 | mobile - desktop |
|
| mobile - desktop |
|
 |
 Available Now at RodentPro.com! |
News & Events:
|
Posted by James Wilson on January 07, 2003 at 18:53:23:
In Reply to: Fair questions - answers in book (p. 3 last para) and below posted by rayhoser on January 07, 2003 at 15:40:06:
: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have a strong view one way or other (also see below), but do accept that the names in my book are now in many cases 'out-of-date' - the book came out 14 years ago!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.
