 | mobile - desktop |
|
| mobile - desktop |
|
 |
 Available Now at RodentPro.com! |
News & Events:
|
Posted by rayhoser on January 07, 2003 at 15:40:06:
In Reply to: Questions For Mr. Hoser. posted by James Wilson on January 07, 2003 at 14:30:15:
In that book I wrote that taxonomy and nomenclature are in a state of flux and that names are changing, etc.
The taxonomy used in the book was that agreed by most Australian herpetologists at the time and generally in line with that of Cogger 1986.
Also note that at the time, the Wells and Wellington papers were still before the ICZN in terms of a ruling.
The book thus did not make judgements on taxonomy as a matter of course, merely followed on from others.
As for the lizard species indicated, I don't really have a strong view one way or other (also see below), but do accept that the names in my book are now in many cases 'out-of-date' - the book came out 14 years ago!
I also agree that the She-oak skinks are NOT part of Tiliqua in the accepted definition of a species as of 2003.
Hope I've helped.
