[Taxacom] Subspecies' Authors! how to indicate?
siahsarvie at yahoo.com
Thu Dec 25 09:54:24 CST 2008
Thanks for help but as you may have seen I have got two somwhat different responses
well there is no problem for "A. sinica sinica Cai, 1989" but for the other one if I am supposed to write
A. sinica tibetiana (Abatzopoulos, Zhang & Sorgeloos, 1998)
A. sinica tibetiana Abatzopoulos, Zhang & Sorgeloos in 1998
You know the genus has not been changed in this case, but just the species A. tibetiana has been fallen to subspecies rank A. sinica tibetiana. So does the pranthesis is needed or not?
--- On Wed, 12/24/08, Vazrick Nazari <nvazrick at yahoo.com> wrote:
From: Vazrick Nazari <nvazrick at yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Subspecies' Authors! how to indicate?
To: siahsarvie at yahoo.com
Date: Wednesday, December 24, 2008, 10:54 AM
Since the status of A. sinica (and its nominal subspecies, A. sinica sinica) has not changed, no brackets are necessary. The authors of ssp. tibetiana will however go under brackets, since their taxon has a different status now.
So, the arrangement will be:
- A. sinica Cai, 1989
-- A. sinica ssp. sinica Cai, 1989
-- A. sinica ssp. tibetiana (Abatzopoulos, Zhang & Sorgeloos, 1998)
Hope this helps.
Vazrick Nazari, PhD Candidate
Department of Integrative Biology
University of Guelph
SCIE 2488, 488 Gordon Street
Guelph, ON N1G 2W1
Phone: (519) 824-4120 ext. 53943
From: Roohollah Siahsarvie <siahsarvie at yahoo.com>
To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Sent: Wednesday, December 24, 2008 12:51:47 PM
Subject: [Taxacom] Subspecies' Authors! how to indicate?
I have a question and I would be thankful if you help
Suppose that two species which have been described by two different authors are treated by the third author as two subspecies of one of those. So which author should be mentioned in giving reference to those subspecies?
I give an example
Artemia sinica Cai, 1989 and Artemia tibetiana Abatzopoulos, Zhang & Sorgeloos, 1998 were both fell to two subspecies of the first species i.e. Artemia sinica by Zhou et al., 2003. In this case which one is correct:
a) A. sinica sinica Cai, 1989 and A. sinica tibetiana Abatzopoulos, Zhang & Sorgeloos in 1998
b) A. sinica sinica (Cai, 1989) and A. sinica tibetiana (Abatzopoulos, Zhang & Sorgeloos in 1998)
or a third choice?
Thanks in advance for your help.
Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
The entire Taxacom Archive back to 1992 can be searched with either of these methods:
Or use a Google search specified as: site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom your search terms here
More information about the Taxacom