[Taxacom] Opinion 2027 [ was Canis [familiaris] dingo Blumenbach ]

Wed May 9 12:24:55 CDT 2018

Dear Paul,
yes this is right in this form.

Cheers
Francisco

-----
Francisco Welter-Schultes

Am 09.05.2018 um 13:13 schrieb Paul van Rijckevorsel:
> Dear Francisco,
> 
> Thank you: this does help!
> 
> Just to be clear, this also means that if Aurochses,
> cattle and zebu's are treated as three subspecies
> of the same species, they are to be called:
> - Bos primigenius primigenius,
> - Bos primigenius taurus,
> - Bos primigenius indicus
> 
> Right?
> 
> Thank you,
> 
> Paul
> 
> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Francisco Welter-Schultes" 
> <fwelter at gwdg.de>
> To: <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> Sent: Wednesday, May 9, 2018 12:50 PM
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Opinion 2027 [ was Canis [familiaris] dingo
> Blumenbach ]
> 
> 
>> The explanation of that ruling in Opinion 2027 is slightly sophisticated,
>> and the Commission is aware of that, but in this case it is not
>> problematic to select the correct names, depending on the individual
>> situation.
>>
>> Canis lupus L 1758 is the name of the wild form of the species. Opinion
>> 2027 makes sure that the wild form shall carry the name of the wild
>> species, not of an eventually earlier established name for a domesticated
>> form. So the wolf's name shall in any case be Canis lupus. It is not
>> admissible to use Canis familiaris L 1758 for the wolf, even if the First
>> Reviser gave precedence to C. familiaris over C. lupus (which I do not 
>> kow
>> off hand).
>>
>> The dingo is considered a domesticated form of Canis lupus, many years 
>> ago
>> released or escaped to the wild again.
>> I am not exactly up to date on the taxonomic issues. Those authors who
>> consider the dingo a wild species, not conspecific with the wolf, would
>> call that species Canis dingo. I do not know if there are such authors.
>>
>> Those authors who consider the dingo a special race of the dog and would
>> like to use the name for the dog Canis familiaris L 1758, can call this
>> form Canis familiaris, or Canis familiaris dingo. Those who consider the
>> dingo being a dog but so much different that it would be some kind of an
>> independently evolved dog for which an independent name would be 
>> justified
>> or needed, would call this independently domesticated form Canis 
>> dingo, as
>> opposed to the other dogs Canis familiaris.
>>
>> Those who like to talk in a scientific environment about dogs and dingos
>> and wolves as one species, will have to use the specific name Canis lupus
>> for the species (following Op. 2027), and if they consider the dog and 
>> the
>> dingo as subspecies, call those subspecies Canis lupus familiaris and, if
>> they consider the dingo an independent subspecies not consubspecific with
>> the dog, Canis lupus dingo. For the latter authors or users Op. 2027 does
>> not come into play, because Canis lupus is the senior name anyway and 
>> does
>> not compete with Canis dingo.
>>
>> Horses or dogs that escaped and live in the wild are usually called feral
>> domesticated species, not wild species in the sense of Op. 2027. The 
>> dingo
>> would not be called a wild species in this sense.
>>
>> If this helps.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Francisco
>>
>> -----
>> Francisco Welter-Schultes
>>
>> Am 09.05.2018 um 10:20 schrieb Paul van Rijckevorsel:
>>> OK, in the absense of anybody supporting
>>> my interpretation of Opinion 2027, is there
>>> anybody who would like to share his (other)
>>> interpretation of this ruling?
>>>
>>> Paul
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Paul van Rijckevorsel"
>>> <dipteryx at freeler.nl>
>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 12:46 PM
>>>
>>>> Thanks Tony, but they already know.
>>>>
>>>> Their problem is that they allow themselves to be
>>>> confused by the "ruled under the plenary power
>>>> to be not invalid by reason of being pre-dated by
>>>> a name based on a domestic form" which is indeed
>>>> a double negative that is awkward to read, rather
>>>> than going by the more readable:
>>>> "The names listed in the ruling above, which are
>>>> the first available names in use based on wild
>>>> populations, apply to wild species and include
>>>> those for their domestic derivatives if these are
>>>> not distinguishable." (p83)
>>>>
>>>> So what is immediately needed is a nomenclaturalist,
>>>> or two, or three, who state support for the obvious
>>>> explanation of the ruling.
>>>>
>>>> Paul
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: Tony Rees
>>>> To: Paul van Rijckevorsel
>>>> Cc: taxacom
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 9:15 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Canis [familiaris] dingo Blumenbach - a
>>>> non-existentname?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Hello Paul, I have alerted ITIS to your message as below and hopefully
>>>> you or I will get an appropriate response from them shortly.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Best regards - Tony
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Tony Rees, New South Wales, Australia
>>>> https://about.me/TonyRees
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 8 May 2018 at 15:44, Paul van Rijckevorsel <dipteryx at freeler.nl>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message ----- From: "Tony Rees" <tonyrees49 at gmail.com>
>>>> Sent: Tuesday, May 8, 2018 12:15 AM
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Maybe to some this will seem a lot of effort to clean up one name but
>>>> in
>>>> this case the error was propagated widely and picked up in other
>>>> sources
>>>> including several Wikipedia articles and Wikispecies, whom I will
>>>> contact,
>>>> as well as elsewhere no doubt.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ***
>>>> Yes, it is nice to be able to eliminate errors.
>>>>
>>>> This brings to mind that ITIS still uses several names that
>>>> have been 'outlawed' by Opinion 2027 (2003). This is
>>>> based on an error in Mammal Species of the World (2005),
>>>> an error for which the surviving author has since apologized.
>>>> It concerns names for very well-known animals:
>>>> Bos primigenius (not 'Bos taurus primigenius')
>>>> Bos gaurus (not 'Bos frontalis gaurus')
>>>> Bos mutus (not 'Bos grunniens mutus')
>>>> Bubalus arnee (not 'Bubalus bubalus arnee')
>>>> Camelus ferus (not 'Camelus bactrianus ferus')
>>>> Capra aegagrus (not 'Capra hircus aegagrus')
>>>> Lama guanicoe (not 'Lama glama guanicoe')
>>>> Ovis orientalis (not 'Ovis aries orientalis')
>>>>
>>>> [The first name as allowed / protected by Opinion 2027.
>>>> The names in parentheses as used by ITIS and disallowed
>>>> by Opinion 2027, with the other subspecies also named
>>>> wrong.
>>>>
>>>> Treating taxa at the level of subspecies, Bos primigenius
>>>> primigenius, Bos primigenius taurus, Bos primigenius indicus
>>>> are nomenclaturally correct options for three related taxa.]
>>>>
>>>> Something wrong with the silkworm, as well.
>>>>
>>>> It has now been fifteen years since Opinion 2027 was published
>>>> https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/34357823
>>>> so cleaning up these names in ITIS is well overdue.
>>>>
>>>> Can somebody please help?
>>>>
>>>> Paul
>>>>
>>>> [There have been earlier efforts]
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>>> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: 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
>>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the Web, visit:
>>>> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>>>> You can reach the person managing the list at:
>>>> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>>>
>>>> Nurturing Nuance while Assaulting Ambiguity for 31 Some Years,
>>>> 1987-2018.
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: 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
>>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the Web, visit:
>>> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>>> You can reach the person managing the list at:
>>> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>>
>>> Nurturing Nuance while Assaulting Ambiguity for 31 Some Years, 
>>> 1987-2018.
>> _______________________________________________
>> Taxacom Mailing List
>> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: 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
>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the Web, visit:
>> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>> You can reach the person managing the list at:
>> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>
>> Nurturing Nuance while Assaulting Ambiguity for 31 Some Years, 1987-2018.
>>
> 
> .
> 