[leps-talk] Re: Common Names update

[Barb Beck]

Obviously Hank Brodkin wants to make fun of us because we want to keep track
of the field identifiable forms of our butterflies.  Some of these field
identifiable forms are actually good species - even the NABA admits in their
justification of their latest names that they are good species but still
fails to separate them and therefore does not separate them in their
database.

Well Hank.  I am working hard here to try to help people find out something
about what we have. I want my data stored to the precision possible.  Please
do not poke fun of us for trying.

I guess where you are everything is know about your butterflies or you do
not care.  Well I do.

Barb Beck
Edmonton
-----Original Message-----
From: Hank Brodkin [mailto:hbrodkin at earthlink.net]
Sent: April 1, 2002 5:45 PM
To: robert.beiriger at worldnet.att.net; leplists; Tils
Subject: [leps-talk] Re: Common Names update


OK guys - here my two bits:
If we want to give sub-species common names - how about calling butterflies,
or whatever, as follows using Juniper Hairstreak (Callophrys gryneus as an
example):

Nominate race (or form) of Juniper Hairstreak.
nelsoni race (or form) of Juniper Hairstreak
muiri race (or form) of Juniper Hairstreak
etc.
Probably the above is a bad example as some splitting appears to be in the
works.

Just an idea for those who want common names for subspecies and for those of
us who would like to learn to differentiate between races without drivng
those who don't up the wall ;-)



----------------------------------------------------------------------
Hank Brodkin
Carr Canyon, Cochise County, AZ
hbrodkin at earthlink.net
SouthEast Arizona Butterfly Association (SEABA)
http://www.naba.org/chapters/nabasa/home.html
"Butterflies of Arizona - a Photographic Guide"
by Bob Stewart, Priscilla Brodkin and Hank Brodkin
http://home.earthlink.net/~hbrodkin/book.html
----- Original Message -----
From: "robert beiriger" <robert.beiriger at worldnet.att.net>
To: "leplists" <LEPS-L at lists.yale.edu>
Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 7:06 PM
Subject: Re: Common Names update


> Mike and all:
>
>     Just to add my two cent onto Mike Quinn's e-mail and to say I strongly
> agree with Mike.
>
> 1.    I know from personal experience that there in several of families of
> Hymenoptera you will not if be able to even get a species ID.  Even the
> "experts" can not tell the species apart and will stop at the genus.  You
> can not get subspecies until you can at tell the species apart.
>
> 2.     In longhorn beetles and others (Scarabs) there really is not a lot
of
> good subspecies described.  If you get a red and a green form of a beetles
> from the same location they sometimes are considered different subspecies.
> I do not believe that this is the correct use of a subspecies.
>
> 3.      I think most people want to find something new and spend too much
> time describing very small differences in a population.
>
>
> Robert Beiriger
> Loxahatchee,FL
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Mike Quinn <Mike.Quinn at tpwd.state.tx.us>
> To: 'Leps-L' <LEPS-L at lists.yale.edu>
> Sent: Monday, April 01, 2002 1:01 PM
> Subject: RE: Common Names update
>
>
> > Ron, In your three replies, you attempted to rebut every single sentence
> > except the following:
> >
> > "There's a strong correlation between the number of subspp. a taxon has
> and
> > the number of amateur enthusiasts involved. Examples include Tiger and
> > Longhorn Beetles, Butterflies, Orchids, and Cacti (though the latter two
> are
> > further split by crossbreeding). I believe there are relatively few
> subspp.
> > described for Moths, Diptera, and Hymenoptera. This is not to suggest
that
> > there is no utility to subspp. Apis mellifera L. has numerous important
> > subspp."
> >
> > This is the crux of my view of subspecies. If someone tried to publish a
> > paper today describing a bunch of subspp. of Staphylinids, Braconids, or
> > Chalcidoids I think he or she would be politely asked to get a life.
> >
> > Your reference to the doctor with too many patients is an apt analogy
for
> > today's ever older and ever fewer systematists. I think their time would
> be
> > best spent working on the many entomological groups which have no
> specialist
> > rather than further dividing the charismatic butterflies.
> >
> > Mike Quinn
> >
> > PS: I don't recall mentioning my political persuasion. For all you know,
I
> > voted for Nader!
> >
> > ===
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  ------------------------------------------------------------
> >
> >    For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
> >
> >    http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
>
>    http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl
>
>
>


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Stock for $4.
No Minimums.
FREE Money 2002.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/6GDALA/VovDAA/ySSFAA/CCYolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

TILS Motto: "We can not protect that which we do not know." © 1999

Subscribe:  TILS-leps-talk-subscribe at yahoogroups.com
Post message: TILS-leps-talk at yahoogroups.com
Archives: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TILS-leps-talk/messages
Unsubscribe:  TILS-leps-talk-unsubscribe at yahoogroups.com
For more information: http://www.tils-ttr.org




Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/




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

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

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