A response to ‘Comment to Wetzeliella and its allies – the ‘hole’ story: a taxonomic revision of the Paleogene dinoflagellate subfamily Wetzelielloideae by Williams et al. (2015)’

ABSTRACT The paper by Williams et al. (2015) concerning a proposed taxonomic revision of the subfamily Wetzelielloideae has led to a comment by Bijl et al. (2016) that questions the validity of our assumptions regarding recognition of the equiepeliform, latiepeliform, hyperepeliform and soleiform archaeopyle types and their significance at the generic level. In this response we address the points that they raise, which are: the introduction of taxonomic criteria allegedly not followed in other fossil subfamilies; the erection of too many taxa; the unworkable nature of the proposed classification; and the reduction of stratigraphic applicability of many significant marker species. We have organised our response under the following topics: pragmatism versus theory; generic criteria: intergroup consistency; the genus Apectodinium and operculum attachment; stratigraphic utility; the number of taxa; and recognition problems. We also discuss specimens illustrated in the two plates included with the comment. The...