[Taxacom] progress on globalnames.org

[Geoff Read]

>>> On 15/05/2009 at 10:02 a.m., Peter DeVries <pete.devries at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I did a check via Google Scholar for papers published this year that
mention the *Puma concolor*, and *Felis concolor.*
> *
> *
> Both of these names for the same species are still being used.

The general public may not know this is a possibility, but regardless of
the facts of this case, taxonomists usually think this situation is just
fine.  Whoops a daisy, chop off some Felis into Puma. Couldn't be easier. 
A recombination probably has no effect on the species concept. There will
be a transition period (years, decades) - during which some will be
oblivious, or resistant to a genus change. And the change may not 'stick'.

> The efforts would go much more quickly if we create identifiers for
species concepts.

Such as 'Felis concolor' perhaps? But didn't someone already do that right
at the start of it all? There may be "over 4000 names in English"
(wikipedia) but we're alright here in taxonomy land, as we've got just one
basionym.

Nomenclatural history can get very complicated, but I doubt you've chosen
a good example where confusion and uncertainty might occur at a species
level.

Actually efforts would go much more quickly, especially for taxonomists
trying to sort out the rubbish online, if organizations collecting species
names only served up on the web name strings that are adequately
researched, at very least not prominently presenting trivial misspellings
without provenance, and carefully anchored names with authors, dates, and
citations, and, most important, provided good rapid methods for flags to
be added for indicating the many errors in their databases as soon as they
are noticed.


Geoff
--
Geoffrey B. Read, Ph.D.
Wellington, NEW ZEALAND
gread at actrix.gen.nz