[Taxacom] Taxonomic concepts [Was: Questions on Taxonomic Code of Practice]

Jim Croft jim.croft at gmail.com
Sun Jan 12 18:38:41 CST 2014

I am pretty sure botanical convention, if not The Code, accommodates these
situations succinctly.

If it is a homonym, the author (plus the combining author, if there is one
- I have no idea why you guys throw away this useful piece of information)
lets you know what is going on.

If it is a difference of concept, 'sensu' is the signal (we are never
really going to get rid of Latin, you know).

If a name is variously illegitimate, 'auct.' is the alert notification.

If the name is a misidentification, 'auct. non' tells you so, and who (or
'auctt. non' if ther have been multiple).

There are probably others I can not remember.

We certainly don't write descriptive sentences to cover this stuff...


On Fri, Jan 10, 2014 at 8:01 AM, Stephen Thorpe
<stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>wrote:

> Jim,
> In zoology, Aus bus (L. 1758) non XYZ (2013) would more often imply
> homonymy, not misidentification, i.e. Aus bus (L. 1758) and Aus bus XYZ
> (2013) are distinct available names (homonyms).
> So, we have 3 separate issues, viz. (1) misidentifications; (2) homonymy;
> and (3) "taxonomic concepts". Of these, (3) doesn't really get explicitly
> discussed in zoological taxonomy very much at all (at most, sensu lato and
> sensu stricto get used to distinguish between broader and narrower
> concepts).
> There isn't a standard terminology to deal unambiguously with (1) , (2) or
> (3), so there is much potential for confusion!
> Cheers,
> Stephen
>   *From:* Jim Croft <jim.croft at gmail.com>
> *To:* Stephen Thorpe <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>
> *Cc:* Taxacom <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> *Sent:* Thursday, 9 January 2014 12:17 PM
> *Subject:* Re: [Taxacom] Questions on Taxonomic Code of Practice
>   > Aus bus (L. 1758) sensu XYZ (2013)
> > This implies that Aus bus (L. 1758) was misidentified by XYZ (2013) !
> No it doesn't. It means 'in the sense of' or 'as used by'. If it implies
> anything at all, it is one of difference of interpretation or
> understanding. If there was a misidentification or similar stuff-up
> involved, we would/should be more explicit. 'Non' and 'not' have been used
> for this sort of thing.
> > The only way is to state in words something like "we are herein
> > following the species concept of XYZ (2013) for Aus bus (L. 1758) ..."
> Which is what 'sensu' means...
> But as these are taxonomic assertions, none of 'The Codes', being
> nomenclatural and all, really need to bother themselves with all this. ;)
> jim

Jim Croft ~ jim.croft at gmail.com ~ +61-2-62509499 ~ http://about.me/jrc
'Without the freedom to criticize, there is no true praise.
- Pierre Beaumarchais
'Whenever you find yourself on the side of the majority, it's time to pause
and reflect.'
- Mark Twain
'A civilized society is one which tolerates eccentricity to the point of
doubtful sanity.'
 - Robert Frost

More information about the Taxacom mailing list