Fwd: PhyloCode names

[Richard Pyle]

> Second, and more fundamentally, adding a prefix or suffix changes the
> name.  The (currently incorrect) criticism that the PhyloCode would
> change many familiar names would then be valid.  The ICBN name of the
> composite clade is Asteraceae.  Why shouldn't this same name be used
> for the exact same group under the PhyloCode?  This is not an
> isolated problem.  There are a great many current names that apply
> unambiguously to clades under the existing codes; I would not want to
> change all of those names under the PhyloCode.


I think we're close to a common ground here.  There's not much difference
between a standardized suffix "phy" appended to the names, and a standard
for following PhyloCode names with the symbol "(P)".  Both are intended to
signify the same thing:  "sensu PhyloCode" (as opposed to "sensu Linnaean
Code"), except in a less cumbersome way.  The issue at stake is how tightly
linked the "designator" is to the name.  In the draft PhyloCode, the "(P)"
designator is optional.  The concern of Thomas Lammers and others is that
such an optional designator, separated from the name itself, does not ensure
that a printed taxon name will unambiguously be indicated as "sensu
PhyloCode" vs. "sensu Linnaean code".  The alternative is to "hard-attach" a
suffix (such as "phy") to each name as used by PhyloCode.  That way, the
designator is more likely to be applied in all cases, thereby reducing the
chance of ambiguity.  The problem, of course, is the awkward pronunciation.
I'm not sure the second point raised by Philip above is really an issue,
because the root of the name remains identical.  There's really not much
difference between "Pomacanthidae (P)" and "Pomacanthidaephy" in terms of
being able to recognize "Pomacanthidae" as the taxon name in question.  The
real differences are that: 1) the former method doesn't guarantee that a
printed "Pomacanthidae" unambiguously represents a name outside of the
"PhyloZone" (especially if the "(P)" is optional); and 2) the latter method
looks and sounds awkward.

Perhaps there is a compromise solution?  Maybe something like a mandatory
subscript "P" for all PhyloCode names? Subscripts are hard to render in
ASCII, so maybe instead a mandatory "-P" suffix?  At the very least,
enforcement of the "(P)" designator (at least during the first few years
that PhyloCode is in effect) might be prudent.

Aloha,

Rich

Richard L. Pyle
Ichthyology, Bishop Museum
1525 Bernice St., Honolulu, HI 96817
Ph: (808)848-4115, Fax: (808)847-8252
email: deepreef at bishopmuseum.org
"The views expressed are the author's, and not necessarily those of Bishop
Museum."