[Taxacom] Drosophila melanogaster name change?

[Kim van der Linde]

Francisco

I disagree. I think we should refrain from making decisions based on the 
personal preferences of people just to avoid having to make substantial 
decisions. If we do that, taxonomy becomes more and more imprecise, in 
order to facilitate the avoidance of difficult decisions. Taxonomically, 
this revision is very straightforward and if Drosophila melanogaster 
hadn't been in the way, the genus would have been split 10-15 years ago.

Kim



On 4/9/2010 8:31 AM, Francisco Welter-Schultes wrote:
> Kim,
>> If we would apply the same
>> criteria to the other genera in the family, we would have to lump
>> most genera together in just a few large genera.
> But nobody forces you to do that. You are free to be inconsistent,
> subgenera here and genera there. For which you have a good
> reason.
>
>> Basically, examine the phylogeny, but leave the taxonomy as is to
>> preserve the name.
> You will certainly take the most responsible decision.
>
> Francisco
>
> University of Goettingen, Germany
> www.animalbase.org
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> 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
>

-- 
http://www.kimvdlinde.com