[Taxacom] Read... and believe...

Mon Sep 7 16:32:23 CDT 2009

Thanks for the warning, John, but Chris isn't a nasty person, and he was only offering examples relevant to a thread, so it's not as if posting it to the list divulges any sensitive or confidential information.

In response to you response about the orangutan theory, I would say that convergence in morphology/behaviour among apes is always going to be more likely than EXACT convergence in base sequences in their DNA. The more complex a shared character, the less likely it is due to convergence. If you found two species with an IDENTICAL and extremely complex structure, unique to them, this would be the strongest case for synapomorphy. A long sequence of bases is such a complex character. Sticking a roof on your hut is not so complex! :)

________________________________________
From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of John Grehan [jgrehan at sciencebuff.org]
Sent: Tuesday, 8 September 2009 12:29 a.m.
To: Taxacom
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Read... and believe...

Stephen,

Be warned. Some people on this list can get quite nasty when it comes to
posting off-list responses. I did it by accident and I had individuals
threatening to sue me. Not everyone on this list necessarily has a
collegial perspective.

John Grehan

-----Original Message-----
From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
[mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Stephen Thorpe
Sent: Monday, September 07, 2009 5:49 AM
To: Chris Lyal
Cc: Taxacom
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Read... and believe...

Hope you don't mind me replying to the list on this Chris, but it quite
nicely illustrates the sort of confusions that can occur in
interpretation of another's words

[Roger said] >If, for example, A is considered a synonym of B does that
mean that we can treat everything that has ever been labelled A as if it
had been labelled B?

[Roger didn't say] >If, for example, A is considered a synonym of B does
that mean that everything that has ever been labelled as A is species B,
or vice versa?

Your first example is like this:
Specimens are labelled A, then some of them get reidentified as (new)
species C. A is then synonymised with B. So you say that C would follow
into synonymy with B!!! I say that we can indeed think of those original
A's as if they had been labelled B, and the ones that were incorrectly
labelled A were also effectively incorrectly labelled B!

Second example:
> he formulated a concept of a parasitoid species with very few hosts
Again, if some A's were misidentified (and really C), and A becomes a
synonym of B, then the misidentified A's become misidentified B's!!! No
problem!

Stephen

________________________________________
From: Chris Lyal [C.lyal at nhm.ac.uk]
Sent: Monday, 7 September 2009 9:25 p.m.
To: Stephen Thorpe
Subject: RE: [Taxacom] Read... and believe...

There are numerous specimens in the NHM collections that bear more than
one identification label, as successive taxonomists have reidentified
them.  I've (naturally) done it myself, for example when I've examined a
species and decided that the specimens previously identified as it
represent more than one entity, the 'original' species and a new
species.  Following the logic 'A is considered a synonym of B so we can
treat everything that has ever been labelled A as if it had been
labelled B' means that if the original species was synonymised with
something else my new species would automatically fall synonym as well.

That is a formal example, but there are many informal ones.  For
example, one of the UK's parasitoids has been recorded from scores of
hosts; examination of vouchers by one of my colleagues led him to the
understanding that most of these records were misidentifications, and he
formulated a concept of a parasitoid species with very few hosts.
However, 'if everything labelled A..' is correct, his concept must fall.

Cheers,
Chris

-----Original Message-----
From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
[mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Stephen Thorpe
Sent: 07 September 2009 10:12
To: Roger Hyam; Taxacom
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Read... and believe...

[Roger wrote] A world without taxon concepts also lacks synonymy.
If, for example, A is considered a synonym of B does that mean that we
can treat everything that has ever been labelled A as if it had been
labelled B? Most taxonomists will answer this question with "That
depends".

[reply] One bit at a time:
> A world without taxon concepts also lacks synonymy
Really? Why? If I stick my flag in the ground and say everything in all
directions from here until we hit the sea is hereby named "Australia",
and somebody else does the same to a different bit of ground but dubs it
"New Holland", then these names are synonyms even though neither of us
knew where the coastline was ...
>If, for example, A is considered a synonym of B does that mean that we
can treat everything that has ever been labelled A as if it had been
labelled B?
Yes! Please provide a counterexample!

________________________________________
From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
[taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Roger Hyam
[rogerhyam at mac.com]
Sent: Monday, 7 September 2009 8:55 p.m.
To: Taxacom
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Read... and believe...

Thank you everyone for your interest in my blog and thanks Jim for
posting it to the list.

I didn't announce the blog to Taxacom myself as I thought it might
provoke a "response".

Here is the link to the post in case you have not followed this thread
from the start.

http://www.hyam.net/blog/archives/598 "Nomenclature is Dead! Long Live
Barcode Taxa!"

I'll not respond to everyone in detail - I think most of the issues have
been covered before in numerous places. You could try this posting
(which I think may address Tony's points ) if you really must read more
and haven't read it already:

http://www.hyam.net/blog/archives/526 "Taxa, Taxon Names and Globally
Unique Identifiers in Perspective"

A world without taxon concepts also lacks synonymy.

If, for example, A is considered a synonym of B does that mean that we
can treat everything that has ever been labelled A as if it had been
labelled B? Most taxonomists will answer this question with "That
depends".

My contention is that if it depends on some ones opinion then it can't
be *reproduced* in the future when that person is dead. It can only be
approximated to. Which is fine but let us be honest about it.

I will really cherish Richard Petit's "truly pathetic piece of verbiage"
comment. I love it.  It beats the "somewhat obscure" that was my
previous favourite - from a tutor some 20 years ago.

The fun bit is that people don't respond to "pathetic verbiage", they
tend to ignore it or laugh. I suspect, therefore, that I touch a nerve
with my comments - which was my evil intention.

I have updated that strapline on my blog to "truly pathetic verbiage"
is honour of this.

Compassion,

Roger
_______________________________________________

Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom

The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of
these methods:

(1) http://taxacom.markmail.org

Or (2) a Google search specified as:
site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
_______________________________________________

Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom

The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of
these methods:

(1) http://taxacom.markmail.org

Or (2) a Google search specified as:
site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
_______________________________________________

Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom

The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of
these methods:

(1) http://taxacom.markmail.org

Or (2) a Google search specified as:
site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here

_______________________________________________

Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom

The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:

(1) http://taxacom.markmail.org

Or (2) a Google search specified as:  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here