Taxacom: demystifying gender agreement ( was Re: Removals of offending scientific names)

[Stephen Thorpe]

 Doug,If someone somewhere considers gender variants to be distinct taxa, then that is just one of many errors that they might make. I don't think that you can eliminate the possibility of various errors based on ignorance and I don't see why this particular error is any more or less serious than any other. In fact, a more serious problem is surely people considering different combinations to be different taxa, as there is also no single shared resource for checking if Aus bus is the same taxon as Cus bus. This is further complicated by the subjective nature of taxonomy, so you can't actually say that Cus bus is the correct current combination. Some taxonomists might want to place the species in genus Cus, while others might want to retain it in genus Aus.Stephen
    On Saturday, 24 June 2023 at 04:30:13 am NZST, Douglas Yanega via Taxacom <taxacom at lists.ku.edu> wrote:  
 
 On 6/22/23 8:37 PM, John Grehan wrote:
> I am not as acquainted with all the experts out there that have 
> commented on this issue, but for the World Catalogue of Hepialidae 
> (hopefully published within a week or two at most) the authors 
> followed a precedent set by some past major players in 
> hepialid taxonomy and used the original form of the species name, 
> regardless of whether correct in the first place, or now in a genus 
> with a different gender. Keeps life simple, and as far as I am 
> concerned, quite comprehensible.

In principle, that could be true - about it keeping things simple - but 
in practice, it does not seem to work that way.

The principle relies on all lepidopterists, and all other taxonomists 
using lepidopteran names, having access to a single authoritative master 
list of names (otherwise, people would need to each have access to 
copies of the original literature). In practice, there are LOTS of 
different sources for lep names, and they are very commonly in conflict 
with one another, here and there. The same species can have two 
different spellings scattered throughout the literature, as well as 
online sources, and that is not "keeping it simple".

The very first butterfly name I looked up just now - a butterfly I 
learned as "Mitoura gryneus" several decades ago - is one that stuck in 
my head as a budding entomologist because it was the very first time in 
my life I had learned a scientific name that was explained to me as 
being a gender mismatch, and when I first learned that lepidopterists 
didn't use gender agreement. The noteworthy thing about it is that if 
you do a verbatim Google search, you can find hundreds of sources that 
have "Mitoura gryneus", hundreds more that have "Mitoura grynea", 
hundreds more that have "Callophrys gryneus", and hundreds more that 
have "Callophrys grynea".

That does not at all look simple to me, and *that's just the first name 
I looked up*. I'm willing to wager that if there are other common leps 
with obvious gender mismatches, that they'll have a very high 
probability of appearing in the literature with multiple conflicting 
spellings.

This exemplifies EXACTLY why I advocate for a single authoritative 
master list. No system of gender agreement, even ZERO gender agreement, 
is going to ensure that everyone, everywhere, is on the same page unless 
there is a single shared resource that everyone uses to obtain the 
proper spelling. When everyone does their own independent research, 
people can come to different conclusions, leading to inconsistency. If 
the master list gives the spelling variants, *and tells you when to use 
which variant*, then there is no reason not to keep gender agreement. 
Both approaches - keeping gender agreement or abandoning it - at *that* 
point would require exactly the same amount of effort: typing a name 
into a search engine linked to a list, and following the result.

It's called "having our cake and eating it too".

Peace,

-- 
Doug Yanega      Dept. of Entomology      Entomology Research Museum
Univ. of California, Riverside, CA 92521-0314    skype: dyanega
phone: (951) 827-4315 (disclaimer: opinions are mine, not UCR's)
              https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ffaculty.ucr.edu%2F~heraty%2Fyanega.html&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C62a517519b504f29a80608db743a6ccc%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638231566513444560%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=1MA4HYmtGXqR3M%2BAXMEBs0Ks9a26csyDf8v5T6E2TvA%3D&reserved=0
  "There are some enterprises in which a careful disorderliness
        is the true method" - Herman Melville, Moby Dick, Chap. 82
_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List

Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at lists.ku.edu
For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit: https://lists.ku.edu/listinfo/taxacom
You can reach the person managing the list at: taxacom-owner at lists.ku.edu
The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at: https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C62a517519b504f29a80608db743a6ccc%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638231566513444560%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=paYnfGN5x9SqmNwSedDxhc%2BpKoqxKRE3TRCE6nvpOX0%3D&reserved=0

Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity and admiring alliteration for about 36 years, 1987-2023.