Nomenclature versus Taxonomy

[Edwards, G.B.]

Chris, This is certainly true.  But what then would you use as a
standard?  Wouldn't you agree that in general (i.e., other than disputed
taxonomic placements), the last placement by an acknowledged authority
is the currently accepted name for a species (based on your last post it
seems like you probably would ... >as an editor of a database I want to
see a FLAG that tells me immediately that something has been changed at
least in respects to the "current" taxonomy in the opinion of the
author(s).)?  

Last I heard, we had a shortage of taxonomists/ systematists, so it
often seems like a waste of time to mess with disputes unless they can
be dealt with in a revisionary context.  One hopes that all significant
taxonomic works go through a thorough review process, but even if they
don't (and some probably don't), is anyone going to review every single
revision in every single group to make sure it is "acceptable" in some
way?  I really doubt it.  Therefore, unless you have an above average
interest in a certain group, chances are you are going to accept the
classification of who ever latest worked on it, especially if you know
that author(s) is a recognized authority on the group.  Surely the
percentage of disputed species placements is pretty low compared to the
overall number of species classified.
 
G. B. Edwards

>
...  Every paper must be evaluated on its merits. And the simply fact
that so many junior synonyms have discovered and are now accepted by all
is proof that the most recent paper does not always represent the best
taxonomy.

F. Christian Thompson
Systematic Entomology Lab., USDA
c/o Smithsonian Institution
MRC-0169 NHB
PO Box 37012
Washington, DC 20013-7012
(202) 382-1800 voice
(202) 786-9422 FAX
cthompso at sel.barc.usda.gov e-mail
www.diptera.org  web site

>>> Ron Gatrelle <gatrelle at TILS-TTR.ORG> 05/03/05 11:53AM >>>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Edwards, G.B." <edwardg at DOACS.STATE.FL.US>
Subject: Re: any official terminology? Nomenclature versus Taxonomy

snip

 I might disagree in principle with the concept that several
valid combinations could be in existence simultaneously, since it
could
be argued that the most recently published combination should be the
valid one.  But if that always was strictly followed, inadvertent
changes would be made too many times by authors who were not aware of
the most recent literature.
************

To all:
Since I am just getting to emails and starting at the oldest and
working my
way up, various points may have already been commented on and clarified
or
settled.    But coming in late....   The term "valid" is another like
"official" that has different meanings and is thus subjective due to
the
(unknown) interpretations of the speakers and hearers.   Per the ZN
Code,
there can only be one "valid" species name for a taxon.   So in that
sense,
no there can not be several simultaneously valid specific names.  But
in
regard to species genus combinations there can be several valid
combinations because these are a matter of taxonomic concept.   Here is
a
simple example -- Aus bus or  Gus bus or Aus (Gus) bus.    None of
these
are "wrong".  Thus, all are valid, each to the concept of the
taxonomist
that employs it as such.

Ron Gatrelle