 | mobile - desktop |
|
| mobile - desktop |
|
 |
 3 months for $50.00 |
News & Events:
|
Posted by TW Taggart on January 18, 2003 at 14:53:03:
In Reply to: Re: AOU vs SSAR posted by chrish on January 13, 2003 at 12:34:23:
:
:When Collins first proposed his standardized common names list, I think it was headed in the right direction. However, it soon became a philosophical bully pulpit for his personal views on taxonomy and systematics, and that's when it went off course.
:That's why I like the Crother committee approach better. They don't try to force phylogenetic changes through in their common name list. It is simply an attempt to assign common names to the most widely accepted taxonomy.
?
Having played a role in the construction of both lists, I feel obliged to correct your misconceptions concerning them.
There is contention among systematists as to which taxonomic proposals merit support or recognition. Therefore, the necessity of making taxonomic choices exists, anytime a list is constructed. This is true whether the list is a state park pamphlet or a global inventory.
In the history of the Collins list, a scientific name has never been changed prior to its appearing in print in a peer-reviewed scientific journal, and that with very few exceptions (usually caused by someone proposing a taxonomic change), none of the common names has changed since 1978. That's why we call them "standard common names."
Both lists utilize the committee approach, and so your assertion that any individual’s ‘..personal views on taxonomy and systematics’ are perpetuated autonomously are unfounded.
