Re: English names

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Taxonomy Forum ]

Posted by BIC on June 17, 2002 at 08:27:54:

In Reply to: Re: English names posted by Josiah on June 16, 2002 at 12:33:19:

: >As far as species concepts are concerned, that
: >is largely a non-issue. If evidence is provided
: >that indicates a lineage then that lineage
: >should be named. It is important to recognize
: >that English names merely follow the science and
: >in no way constitute hypotheses about lineages.
: >The Latin names are the hypotheses, the English
: >names are labels for convenient (hopefully)
: >communication.

: A lineage should be named as what, a species or subspecies? The utilized species concept determines this, so it does matter. Take your favorite study and the data provided, utilize the three most widely used species concepts (BSC, PSC, and ESC), and in most cases you'll get two or three different answers regarding taxonomy. An observed "lineage" in many phylogeography studies does NOT necessarily equal a "species" and thus should NOT be named as such. I've seen numerous cases where lineages (clades) were formed because of small sample sizes, samples originating far from each other, and population structure. Species concepts create the hypotheses, not scientific and common names.

: Jo

It really doesn't matter how you determine a lineage (as long as you recognize the ability to interbreed as primitive) as long as you are looking at organismal lineages. Your example of phylogeography studies is an unfortunate one because those identify mtDNA lineages and not organismal lineages. The question you pose about naming a lineage a subspecies or species may be my fault for not being clearer. By lineage I mean a unique evolutionary lineage, which can never be a subspecies. As for what the hypothesis is, again I made a mistake in making a leap. When I said the Latin name is the hypothesis it was implicit that the Latin name was derived via lineage identification.

As for Delisle's criticism of "can't", I again refer you to the ornithologists. Pessimism is not a sufficient criterion for not trying.

Follow Ups:

Re: English names Josiah 06/17/02 (1)
- Re: English names BIC 06/18/02 (0)

Post a Followup

Name:
E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:
: : >As far as species concepts are concerned, that : : >is largely a non-issue. If evidence is provided : : >that indicates a lineage then that lineage : : >should be named. It is important to recognize : : >that English names merely follow the science and : : >in no way constitute hypotheses about lineages. : : >The Latin names are the hypotheses, the English : : >names are labels for convenient (hopefully) : : >communication. : : A lineage should be named as what, a species or subspecies? The utilized species concept determines this, so it does matter. Take your favorite study and the data provided, utilize the three most widely used species concepts (BSC, PSC, and ESC), and in most cases you'll get two or three different answers regarding taxonomy. An observed "lineage" in many phylogeography studies does NOT necessarily equal a "species" and thus should NOT be named as such. I've seen numerous cases where lineages (clades) were formed because of small sample sizes, samples originating far from each other, and population structure. Species concepts create the hypotheses, not scientific and common names. : : Jo : It really doesn't matter how you determine a lineage (as long as you recognize the ability to interbreed as primitive) as long as you are looking at organismal lineages. Your example of phylogeography studies is an unfortunate one because those identify mtDNA lineages and not organismal lineages. The question you pose about naming a lineage a subspecies or species may be my fault for not being clearer. By lineage I mean a unique evolutionary lineage, which can never be a subspecies. As for what the hypothesis is, again I made a mistake in making a leap. When I said the Latin name is the hypothesis it was implicit that the Latin name was derived via lineage identification. : As for Delisle's criticism of "can't", I again refer you to the ornithologists. Pessimism is not a sufficient criterion for not trying.

Optional Link URL:
Link Title:
Optional Image URL:

[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Taxonomy Forum ]