[Taxacom] Use of geographic range data as diagnostic characters

[Derek Sikes]

Thanks to all who replied. All very helpful, especially Francisco & Doug's
elaborations on the code!

I was indeed interested in what the code states about the validity of
locality data as a means to make a name available, in addition to the more
general situation in which a species is later determined to be essentially
undiagnosible without the use of locality data (post description).

-Derek


On Sun, Feb 17, 2013 at 10:17 PM, Stephen Thorpe <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz
> wrote:

> Yes, but Doug, I didn't interpret the question:
> >> Does the ICZN forbid or recommend against this?<<
> in the extreme sense of geography *alone*, and I don't think that there is
> much to suggest that this extreme reading was what was meant. The fact that
> Derek mentions keys suggests to me that he has some vague idea that adding
> geographical characters might nullify an otherwise perfectly valid original
> description. At the very least it is ambiguous, with a bit of "nonsense"
> required for both interpretations, since who in their right mind would
> define a species based on geography *alone*?
> Cheers,
> Stephen
>
> From: Doug Yanega <dyanega at ucr.edu>
> To: TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU
> Sent: Monday, 18 February 2013 7:01 PM
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Use of geographic range data as diagnostic
> characters
>
> Stephen Thorpe wrote:
>
> >Hold on, the original question in this thread was:
> >>>  Does anyone know of a publication that addresses the issue of
> >>>using geographic range data in a species diagnosis? And /or in
> >>>an identification key?<<
> >Diagnoses and keys are what I am talking about ... I'm not sure that
> >there is a clear distinction between circumscription and practical
> >identification?
>
> If you re-read the full question, Derek also asked:
>
> >>  Does the ICZN forbid or recommend against this?
>
> THAT is what Thomas and I were replying to. "A diagnostic feature"
> (which geography may certainly be) is not necessarily synonymous with
> "a Code-compliant descriptor", and - in my opinion - the Code does
> effectively forbid it, in the sense that geography *alone* cannot be
> used to define a taxon.
>
> Peace,
> --
>
> Doug Yanega        Dept. of Entomology        Entomology Research Museum
> Univ. of California, Riverside, CA 92521-0314        skype: dyanega
> phone: (951) 827-4315 (standard disclaimer: opinions are mine, not UCR's)
>               http://cache.ucr.edu/~heraty/yanega.html
>   "There are some enterprises in which a careful disorderliness
>         is the true method" - Herman Melville, Moby Dick, Chap. 82
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> 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) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org/
>
> (2) a Google search specified as:  site:
> mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
> _______________________________________________
>
> 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) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> (2) a Google search specified as:  site:
> mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>



-- 

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Derek S. Sikes, Curator of Insects
Associate Professor of Entomology
University of Alaska Museum
907 Yukon Drive
Fairbanks, AK   99775-6960

dssikes at alaska.edu
http://users.iab.uaf.edu/~derek_sikes/sikes_lab.htm

phone: 907-474-6278
FAX: 907-474-5469

University of Alaska Museum  -
http://www.uaf.edu/museum/collections/ento/
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Interested in Alaskan Entomology? Join the Alaska Entomological
Society and / or sign up for the email listserv "Alaska Entomological
Network" at
http://www.akentsoc.org/contact.php