another trash name
DR. JAMES ADAMS
JADAMS at em.daltonstate.edu
Mon Sep 10 17:54:55 EDT 2001
Listers,
Norbert, even though we've never met, I could just about e-kiss
you. Don't worry, my wife is secure in our relationship and she
knows it would be a collegial kiss. It's just that you keep saying
clearly what I've been trying to muddle through.
Norbert and Jaakko wrote about the genus Nymphalis and other
"genera" that could be included in Nymphalis (such as Aglais,
Inachis, Polygonia, etc.):
BUT we can all still examine this information and
> draw completely different taxonomic rank interpretations. By way
> of example we can treat these as one genus. . . We can also
> have numerous finely divided genera. Thirdly we can use the
> subgenus category and for example treat Aglais as a subgenus
of Nymphalis.
Norbert also wrote:
I for one prefer to keep genus names to a minimum because they
are an obligatory category. This still leaves the subgenus rank
available for those who wish to communicate finer distinctions
I agree wholeheartedly. The genus/subgenus distinctions are
best used this way, because the larger "genus" Nymphalis allows
you to know that these species are a nicely knit grouping of near
closest relatives, and the subgenus name lets you delineate further
the species groups within the genus.
Lastly, Norbert said:
Natural groups are a useful concept but
there certainly is no requirement that all natural groups have a
formal name in the name heirarchy. The eternal question in all these
matters is: How big (or small) do we build that corral before we put
the butterflies into it :-) and regardless of the size, do we need to
put a formal name on the corral ??
What else is there to say? Names are great to have, and I'm
all for familial/subfamilial/tribal/generic/subgeneric names to
indicate perceived levels of relatedness, but you need not put
names on each species pair, etc.
No offense, Ron (we've disagreed before and know perfectly well
it's nothing personal), but I still have to contend that there is no
such thing as a genus (or any higher taxa) in nature, and Norbert's
post explains perfectly why. Yes, there are some species that are
certainly each other's closest relatives, but distances between
species are not easy to delineate, and so are open to some
interpretation . . . and the species themselves don't care!!
James
Dr. James K. Adams
Dept. of Natural Science and Math
Dalton State College
213 N. College Drive
Dalton, GA 30720
Phone: (706)272-4427; fax: (706)272-2533
http://www.daltonstate.edu/galeps/ (Georgia Lepidoptera)
U of Michigan's President James Angell's
Secret of Success: "Grow antennae, not horns"
------------------------------------------------------------
For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl
More information about the Leps-l
mailing list