 | mobile - desktop |
|
| mobile - desktop |
|
 |
 |
News & Events:
|
Posted by Marty Feldner on October 18, 2002 at 17:37:57:
In Reply to: Re: Crotalus oreganus posted by Gary N on October 18, 2002 at 15:44:09:
"Thanks for the excellent response, Marty."
No problem, but I would have rather posted my original response. Out of habit when I edit a post I hit "back." Apparently, with the new system at Kingsnake it will terminate the previous screen and then not return me to my response when I hit the forward button. Guess I'll learn to use the edit button or deal with the frustration of having a post lost.
"I will wait until the smoke clears before changing my lists. Or maybe until Stebbins' book is published."
It may be a while before the smoke clears. But, when it does, I think the paper with the most compelling data will be the one which is followed. Depending on when Stebbins has final revisions for his book he may not have a chance to assess the work contained in the Douglas and Schuett paper before publication. Still, it will be interesting to see what taxonomy he follows whether or not the Douglas and Schuett paper has been published.
"I notice that on the Reptiles & Amphibians of Arizona website you and Tom call that snake (great photo!) Crotalus lutosus. I'm assuming that name comes from the Douglas and Scheutt work you referred to."
The taxonomy on the website does come from the taxonomy that is likely to be published by Douglas and Schuett. What will happen with the oreganus/helleri portion of the complex is still being worked out as far as I know, and from the sounds I've heard, it will be more interesting than some would have thought.
"As you suspected, Collins and Taggart are following Ashton and de Queiroz, and claim support from a group including Harry Greene and Lee Grismer."
I thought they might be. I can't fault Collins and Taggert for following Ashton and de Queiroz since it is the most recent paper on the subject and probably contains the most compelling argument currently available on how to arrange the viridis complex. Like so many other hypotheses, the best arrangement for the viridis complex may again change when more compelling data is published. Collins definitely has some quality people on his committee. I won't say they necessarily balance out Collins' views on taxonomy (which I believe led to his split from the SSAR) if he is involved in the decision making process since some of them have their own philosophies regarding taxonomy which often isn't reflected by cohorts in the field. I wouldn't call them rogue taxonomists since I find value in the differing approaches and ideas used to classify herps, but if I were to publish and the SSAR had a name different from that recognized by the CNAH, I'd go with the name used by the SSAR. You know how taxonomy is. LOL
