[Taxacom] Who should get the kudos?

[Mary Barkworth]

Then again, it would not have been described if the collector had not realized it was interesting.  I do not think there is a right or wrong but lots of plant species are named for collectors who brought them to the attention of a taxonomist. I am sure it builds goodwill - and there is nothing wrong with that. 
Mary

-----Original Message-----
From: Taxacom <taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> On Behalf Of John Grehan
Sent: Thursday, January 3, 2019 9:29 AM
To: blaberus1 <g.beccaloni at gmail.com>
Cc: taxacom <Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Who should get the kudos?

George,

In my experience for the group of my study species have sometimes been named for the collector, sometimes not. Seems to be a discretionary choice.
There seems to be no necessity for the Semioptera to have been named after the collection. For the new species for which I have been involved with none of the collectors who brought material to the attention of myself or colleagues 'knew' in advance that they had a new species. I have found new species in other groups and it would be absurd to expect that the species should necessarily be named after me just because I found the specimens. I think your critics are unfamiliar with normal taxonomic practice. I'll be interested to what others on the list with broader experience have to say.

John Grehan

On Thu, Jan 3, 2019 at 11:18 AM blaberus1 <g.beccaloni at gmail.com> wrote:

> I have been debating with historians of science and others for a while 
> now about who discovered Semioptera wallacii (Standardwing Bird of 
> Paradise): – was it Alfred Russel Wallace or his assistant Ali? They 
> are arguing it was Ali as he shot the first specimen – and they 
> believe it is a great injustice it was named after Wallace (in fact I have been called “racist”
> for arguing against this point of view!).
>
>
>
> Wallace wrote in his book *The Malay Archipelago* “Just as I got home 
> I overtook Ali returning from shooting with some birds hanging from his belt.
> He seemed much pleased, and said, "Look here, sir, what a curious bird,"
> holding out what at first completely puzzled me. I saw a bird with a 
> mass of splendid green feathers on its breast, elongated into two 
> glittering tufts; but, what I could not understand was a pair of long 
> white feathers, which stuck straight out from each shoulder. Ali 
> assured me that the bird stuck them out this way itself, when 
> fluttering its wings, and that they had remained so without his 
> touching them. I now saw that I had got a great prize, no less than a 
> completely new form of the Bird of Paradise, differing most remarkably from every other known bird.”
>
>
>
> As a taxonomist my argument is that while Ali collected the first 
> specimen he did not know it was a species new to Western taxonomy. We 
> are talking about species new to SCIENCE, not simply new to Ali. 
> Unlike Wallace, Ali was illiterate and was not a biologist/taxonomist. 
> Wallace, however, thanks to his in-depth knowledge of the birds of the 
> region, immediately recognised that it was a new species. He excitedly 
> wrote to his agent
> Stevens:
>
>
>
> "...I believe I have already the finest & most wonderful bird in the 
> island [Bacan, Indonesia]. I had a good mind to keep it a secret but I 
> cannot resist telling you, I have got here a new Bird of Paradise!! of 
> a new genus!!! quite unlike anything yet known, very curious & very handsome!!!
> When I can get a couple of pairs I will send them overland to see what 
> a new Bird of Paradise will really fetch. I expect £25 each! Had I 
> seen the bird in Ternate I would never have believed it came from 
> here, so far out of the hitherto supposed region of the Paradiseidae. 
> I consider it the greatest discovery I have yet made..." (Wallace, 
> 1858)
>
>
>
> So Wallace clearly thought HE had discovered it.
>
>
>
> The species was named in Wallace’s honour by Gray in 1859 -
>
> http://wallace-online.org/content/frameset?pageseq=1&itemID=WSPEC017&v
> iewtype=text based on a sketch which Wallace had sent.
>
>
>
> So my argument is that simply collecting a new species does not mean 
> you discovered it – even if it is new to you personally. The 
> discoverer is the person who realises it is a species not yet named by 
> taxonomists. What do you think?
>
>
>
> Incidentally, I note that none of 10 randomly selected species of 
> cockroaches described in the last 10 years were named after the 
> collectors of the holotypes of these species. Their names were, 
> however, mentioned in the species descriptions, so they were credited 
> for their efforts. Perhaps, however, some taxonomists do regularly name species after their collectors?
> Does anyone know whether this practice is commonly followed by 
> taxonomists of particular groups?
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> George Beccaloni
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the Web, visit:
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> You can reach the person managing the list at:
> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>
> Nurturing Nuance while Assaulting Ambiguity for 31 Some Years, 1987-2018.
>
_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu

http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org To subscribe or unsubscribe via the Web, visit: http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
You can reach the person managing the list at: taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu

Nurturing Nuance while Assaulting Ambiguity for 31 Some Years, 1987-2018.