[Taxacom] labeling redescriptions properly

Geoff Read gread at actrix.gen.nz
Thu Sep 8 19:20:20 CDT 2011

In that article Berendsohn introduces "potential taxon" and states the
notation for such "extends that for misapplied names, for which the term
"sensu:" is in common
use, and might make use of the designation "secundum" (according to;
"sec." ) followed by an appropriate reference."

Sensu is unambiguous, instantly understandable by lay people, not a common
abbreviation used for a myriad of other concepts, acronyms, etc, as is the
abbreviation 'sec' with or without the stop.  Sensu is not at all
restricted to misapplied names in my experience - sensu Brown could be the
correct interpretation after sensu White who was off beam.

Sorry, I can't see introducing 'sec' as being a necessary or wise
complication to the already enough complicated world of nomenclature. 
Those 3 letters have too much baggage, & are too widely used elsewhere for
other things.

If you want to use 3 letter arbitrary indicators how about 'arf' 
(phonetic abbreviation of 'after'). Then we could have Formica sanguinea
Latreille arf. arf. Smith 1853 (for his second concept use after 1951 that
is). That would be sure to make non-taxonomists take us seriously.

Geoff  :^)  [but slightly despairing of where this is going]

On Fri, September 9, 2011 9:00 am, Richard Pyle wrote:
> The definition for "sec" under GNUB is that established by Walter
> Berendsohn
> in one of his early publications on modeling taxonomic data.  The reason
> "sec" is visible under ZooBank is that ZooBank is a service that sits on
> top
> of GNUB.  I would encourage people to refer to Walter's publications for
> why
> "sec." was selected instead of "sensu". Probably check this one:
> Berendsohn W.G. 1995. The concept of "potential taxa" in databases. Taxon
> 44: 207-212.

More information about the Taxacom mailing list