abbreviations for author names
dremsen at MBL.EDU
Thu Mar 9 13:40:52 CST 2006
Last spring we performed an analysis of 500 recent publications to
see how names were cited. We examined whether or not authorship was
cited and whether or not an implicit or explicit taxon concept
reference could be determined. We selected journals with the highest
impact within subject areas determined by the ISI Journal Citation
Reports using the following subject areas. (Biodiversity
Conservation, Biology, Cell Biology, Ecology, Fisheries, Infectious
Diseases, Oceanography, Plant Science, Zoology, etc.). We found
that about 3/4 of the time authorship is not cited at all and that it
tends to cluster in those categories where one would expect it
(Zoology, Ecology). In most cases it simply is not done.
Sometimes the name reference was to a known homonym, although the
case I am thinking of I assume is legit because it falls among two
"Cyclophilin A is required for TRIM5-mediated resistance to HIV-1 in
Old World monkey cells"
PNAS | October 11, 2005 | vol. 102 | no. 41 | 14837-14842
refers to the genus Aotus. The only disambiguating information is
the vernacular reference to "owl monkey."
On Mar 9, 2006, at 7:35 AM, christian thompson wrote:
> You are missing the point. Junior homonyms are NEVER VALID names.
> Users, such as birdwatchers, ecologists, epidemiologists,
> agriculturists, etc., only use VALID names and each of these are
> unique without authors.
> So, once homonyms are identified and resolved, then the junior ones
> are no longer of any interest to any one except nomenclaturists.
> As for Martin, the real reason there is a decline in jobs,
> opportunities, support for, etc., systematics is simply because the
> Public is tried of some trying to force useless requirements on
> them. All they need and want is an unique binomen for each and
> every species. A stable, universal tag that can be used to index
> and retrieve information. When they are burden with all the
> nomenclatural junk, they rebel and turn to common names.
> Ask yourself why Paul Herbert is getting millions for his DNA
> barcode scheme? Simply because it promises the Public something
> they want and what WE, the taxonomists, have failed to deliver
> after 250 years of work. Users want to know what it is and what to
> call it. Authors, publication dates, types, etc., are all
> irrelevant to the Public. A simple barcode that they can read with
> their palm pilots or whatever is what they would like.
> Sorry ...
> F. Christian Thompson
> Systematic Entomology Lab., USDA
> c/o Smithsonian Institution
> MRC-0169 NHB
> PO Box 37012
> Washington, DC 20013-7012
> (202) 382-1800 voice
> (202) 786-9422 FAX
> cthompso at sel.barc.usda.gov e-mail
> www.diptera.org web site
>>>> Derek Sikes <dsikes at UCALGARY.CA> 03/08/06 03:10PM >>>
> On Mar 8, 2006, at 12:51 PM, christian thompson wrote:
>> BUT then wonders about the need for author names. These, despite
>> what some people think are NOT part of scientific names in Zoology.
>> However, some zoologists maintain their usage as a honorific.
>> Birdwatchers and others gave up on them years. No real information
>> value. And with online nomenclators to find names, no real need to
>> use them. If you want to know what an abbreviation means, why not
>> just enter the scientific name into online nomenclator and see what
>> comes up?
> But what about homonyms? There are 26 in the genus Nicrophorus -
> without the Author how could one tell which was which? If synonymy
> tables in nomenclators are available and static then the 'user'
> perhaps doesn't need to bother with the author - but how many taxa
> are so well treated (outside of the birds)?
> N. basalis Faldermann, 1835
> N. basalis Gistel, 1848
> N. bipunctatus Kraatz, 1880
> N. bipunctatus Portevin, 1914
> N. cadaverinus Gravenhorst, 1807
> N. cadaverinus Gistel, 1857
> N. cadaverinus Mareuse, 1840
> N. insularis Grouvelle, 1893
> N. insularis Lafer, 1989
> N. interruptus Brullé, 1832
> N. interruptus Gistel, 1857
> N. interruptus Stephens, 1830
> N. lunatus Fischer von Waldheim, 1842
> N. lunatus LeConte, 1853
> N. marginatus Gistel, 1857
> N. marginatus Fabricius, 1801
> N. maritimus Guérin-Ménéville, 1835
> N. maritimus Mannerheim, 1843
> N. orientalis Motschulsky, 1860
> N. orientalis (Herbst,1784)
> N. plagiatus (Ménétries, 1854)
> N. plagiatus Motschulsky, 1870
> N. pollinctor LeConte, 1854
> N. pollinctor Mannerheim, 1853
> N. quadricollis Hatch, 1928
> N. quadricollis Gistel, 1848
> Derek S. Sikes, Assistant Professor
> Division of Zoology
> Department of Biological Sciences
> University of Calgary
> 2500 University Drive NW
> Calgary, Alberta, Canada, T2N 1N4
> dsikes at ucalgary.ca
> phone: 403-210-9819
> FAX: 403-289-9311
> "Remember that Truth alone is the matter you are in Search after; and
> if you have been mistaken, let no Vanity reduce you to persist in
> your mistake." Henry Baker, London, 1785
> Entomological Society of Alberta:
uBio Project Manager
Marine Biological Laboratory
Woods Hole, MA 02543
More information about the Taxacom