multicaudata ( try IV )

[Doug Yanega]

Michael Gochfeld wrote:

>On the other hand, it's not likely that anyone has been confused
>about which taxon was being referred to regardless of the spelling.

Then you've never tried to use a database of species names. There aren't
many pieces of software that, when asked to find "multicaudata" will inform
you that it's spelled "multicaudatus" in the database and give you the
correct record. It will simply inform you that the name is not in the
database. THAT is confusing. For those of us concerned with automated
taxonomic information retrieval systems, alterations in species epithets
are MASSIVE obstructions to efficiency. Using the original spelling in
perpetuity is by far a better system - from this perspective. Apparently
the only cataloguer who felt this way was Poole, who lists only original
spellings in the Nomina Insecta Nearctica (and this is, of course,
confusing).

Peace,


Doug Yanega        Dept. of Entomology         Entomology Research Museum
Univ. of California - Riverside, Riverside, CA 92521
phone: (909) 787-4315 (standard disclaimer: opinions are mine, not UCR's)
           http://entmuseum9.ucr.edu/staff/yanega.html
  "There are some enterprises in which a careful disorderliness
        is the true method" - Herman Melville, Moby Dick, Chap. 82



 
 ------------------------------------------------------------ 

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

   http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl