[Taxacom] FW: DNA only descriptions

[Curtis Clark]

On 8/15/2010 5:16 PM, Stephen Thorpe wrote:
> >How many field guides are based on the original species descriptions?
> wrong question - you mean how many are based on (external) morphology? 
> Answer: all of them ...

Let me try again, in hopes of avoiding the bug up your arse.

Good field guides are not based on the original species descriptions, 
because (1) original descriptions often involve technical features not 
easily visible in unmagnified living organisms, and (2) original 
descriptions are often based on just enough specimens to firmly 
establish the novelty, and thus often don't include variation discovered 
at a later date. In the case of plants, the original descriptions are 
also in Latin. The best field guides are based on the author's 
familiarity, *in the field*, with the species in question, and they 
often include features either not seen by the authors of the species or 
not fully diagnostic if all related species are taken into account.

There are plenty of reasons to decry DNA-only descriptions, but 
interference with field guides isn't one of them.

-- 
Curtis Clark                  http://www.csupomona.edu/~jcclark/
Director, I&IT Web Development                   +1 909 979 6371
University Web Coordinator, Cal Poly Pomona