mesibov at southcom.com.au
Sun Jun 2 02:14:37 CDT 2013
I wondered why Rod Page didn't list CoL as a name source in his post yesterday, so I did a quick check of CoL coverage of a small group of species names. No one on this list will be surprised that I picked Australian millipedes for the test.
I used CoL's 2013 Annual Checklist, and looked up the 170 new species published during the period 2000-2010 inclusive - no new combinations, just new species. I stopped at 2010 in hopes that CoL coverage would at least reach that date. In fact, it has 2 of the 9 names from 2011.
CoL is missing 58 of the 170 species. I can't see a pattern in these missing names with regard to year published, author or journal.
I didn't do a thorough search for the 58 in ION, but all the ones I looked for were there. Being based on CoL, EOL also lacks the 58 MIA (Missing In Aggregation).
[EOL also preserves CoL's mistakes, so that (just an example) you can find a species page for Gigantowales chisholmi Verhoeff, 1937, and another for the misspelled Gigantowales cisholmi Verhoeff, 1937. ION only lists the correct spelling.]
Dr Robert Mesibov
Honorary Research Associate
Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery, and
School of Agricultural Science, University of Tasmania
PO Box 101, Penguin, Tasmania, Australia 7316
(03) 64371195; 61 3 64371195
More information about the Taxacom