[Taxacom] New lizard species

[Stephen Thorpe]

>wondering if it is possible for taxonomy as a profession to go blind?
Is that a reference to lack of observable diagnostic characters, or to 'molecular onanism'???  :)




________________________________
From: Jim Croft <jim.croft at gmail.com>
To: Bob Mesibov <mesibov at southcom.com.au>
Cc: TAXACOM <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Sent: Sat, 5 June, 2010 1:26:25 PM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] New lizard species

I am getting probably too old for this game Bob.  Yep, probably so old
fashioned that I'd believe  that if something wanted to become a
species it should probably evolve a few observable or measurable
characters to proclaim this probability? It would probably want
something to show that it was different to what it was probably
related to. I could be right about this, or, probably not... ;)

jim (wondering if it is possible for taxonomy as a profession to go blind?)

On Sat, Jun 5, 2010 at 10:19 AM, Bob Mesibov <mesibov at southcom.com.au> wrote:
> If you haven't seen it, do read
>
> Leache, A.D. and Fujita, M.K. 2010. Bayesian species delimitation in West African forest geckos (Hemidactylus fasciatus). Proceedings of the Royal Society B. Published online as doi:10.1098/rspb.2010.0662
>
> In a well-argued and very clear paper, the authors plump for probabilistic determination of species, and name four *Linnean* species on probabilistic grounds. They say '...we are not aware of any morphological or ecological characteristics that differentiate these lineages,' and therefore diagnose their species as follows (one example):
>
> 'Diagnosis. This species includes all populations that cluster with those from the southern portion of the Congolian rainforest included in this study (southern Cameroon, Gabon and Congo), with strong support in the Bayesian species delimitation model.'
>
> I don't actually have a problem with the methods used or the argument. My concern is that the authors confuse Linnean species with lineages. Lineages can be diagnosed within a probabilistic framework. They give us an insight into how evolution might possibly have happened. Linnean species are those nice, easily recognised things that enable us to retrieve biodiversity information, write field guides and feel that we have a handle on natural history.
>
> It's been obvious for a long time that Linnean taxonomy and molecular taxonomy were headed in different directions, but this paper (IMO) is a clumsy attempt to yoke them back together.
> --
> Dr Robert Mesibov
> Honorary Research Associate
> Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery, and
> School of Zoology, University of Tasmania
> Home contact: PO Box 101, Penguin, Tasmania, Australia 7316
> 03 64371195; 61 3 64371195
> Webpage: http://www.qvmag.tas.gov.au/mesibov.html
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> 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
>



-- 
_________________
Jim Croft ~ jim.croft at gmail.com ~ +61-2-62509499 ~
http://www.google.com/profiles/jim.croft
'A civilized society is one which tolerates eccentricity to the point
of doubtful sanity.'
- Robert Frost, poet (1874-1963)

_______________________________________________

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