[Taxacom] Why stability? - Revisited

Fri May 1 21:14:31 CDT 2015

It might be noted that most monographs and most floras (apologies to my non-botanical colleagues for my botanical POV; I'd be interested to understand how this is the same or different in zoology) actually do a poor or even terrible (misleading) job of connecting past usage and circumscriptions to modern usage and circumscriptions -- in part because of the convention of being completely focused on types.

Example.  Quercus prinus L. 1753.  For 250 years this name has been variously applied to 2 very different and clearly distinct species (very different in overall morphology, in habitat, in distribution) -- because the minimal type was ambiguous.  WHAT did Linnaeus mean???  This has been fought over and disagreed about for 254 years but is now resolved by formal rejection of the name Quercus prinus L.

The typical monograph or flora has simply decided the issue by their opinion, and recognized 2 species:  EITHER

1. Quercus prinus (with montana in synonymy) and Quercus michauxii, OR
2. Quercus montana and Quercus prinus (with michauxii in synonymy).
with no usage of sec or sensu, and usually with no explanation of the issue.  

This means that when one encounters "Quercus prinus Linnaeus" in most floras, or on a specimen label or species list, it can only mean ambiguously "one or the other".  

But, if one approaches things with a "sec" or "sensu" approach, immensely more clarity can be found and floristic treatments and specimen IDs based on each can be parsed.  

Quercus michauxii Nuttall, Basket Oak, Swamp Chestnut Oak.  Bottomland forests, especially in fertile soils of upper terraces where flooded only infrequently and for short periods, upland depression ponds, sometimes on moist lower slopes.  Apr; Sep-Oct (of the same year).  NJ south to n. peninsular FL and west to e. TX and se. OK, north in the interior to s. IL and s. IN.  See discussion under Q. montana about the application of the name Q. prinus Linnaeus.  [= Q. michauxii -- C, F, FNA, G, GW, K, Mo, RAB, Va, W, WH3; = Q. prinus Linnaeus – S, name rejected (possibly misapplied, and a source of confusion)]

Quercus montana Willdenow, Rock Chestnut Oak.  Xeric forests of ridges and slopes, shale barrens, occasionally in mesic situations especially where rocky.  Apr; Sep-Nov (of the same year).  Primarily Appalachian but broadly distributed in e. North America:  s. ME, NY, MI, s. UN, s. IL, and se. MO (Smith & Parker 2005) south to c. GA, c. AL, ne. MS (and LA?).  The proper application of the Linnaean “Q. prinus” has been controversial and unclear, having been debated and variously applied for well over a century.  The name “Q. prinus” has nomenclatural priority over either “Q. montana” or “Q. michauxii”, but it is not clear which species was intended; after centuries of uncertainty, Whittemore & Nixon (2005) proposed its formal rejection and the proposal was formally and unanimously accepted (Brummitt 2007).  [= Q. montana -- FNA, K2, Pa, S, Va, W; = Q. prinus Linnaeus – C, F, G, K1, RAB, WV, name rejected (probably misapplied, and a source of confusion)]

Strangely helpful and actually very simple to pay attention not only to monography and typification and rulings in the code, but to "map" the names used by past authors explicitly to clarify usage over time.

Alan 

-----Original Message-----
From: Taxacom [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Weakley, Alan
Sent: Friday, May 01, 2015 9:38 PM
To: Stephen Thorpe; Dilrukshan Wijesinghe; TAXACOM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Why stability? - Revisited

I was just hoping (no "dictating" going on) for some focus on a topic of importance -- without haring off on other topics that have been hashed over repeatedly on this forum.  The "decline of monography" and "the evil of data aggregators" can have and have had their own lengthy strings (and I and many others I'm sure have their various and largely sympathetic thoughts on these issues).  But, both are tangentially related to the topic which I (and a number of others) thought was on the table in this string:  sec, sensu, precision in connecting an alleged identification with a name, "taxonomic concept mapping" (clear bounding of the "taxonspace" around the type specimen 'flag') and ways to go about best delineating that and communicating it to the benefit of current and future taxonomists and other users of taxonomic information.

In my humble opinion (IMHO) having some discipline about staying "on topic" would make this a more beneficial forum for all.  But, far from being "supreme ruler of the cosmos", I am "but an egg".

---Original Message-----
From: Stephen Thorpe [mailto:stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz] 
Sent: Friday, May 01, 2015 8:15 PM
To: Dilrukshan Wijesinghe; TAXACOM; Weakley, Alan
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Why stability? - Revisited

@Alan Weakley: When you become supreme ruler of the cosmos, THEN you can dictate what other people can or cannot talk about on Taxacom...

--------------------------------------------
On Sat, 2/5/15, Weakley, Alan <weakley at bio.unc.edu> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Why stability? - Revisited
 To: "Dilrukshan Wijesinghe" <dpwijesinghe at yahoo.com>, "TAXACOM" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
 Received: Saturday, 2 May, 2015, 11:47 AM

 "Aggregators are rubbish".
 "Taxonomists are under citation pressure" to split their  work into smaller articles.

 And I thought we were talking about ways to better  communicate best taxonomy and unambiguous information about  the individual units (based closely on cited underlying
 literature) to the diversity of taxonomy-users (including
 ourselves) across generations.

 -----Original Message-----
 From: Taxacom [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu]
 On Behalf Of Dilrukshan Wijesinghe
 Sent: Friday, May 01, 2015 7:20 PM
 To: TAXACOM
 Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Why stability? - Revisited

 Rod wrote:
 "I'm not denying that this is valuable, but it frustrates me  that there is minimal connection to the underlying  literature. What I see missing from many checklists, and  aggregators as well, is the ability to drill down to the  underlying science."
 That's why aggregators are rubbish. The idea that there  should be one (or a few) sites providing taxonomic  information on all organisms is ludicrous, yet this seems to  be the "philosophy" that drives the "aggregator industry".
 Every day we use specialized sources for information on a  variety of topics that are of importance to us. Obviously,  that is not seen as a huge problem; in fact, that diversity  and specialization is understood to be necessary aspect of  high-quality information.
 Here are some specialized taxonomic websites that are vastly  more reliable and useful than any aggregator:
 World Spider Catalog
 http://www.wsc.nmbe.ch/

 The Goblin Spider Planetary Biodiversity Inventory http://research.amnh.org/oonopidae/index.php

 Pseudoscorpions of the World
 http://museum.wa.gov.au/catalogues-beta/pseudoscorpions

 Jumping spiders (Arachnida: Araneae: Salticidae) of the  world http://www.jumping-spiders.com/index.php

 Catalogue of Pholcidae
 http://www.pholcidae.de/

 Orthoptera Species File Online
 http://orthoptera.speciesfile.org/HomePage/Orthoptera/HomePage.aspx

 Cercopoidea Organised On Line
 http://rameau.snv.jussieu.fr/cool/index.php?&lang=en

 Coreoidea Species File Online
 http://coreoidea.speciesfile.org/HomePage/Coreoidea/HomePage.aspx

 World List of Marine, Freshwater and Terrestrial Isopod  Crustaceans http://www.marinespecies.org/isopoda/

 Global Taxnomic Daabase of Gracillariidae (Lepidoptera) http://www.gracillariidae.net/

 Psocodea Species File Online
 http://psocodea.speciesfile.org/HomePage/Psocodea/HomePage.aspx

 Cassidinae of the world - an interactive manual (Coleoptera:
 Chrysomelidae) http://culex.biol.uni.wroc.pl/cassidae/katalog%20internetowy/index.htm

 Priyantha

 D. P. Wijesinghe
 dpwijesinghe at yahoo.com

 _______________________________________________
 Taxacom Mailing List
 Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org

 Celebrating 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.
 _______________________________________________
 Taxacom Mailing List
 Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org

 Celebrating 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.

_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org

Celebrating 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.