<br>
                                <br>
                                In addition, even if we decide to include
                                the insertions, I favor deleting reference
                                to "stem-based definition" and
                                "stem-modified node-based definition".
                                &nbsp;Those terms go back an additional
                                generation and probably don't need to be
                                covered here (they are covered in the
                                Preface). &nbsp;Moreover, they are misleading in
                                that the term "stem" properly refers to a
                                subset of branches (those that are parts
                                stem lineages).<br>
                                <br>
                                Kevin<br>
                                <br>
                                From: &lt;Cantino&gt;, Phil Cantino &lt;<a
                                  moz-do-not-send="true"
                                  href="mailto:cantino@ohio.edu">cantino@ohio.edu</a>&lt;<a
                                  moz-do-not-send="true"
                                  href="mailto:cantino@ohio.edu">mailto:cantino@ohio.edu</a>&gt;&gt;<br>
                                Date: Wednesday, July 24, 2013 9:44 AM<br>
                                To: Committee on Phylogenetic Nomenclature
                                &lt;<a moz-do-not-send="true"
                                  href="mailto:cpn@listserv.ohio.edu">cpn@listserv.ohio.edu</a>&lt;<a
                                  moz-do-not-send="true"
                                  href="mailto:cpn@listserv.ohio.edu">mailto:cpn@listserv.ohio.edu</a>&gt;&gt;<br>
                                Cc: Kevin de Queiroz &lt;<a
                                  moz-do-not-send="true"
                                  href="mailto:dequeirozk@si.edu">dequeirozk@si.edu</a>&lt;<a
                                  moz-do-not-send="true"
                                  href="mailto:dequeirozk@si.edu">mailto:dequeirozk@si.edu</a>&gt;&gt;<br>
                                Subject: Fwd: [CPN] Fwd: Proposal to
                                reorganize Note 9.3.1--COMMENTS DUE BY
                                WEDNESDAY<br>
                                <br>
                                Dear CPN members,<br>
                                <br>
                                In light of the comments from Brian, Jim and
                                Michel, I have modified the text to insert
                                parenthetical references to the old terms
                                for these definitions (see attached draft).
                                &nbsp;Kevin and I normally run drafts by each
                                other before presenting them to the CPN, but
                                this modification seems uncomplicated
                                (though this is probably a rash comment on
                                my part, as nothing in a code of rules is
                                ever as simple as it first appears). &nbsp;To
                                save time, I am sending it to you at the
                                same time as Kevin receives it. &nbsp;(Kevin, if
                                you could comment on this quickly, it would
                                be helpful.)<br>
                                <br>
                                Others of you who have not commented and
                                wish to, please go ahead and do so today.<br>
                                <br>
                                Thank you.<br>
                                <br>
                                Regards,<br>
                                Phil<br>
                                <br>
                                <br>
                                <br>
                                Begin forwarded message:<br>
                                <br>
                                From: James Doyle &lt;<a
                                  moz-do-not-send="true"
                                  href="mailto:jadoyle@ucdavis.edu">jadoyle@ucdavis.edu</a>&lt;<a
                                  moz-do-not-send="true"
                                  href="mailto:jadoyle@ucdavis.edu">mailto:jadoyle@ucdavis.edu</a>&gt;&gt;<br>
                                Date: July 23, 2013 9:10:24 PM EDT<br>
                                To: "<a moz-do-not-send="true"
                                  href="mailto:cpn@listserv.ohio.edu">cpn@listserv.ohio.edu</a>&lt;<a
                                  moz-do-not-send="true"
                                  href="mailto:cpn@listserv.ohio.edu">mailto:cpn@listserv.ohio.edu</a>&gt;"
                                &lt;<a moz-do-not-send="true"
                                  href="mailto:cpn@listserv.ohio.edu">cpn@listserv.ohio.edu</a>&lt;<a
                                  moz-do-not-send="true"
                                  href="mailto:cpn@listserv.ohio.edu">mailto:cpn@listserv.ohio.edu</a>&gt;&gt;<br>
                                Subject: Re: [CPN] Fwd: Proposal to
                                reorganize Note 9.3.1--COMMENTS DUE BY
                                WEDNESDAY<br>
                                <br>
                                Hello Phil et al.,<br>
                                <br>
                                At the last minute I've finally gone through
                                all the e-mails on these issues since April.
                                &nbsp;The one thing that has bothered me all
                                along is Brian's point about continuity of
                                old and new terms. &nbsp;At first the change in
                                terminology struck me as one of those
                                annoyances that turn people off to
                                nomenclature of all kinds - first we ask
                                people to adopt one new set of terms, like
                                node- and branch-based, and then just when
                                they think they finally understand them we
                                tell them to forget all about it and adopt a
                                new set, for reasons that seem exceedingly
                                abstruse (sorry, Kevin). &nbsp;But now I'm coming
                                around to the notion that the new terms are
                                theoretically better and self-explanatory
                                enough, actually more so than the old ones,
                                and as a neo/paleo person I'm relieved that
                                the terms crown clade and total clade
                                maintain their conspicuous roles. &nbsp;The idea
                                that you'll change the terminology
                                throughout the companion volume is also a
                                big relief.<br>
                                <br>
                                Nevertheless, I really would feel better if
                                the old terms were explicitly acknowledged
                                in the text where the new terms are
                                introduced, not relegated to the glossary,
                                since so many people have seen the old terms
                                in the literature on phylogenetic
                                nomenclature and have made efforts to
                                understand them. &nbsp;At the very least this
                                could be done parenthetically in terms such
                                as "see Glossary for the relations of these
                                terms to the widely used terms node-based
                                and branch-based."<br>
                                <br>
                                Jim<br>
                                <br>
                                Brian,<br>
                                <br>
                                This is a good point. &nbsp;My understanding is
                                that we editors will be responsible for
                                changing all the terminology throughout the
                                companion volume before it is published, so
                                it will not be a headache for the authors
                                and there will be no discrepancy between the
                                companion volume and the code. &nbsp;(Kevin,
                                please confirm whether this is your
                                understanding as well.)<br>
                                <br>
                                As for your suggestion that the old terms be
                                mentioned in the new text for the sake of
                                continuity, since the old (current) terms
                                are widely known and used, I think the best
                                place to do that might be the glossary.<br>
                                <br>
                                Phil<br>
                                <br>
                                <br>
                                On Jul 23, 2013, at 6:08 PM, Brian Andres
                                wrote:<br>
                                <br>
                                <blockquote type="cite">Greetings all,<br>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite"><br>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">&nbsp;I like how this
                                  section has been fleshed out commensurate
                                  to its importance. If the proposed changes
                                  are voted down, I would suggest keeping
                                  most of the new text with the old
                                  terminology. However, I do have one
                                  reservation for the proposed changes in
                                  terminology. If we excise all the node-
                                  and branch-based terms, are we going to
                                  ask all the authors for Companion Volume
                                  to rewrite their entries with these terms
                                  removed? Both the Examples_for_Authors and
                                  Instructions_for_Authors use these terms,
                                  and #5 under Format for Entries in the
                                  Instructions requires their use. I for one
                                  use these the old terms seven times in my
                                  entries. There is a tradition of using
                                  this terminology in the literature and
                                  previous versions of the Code, and I
                                  wonder if they should be at least
                                  mentioned in the discussion of minimum-
                                  and maximum-clade definitions for
                                  continuity and for this discrepancy
                                  between the Code and Companion Volume.<br>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite"><br>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">Best,<br>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">&pound;&aacute;<br>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite"><br>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">On Jul 23, 2013, at
                                  1:47 PM, "Cantino, Philip" &lt;<a
                                    moz-do-not-send="true"
                                    href="mailto:cantino@ohio.edu">cantino@ohio.edu</a>&lt;<a
                                    moz-do-not-send="true"
                                    href="mailto:cantino@ohio.edu">mailto:cantino@ohio.edu</a>&gt;&gt;
                                  wrote:<br>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite"><br>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite">David,<br>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite"><br>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite">Thank you for
                                    spotting the omitted quotation mark.
                                    &nbsp;You raise a good point about multiple
                                    apomorphies. &nbsp;If I recall correctly, a
                                    definition of this type was also used in
                                    one of the entries for the companion
                                    volume (I was not the lead editor on
                                    that one, so I may be mis-remembering).
                                    &nbsp;The use of multiple apomorphies is not
                                    very different from the use of a single
                                    complex apomorphy, which is addressed in
                                    Art. 9.10 and Rec. 9E. &nbsp;&nbsp;It may well be
                                    worth expanding that article and
                                    recommendation to cover complex
                                    apomorphies as well, or perhaps covering
                                    them separately but with wording
                                    parallel to that of Art. 9.10 and Rec.
                                    9E. &nbsp;I also wonder whether that article
                                    and recommendation should be moved up
                                    into the section of Article 9 that we
                                    are now considering. &nbsp;However, I'd
                                    prefer to delay considering these
                                    questions &nbsp;until we find out whether the
                                    proposal already on the table is
                                    approved by the CPN. &nbsp;I'll make a note
                                    to myself so I don't forget to come back
                                    to this later.<br>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite"><br>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite">Phil<br>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite"><br>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite"><br>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite">On Jul 22, 2013,
                                    at 3:21 PM, David Marjanovic wrote:<br>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite"><br>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite">
                                    <blockquote type="cite">Good point in
                                      Note 9.5.2 about the use of external
                                      specifiers for minimum-clade
                                      definitions.<br>
                                    </blockquote>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite">
                                    <blockquote type="cite"><br>
                                    </blockquote>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite">
                                    <blockquote type="cite">In the
                                      explanation of apomorphy-modified
                                      crown clade definitions, the quotation
                                      mark after "the crown clade
                                      characterized by apomorphy M (relative
                                      to other crown clades) as inherited by
                                      A" is missing.<br>
                                    </blockquote>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite">
                                    <blockquote type="cite"><br>
                                    </blockquote>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite">
                                    <blockquote type="cite">Should we
                                      explicitly acknowledge the possibility
                                      of multiple apomorphies in an
                                      apomorphy-based definition? I've seen
                                      at least one in the literature, along
                                      the lines of "the first ancestor that
                                      had all of the following list of
                                      apomorphies inherited by A, plus all
                                      its descendants".<br>
                                    </blockquote>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite">
                                    <blockquote type="cite"><br>
                                    </blockquote>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite">
                                    <blockquote type="cite">That's all. :-)<br>
                                    </blockquote>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite">
                                    <blockquote type="cite">_______________________________________________<br>
                                    </blockquote>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite">
                                    <blockquote type="cite">CPN mailing list<br>
                                    </blockquote>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite">
                                    <blockquote type="cite"><a
                                        moz-do-not-send="true"
                                        href="mailto:CPN@listserv.ohio.edu">CPN@listserv.ohio.edu</a>&lt;<a
                                        moz-do-not-send="true"
                                        href="mailto:CPN@listserv.ohio.edu">mailto:CPN@listserv.ohio.edu</a>&gt;<br>
                                    </blockquote>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite">
                                    <blockquote type="cite"><a
                                        moz-do-not-send="true"
                                        href="http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn">http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn</a><br>
                                    </blockquote>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite"><br>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite"><br>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite">_______________________________________________<br>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite">CPN mailing list<br>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite"><a
                                      moz-do-not-send="true"
                                      href="mailto:CPN@listserv.ohio.edu">CPN@listserv.ohio.edu</a>&lt;<a
                                      moz-do-not-send="true"
                                      href="mailto:CPN@listserv.ohio.edu">mailto:CPN@listserv.ohio.edu</a>&gt;<br>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">
                                  <blockquote type="cite"><a
                                      moz-do-not-send="true"
                                      href="http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn">http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn</a><br>
                                  </blockquote>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite"><br>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite"><br>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">_______________________________________________<br>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite">CPN mailing list<br>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite"><a
                                    moz-do-not-send="true"
                                    href="mailto:CPN@listserv.ohio.edu">CPN@listserv.ohio.edu</a>&lt;<a
                                    moz-do-not-send="true"
                                    href="mailto:CPN@listserv.ohio.edu">mailto:CPN@listserv.ohio.edu</a>&gt;<br>
                                </blockquote>
                                <blockquote type="cite"><a
                                    moz-do-not-send="true"
                                    href="http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn">http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn</a><br>
                                </blockquote>
                                <br>
                                <br>
    _______________________________________________<br>
                                CPN mailing list<br>
                                <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                                  href="mailto:CPN@listserv.ohio.edu">CPN@listserv.ohio.edu</a>&lt;<a
                                  moz-do-not-send="true"
                                  href="mailto:CPN@listserv.ohio.edu">mailto:CPN@listserv.ohio.edu</a>&gt;<br>
                                <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                                  href="http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn">http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn</a><br>
                                <br>
                                <br>
                                <br>
                                --<br>
                                <br>
                                <br>
                                James A. Doyle<br>
                                Department of Evolution and Ecology<br>
                                University of California<br>
                                Davis, CA 95616, USA<br>
                                Telephone: &nbsp;1-530-752-7591; fax:
                                &nbsp;1-530-752-1449<br>
    _______________________________________________<br>
                                CPN mailing list<br>
                                <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:CPN@listserv.ohio.edu">CPN@listserv.ohio.edu</a>&lt;<a
                                  moz-do-not-send="true"
                                  href="mailto:CPN@listserv.ohio.edu">mailto:CPN@listserv.ohio.edu</a>&gt;<br>
                                <a moz-do-not-send="true"
                                  href="http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn">http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn</a><br>
                                <br>
                              </div>
                            </blockquote>
                          </div>
                          <br>
                        </div>
                      </div>
                    </div>
                  </div>
                </blockquote>
              </div>
              <br>
            </div>
          </div>
          <br>
          <fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
          <br>
          <pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
    CPN mailing list
    <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:CPN@listserv.ohio.edu">CPN@listserv.ohio.edu</a>
    <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn">http://listserv.ohio.edu/mailman/listinfo/cpn</a>
    </pre>
        </blockquote>
        <br>
        <br>
        <pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">-- 
    Michel Laurin
    UMR 7207
    Mus&eacute;um National d&#8217;Histoire Naturelle
    Batiment de G&eacute;ologie        
    Case postale 48
    43 rue Buffon
    F-75231 Paris cedex 05
    FRANCE
    <a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www2.mnhn.fr/hdt203/info/laurin.php">http://www2.mnhn.fr/hdt203/info/laurin.php</a></pre>
      </body>
    </html>
    View Site in Mobile | Classic
    Share by: