[Taxacom] FW: DNA only descriptions

[Stephen Thorpe]

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

>The best field guides are based on the author's  familiarity, *in the field*, 
>with the species in question
yes, yes, but somehow the author has to make the connection between name and 
beastie in the field, and ultimately that is grounded in type specimen and/or 
original description. There has to be a connection between name and (external) 
morphology if field identification is to be possible at all, so original 
descriptions based solely on DNA are somewhat less than helpful don't you think? 
Of course, cryptic species will never be identifiable in the field (except on 
assumptions of allopatry), but we wouldn't want to extend this problem to 
noncryptics, would we?

Stephen


________________________________
From: Curtis Clark <lists at curtisclark.org>
To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Sent: Mon, 16 August, 2010 1:05:19 PM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] FW: DNA only descriptions

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


_______________________________________________

Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom

The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these 
methods:

(1) http://taxacom.markmail.org

Or (2) a Google search specified as:  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  
your search terms here