 | mobile - desktop |
|
| mobile - desktop |
|
 |
 3 months for $50.00 |
News & Events:
|
Posted by pjay on October 17, 2002 at 17:59:03:
In Reply to: Re: Good Q.... posted by Langaha on October 17, 2002 at 17:01:02:
We have gotten a little too specific for my tastes. I have been using the Elaphe obsoleta/allegheniensis concept abstractly since I've never read it, nor do I have any opinion on it. The point is that it is out there and whether you use it or not, it is the valid name (assuming they met the criteria for a description) until someone refutes it. They never have to publish more data on the topic regardless of whether or not you or troy or anyone else use the name. The good news is that these things are eventually worked out. If E. obsoleta really is divisible, then it will be shown to be in future studies. If it is all one thing then more sampling will show that there is no real differences among populations. Splitters will always call it E. o. allegheniensis when they get the chance and lumpers will use E. obsoleta.
