Genus as the species

[Robin Leech]

Rod,

In Zoology, if a two genera (and included species) are being discussed, and
the genera have the same initial letter (let's say, for example "A"), then
there are two routes (that I am aware of) that can be followed:
1.  Use the full name of the genus each time (it is still an option).
2.  Use an abbreviation that is authorized.  In mosquito-ology, the use of
_Ae._ for _Aedes_, and _An._ for _Anopheles_ is official and legal.

In many medical and economic entomology journals and texts, this is what you
will find for these two genera - _An._ and _Ae._

I presume that you could do the same sort of thing WITHIN a paper by
following the same sort of official abbreviation that makes sense.  For
example, for _Abedus_ read _Ab_, and for _Acarapis_ read _Ac_.

In my field, spiderology, a North American spiderman published a paper in
which a list of spider species was given in an alphabetical arrangement.
Thus A to say P.  There were several different genera hiding under the
initial "P.".  The result was that when the names were picked up by Pierre
Bonnet in his magnum opus Bibliographia Araneorum, there were shifts of
species epithets to new genera.  If I remember correctly, all were
transferred to "Pardosa".  There were also shifts of names to new families.

Robin Leech.


-----Original Message-----
From: Rod Seppelt <rod_sep at ANTDIV.GOV.AU>
To: Multiple recipients of list TAXACOM <TAXACOM at CMSA.BERKELEY.EDU>
Date: Sunday, April 11, 1999 3:30 PM
Subject: Re: Genus as the species


>To add to Eileen Campbell's recent comment.
>What really bugs me as well is when one finds lots of genera and species
>mentioned in the text and several of the genera begin with the same letter
>e.g., lets say Rhizocarpon and Rinodina.
>Invariably, in the discussion, one finds reference to the species of these
>genera referred to as R. sp and R. sp.  It certainly taxes the brain to
>recall exactly which genus is being referred to.
>One of the benefits of the Linnaean system of nomenclature is that taxa
>have a unique identifier.  I am all for using that identifier rather than
>just the genus name, unless it is entirely unambiguous and one is not
>implying the entire genus from the observations of one species.
>Regards
>Rod Seppelt
>
>Dr. Rodney D. Seppelt
>Principal Research Scientist
>Australian Antarctic Division
>Channel Highway
>Kingston 7050, Tasmania, Australia
>
>phone:  International:  +61 (03) 62 323 438
>        FAX          :  +61 (03) 62 323 449
>
>Visit our web site:  http://www.antdiv.gov.au/
>