[Taxacom] Who should get the kudos?

[blaberus1]

Perhaps I could ask: does anyone consider a collector to be the discoverer
of a species if the collector did not realise it was new to science? The
people I mentioned believe that it was Ali not Wallace who discovered
Semioptera wallacii.

Thanks!

George

On Thu, 3 Jan 2019 at 16:29, John Grehan <calabar.john at gmail.com> wrote:

> 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&viewtype=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.
>>
>