Corrected version Superspecies / Code/ New info

[Ron Gatrelle]

Haste makes waste. Sorry. This is edited, the other two weren't but most
pertinently I had left off the last part of the glossary definition which I
have included here. I also added a new comment at the end. Delete the
others.

Dear Jean-Michel and Guy,
    I am a HUGE proponent of the code as the only thing keeping us from
terminological and taxonomic anarchy. It is unfortunate that the term
superspecies is not found in the glossary of the 2000 code (the term
superfamily is). The quote below from article 6.2 can be misunderstood
without the proper definition of what the word interpolated means within
the meaning of the code. So I here give the codes definition from the
glossary.
I am going to take the liberty to put my take on this in {{    }}.

   " Interpolated name. A name placed within parentheses (1) after a
generic
name to denote a subgenus, {{ used in this manner, the interpolation simply
is to let the reader know that the next name or names in a list are also
components of a subgenus. Thus interpolated here only means -subgenus.
Example: Papilio (Pterourus).}}
(2) after a genus-group name to denote an aggregate of species, {{ here the
interpolation is again only a type of shorthand to let the reader know that
the list of names to follow are all closely related - but not
interbreeding - sister species. Example: Papilio (Pterourus) (troilus)
palamedes. Or. Papilio (machaon) polyxenes. }},
or (3) after a specific name to denote an aggregate of subspecies [Art. 6]
{{ At this point the code continues with the same relational meaning of
interpolated. Thus, Papilio (Pterourus) (troilus) troilus - now lets say
there were 20 subspecies of troilus and that ten were groupable as light
spots on black and 10 were groupable as black spots on white - we would
then have
Papilio (Pterourus) (troilus) troilus (blackus) fakahatcheensis. This looks
bulky, but it is a good shorthand way for the reader to understand the
evolutional relation of the genus - species- subspecies: Papilio troilus
fakahatcheensis. That's all it is.}} Names used in this way are not counted
as one of the names in a binomen or trinomen."

    The  code allows for our utilization of interpolation only with the
codes definition and meaning - which is the same at all levels. The term
superspecies is allowable only in the meaning of the code, i.e
interpolation. Those who would use the term to denote some type of
reproductively compatible "species" aggregates are creating a maverick
taxonomic rank. I quote some other pertinent parts of the codes

In glossary, under species: "The rank next below the genus group; the basic
rank of zoological classification. (2) A taxon at the rank of species."

In glossary, under subspecies: (1) "The species-group rank below species;
the lowest rank at which names are regulated by the Code. (2) A taxon at
the rank of subspecies."

There is no rank of superspecies -period. And the only rank below species
is subspecies. Europeans became notorious for not knowing what a subspecies
is as evidenced by giving every Apollo a subspecific "name" at every 1000
feet (oops) meters of elevation. Now I guess we want to err in the opposite
direction.

Genus - species - subspecies. These are the ranks. Now stay in the rules or
you're not in the game. And in case anyone missed it, this is how and where
the zoological world SPLITS.

NEW INFO. The Ornithoptera example (6:2) in the code can be misleading.
While primus and croesus are considered species, some consider lydius only
a subspecies of croesus.  The example employs these as traditional species.
Ron




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

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

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