Taxacom: Minimalist revision of Mesochorus Gravenhorst, 1829

[Leslie Watling]

This is an interesting discussion because I have been in nearly the same
boat for some old octocorals that I work on. I have wondered whether,
rather than trying to track down whatever still exists for a lot of species
described in the 1880s or so, using characters that are no longer
diagnostic, and where the types are beat up, dried up, and in some cases
where more than 90% of the original specimen is now missing, it might just
be better to ignore those old names and start fresh, as is the case here.
It would certainly save a lot of time. And as pointed out by Michael Ivie,
means we describe a small percentage of the specimens we have collected.
And in the meanwhile, users complain because it takes 10 years or so for a
species description to appear after collection.

As a counterpoint, however, I can't agree that impenetrable literature or
difficult terminology can be reasons to start fresh. Literature can be
found, even really old things, through the Biodiversity Heritage Library,
or older colleagues, and foreign languages can be handled through Google
Translate. Specialized terminology needs to and can be learned and one
could be accused of intellectual laziness if one is unwilling to do so.

Best,
Les

Les Watling
Professor Emeritus
School of Life Sciences
University of Hawaii

Professor Emeritus
School of Marine Sciences
University of Maine