[Taxacom] More theft of names and work by Pseudoscientists - Wuster et al

[Stephen Thorpe]

PS: Arrgghh!! Such a mess! See this recent paper: Reynolds, R.G.; Niemiller, M.L.; Revel, L.J. 2014: Toward a Tree-of-Life for the boas and pythons: Multilocus species-level phylogeny with unprecedented taxon sampling. Molecular phylogenetics and evolution, 71: 201-213. doi: 10.1016/j.ympev.2013.11.011

p. 207: [Quote]Rawlings et al. (2008) recommended subsuming the genus Leiopython Hubrecht 1879 into Bothrochilus Fitzinger 1843 (resurrected by Kluge, 1993 ) [see also: McDowell, 1975 ]. Our analyses support the arrangement of Rawlings et al. (2008) , as we found support for the distinction of L. hoserae nomen dubium (similar to Schleip (2008) ) from B. boa / L. albertisii based on mtDNA in our ML analysis (BS = 95), but not in our Bayesian analysis (PP = 0.59). However, given the limited divergence of these taxa and the findings of similar studies (e.g., Rawlings et al., 2008; Schleip, 2008 ), we suggest the genus Bothrochilus include the species B. boa , B. albertisii , and B. hoserae . The specific epithet hoserae was considered nomen nudum given its original appearance in non-peer reviewed work with no data or analyses to support the name. However, Schleip (2008) provided an extensive formal description of Leiopython (= Bothrochilus ) hoserae , and
 this epithet has been accepted by Schleip and O?Shea (2010) as well as Kaiser et al. (2013) . Hence, we retain the epithet hoserae in the interest of stability.[Unquote]

What a disgraceful confusion of taxonomy with nomenclature (not to mention a slide from nomen dubium to nomen nudum - the latter being actually what they meant!), typical of phylogeneticists!

Stephen

--------------------------------------------
On Sat, 21/6/14, Raymond Hoser - The Snakeman <viper007 at live.com.au> wrote:

 Subject: More theft of names and work by Pseudoscientists - Wuster et al
 To: "iczn-list at afriherp.org" <iczn-list at afriherp.org>, "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
 Received: Saturday, 21 June, 2014, 1:22 PM
 
 
 
 
 ?
 
 
 Dear All, ?I think it is important you be made
 aware of the widening assault on the code of zoological
 nomenclature by a group of thieves and pseudoscientists
 known generally as the Wuster gang, especially as in the
 Bull ZN, false and uncorrected statements have been
 published by this group.?This email is not a rebuttal of
 that (for which I have already sent material to the editor
 of Bull ZN and hopefully will be published there), but
 merely to report a new and even more blatant assault on both
 science and the code by this group of thieves of which I
 only became aware of tonight and goes far beyond the assailt
 on code foreshadowed by Kaiser et al. (2012a, 2012b, 2014
 and?2014)?.?
 
 I should report here that the
 established python species Leiopython
 hoserae Hoser, 2000, a 14 year old name in widespread use
 globally based on good solid science and evidence, being
 recognized as valid since the day it was first published by
 myself following more than 20 years of intensive research,
 is about to be recklessly
 and deliberately over-written with a junior synonym by the
 Wuster gang in yet
 another?so-called "paper" in an act?of
 their extremist Zoological code breaking taxonomic and
 nomenclatural
 vandalism.? The paper doing this
 is in
 one of their PRINO rags, ostensibly authored by a king
 taxonomic vandal Wulf
 Schleip in a PRINO Journal for which the publisher lists him
 as an editor!
 
 The group have now also
 increased their taxon renaming list to over 600
 taxa by no less than six separate authors, (of which I,
 Raymond Hoser?am now just one) and it is clearly open
 ended.
 
 Should the ICZN move now to
 stop their reckless and time-wasting games now, by
 reaffirming the
 ICZN will not allow dual nomenclatures to form and gangs of
 powerful interests
 to bully others into using their invalidly coined names,
 even though their new names are
 recklessly coined in a non-code compliant way?
 
 What has emerged here is a
 battle between scientists like myself who have done
 lifetime?s work on one side and the pseudoscientists and
 thieves in the Wuster
 gang on the other, falsely claiming majority support which
 they don't even have as an excuse to step outside the
 code and steal the work of others to rename already properly
 named taxa, that have been described in a scientific
 manner.
 But if the gang are not stopped no doubt other dishonest
 individuals outside herpetology may
 try to emulate them.
 
 The offending paper is this
 one:
 
  ?
 
 Schleip, W. D. 2014. Two new
 species of Leiopython Hubrecht,
 
 1879 (Pythonidae: Serpentes):
 Non-compliance with the International
 
 Code of Zoological Nomenclature
 leads to unavailable
 
 names in zoological
 nomenclature. J. Herpetol. In press.
 
  ? As cited by Wuster gang co author
 H. Kaiser in his own blog this week. ? By the way, the (code complaint)
 2000 paper (with descriptions) originally printed in hard
 copy in Ophidia review) is posted widely on the web and for
 what its worth was cited as being code compliant by Schleip
 himself in many of his earlier publications, including of
 course Schleip 2008, a paper in which he recognized my taxa
 and then went on to invent three other?species on the
 basis of no scientific evidence whatsoever and has since
 been rejected by the scientific community.? A copy of
 my 2000 paper can be found here: ?http://www.cviewmedia.com/Articles/or01_a_revision_of_the_australasian_pythons.html ?
 
 What does everyone else here
 think??Raymond Hoser
 
 Snakebusters?
 - Australia's best reptiles?
 
 The only hands-on reptiles?
 shows that lets people hold the animals?.
 
 Reptile parties?,
 events, courses
 Phones: 9812 3322
 
 0412 777 211