Zoo. Record and registering names

[John Noyes]

It should be possible to register the names as they are classified in the
article from which they are taken. Most articles give at least the order
and/or superfamily and/or family of the animal in question. That would then
not necessitate any expertise on the part of the compiler and thus reduce
to a minimum any delay in registering a new name. The whole idea would be
to register a name as quickly as possible in order to make it available and
not to worry about how it fits into the greater scheme of things. 

John

At 10:10 AM 2/13/2001 -0500, you wrote:
>The various comments over the past few days on Zoological Record and the
proposal of registering names raises two other issues that should be
addressed, dealing with conflicting classifications and the expertise of
those responsible to register and organize names. First of all let me say
that Zoological Record has been and remains one of the most essential
resources for zoology, but the individuals responsible for Zoo. Record are
compilers without the expertise to make decisions on classification. One
result of this is the higher classification of Hymenoptera used in Zoo.
Record over the last several years, some of which is a farce accepted by no
hymenopterist since the time of Ashmead. Neil Springate wrote a short
article on the subject for the Journal of Natural History [Family-group
names in Hymenoptera (Insecta): a task better left to hymenopterists. 34:
17115-1717]. Perhaps the worst part of the ¡classification¢ used by Zoo.
Record is that of the Chalcidoidea. Zoo. Record recognizes such ¡families¢
as Cleonymidae, Podagrionidae, and Spalangidae, which today are treated by
chalcidologists as subfamilies or even lesser ranks. Differences of rank
among classifications are of little importance, but Zoo. Record insists on
classifying the family Mymaridae in the superfamily Proctotrupoidea rather
than the Chalcidoidea even though relationships of Mymaridae with
Chalcidoidea are strongly supported. This is a more serious problem for
someone who might have only a passing knowledge of the Hymenoptera. Another
bizarre piece of classification  is Zoo. Record recognizing an extant
family, the Mymarommatidae, as a synonym of a family, the Serphitidae, that
has been extinct since the Cretaceous. For those who may be unaware, these
outdated and bizarre mis-classifications result from Zoo. Record using a
catalog of the Hymenoptera compiled by Pagliano and Scaramozzino (1989). If
names are simply to be registered then compilers are sufficient, but if the
names are to be organized then the responsible body must have the expertise
to do so. Zoo. Record uses the library resources of The Natural History
Museum, one could only wish that they would also use the expertise existing
at the NHM.
>
>Gary Gibson
>
>Dr. Gary Gibson
>Systematic Entomology Section
>Eastern Cereal and Oilseed Research Centre
>K.W. Neatby Building, C.E.F.
>Ottawa, Ontario
>Canada K1A 0C6
>
>Tel. (613) 759-1823  FAX (613) 759-1927
>http://res2.agr.ca/ecorc/apss/chalhome.htm
>
>

John S. Noyes, Entomology Department, The Natural History Museum, Cromwell
Road, South Kensington, London, SW7 5BD, UK

Tel. +44 (0)207-942-5594  Fax: +44 (0)207-942-5229

INTERNET: jsn at NHM.ac.uk

Interactive catalogue and biological database of World Chalcidoidea:

http://www.springer-ny.com/detail.tpl?cart=97108527710714749&ISBN=354014675X
or search for Noyes at: 
http://www.springer-ny.com/

Encyrtidae of Costa Rica:
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/science/intro/entom/project2/index.html

Course on taxonomy and biology of parasitic Hymenoptera:
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/entomology/hymcours