Common names list--need for unique names

[Michael Gochfeld]

I agree with most of what Ron has said below. But not with the "never
can be". 

That strikes me as nihilistic, particularly in with recent threads about
the vagaries of the scientific name.  It would be possible for the
common name to be a stable and universal identifier for a taxon,
regardless of changes in scientific names which are intended to reflect
current phylogenetic understanding. 


Mike Gochfeld


Ron Gatrelle wrote:
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Michael Gochfeld" <gochfeld at eohsi.rutgers.edu>
> Sent: Thursday, February 21, 2002 6:11 PM
> Subject: Common names list--need for unique names
> 
> > Fortunately Ron (who recently told us that he is a newcomer to common
> > names) chose wisely in not giving P brevicauda and P indra the same
> > common names.
> 
> Actually,  I don't think I would phrase it quite that way.  I am a newcomer
> to embrasing common names - and that is conditional.
> 
> The Short-tailed indra/brevicauda situation is difficult because they _have
> had_ the same common names of a long time - Short-tailed.  As the decades
> have passed two things have occurred.  First, the authors of butterfly
> literature _started_ using common names.  As they began doing this they
> used the names in their regions.  This was true right up into the modern
> era;  Brown, 1957: Colorado Butterflies, indra = Short-Tailed Black
> Swallowtail;  Emmel & Emmel, 1993: The B'flies of S. California,  Indra for
> the whole species - Short-tailed for indra indra.  Now, where books covered
> all of North America these two needed to have their own name.  Holland,
> 1931, The B'fly Book, used Indra Swallowtail for indra and Newfoundland
> Swallowtail for brevicauda. (Chris Durden has a lot more information of all
> the names used for these two.)
> 
> Second,  suddenly the world became smaller (TV and air travel), and then
> with the electronic media boom (cable TV, internet etc) it became very
> small.  Today, more and more our leps focus is of a Continental scope -
> even from the perspective of state and regional books.  Thus, it is simply
> not practical to have two "Short-tailed Swallowtail" in North America.  The
> matter of a taxon with that same common name in another part of the word is
> whole other matter - and very important.  But this post is not where to
> address that.
> 
> Next, while it is true that a _lot_ of new people have gotten involved with
> butterflies in just the last 5-10 years, this in no way gives these newbies
> the ability to change a common name that has been in use for a 100 years
> (i.e. Red Spotted Purple).  And it has certainly not been given to one
> organization or organizational leader to decide for everyone else what
> names they _must_ use.   Having a list of "standardized" common names for
> all North American butterflies has more than one valid utilitarian purpose.
> But they are still but common names, and as such are neither the correct or
> official identifier of organisms - and never can be.
> 
> I'll take a time out here - to see what others may have to say.  I have
> made notes to remind me of my additional thoughts.
> 
> Ron

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

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

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