Search the Taxacom archive · Browse by month · Mirror of the former lists.ku.edu archive (1992–2025)

[Taxacom] Describing taxa for conservation purposes - Scott Thomson's latest attempt to sabotage the ICZN Code for his own self-gratification.

John Grehan calabar.john at gmail.com
Thu Oct 14 21:29:47 CDT 2021 

Since the rules of nomenclature are a convention or agreement among like
minded individuals there is no such thing as 'illegally' renaming taxa.
Anyone is free to conform to the rules entirely, in part, or not at all. It
is inappropriate, in my opinion, for any taxacom member to make accusations
of 'illegal' actions in taxonomy against other taxonomists. There is no
such thing, and it is not a collegial form of communication on this list -
in my opinion. Hope I am not alone in that.

John Grehan

On Thu, Oct 14, 2021 at 10:10 PM Raymond Hoser - The Snakeman <
viper007 at live.com.au> wrote:

>
> Dear all,
> having read this latest Scott Thomson rant, I note that it is simply a
> justification of sorts for his ongoing taxonomic vandalism which he has
> chosen not to mention to his readers.
> It rehashes the long discredited claims of his Kaiser et al (2013)
> manifesto calling for destruction of the ICZN Code and fails to mention
> that he has illegally renamed several species and genera of turtle,
> including Wollumbinia, for which he has illegally coined the name Myuchelys
> as a junior synonym. ... a bastard name that he desperately tries to get
> others to name.
> So now his latest plot is to set himself up as head honcho to make
> "species lists" which everyone else will use and in contempt of the rules
> of the ICZN.
> This is extremely dangerous as no budding scientist will want to enter the
> science of taxonomy, as they risk their life's work being stolen by Thomson
> and the Wuster gang, who will summarily rename and all sundry in contempt
> of the rules of the Code and then improperly peddle their names to gullible
> others.
> The end result will be lots of undescribed biodiversity becoming extinct
> even before it is named!
> Fortunately there is already a paper that deals with the Thomson rant, and
> I post a link to it below.
> All the best
> Raymond Hoser
>
> Hoser, R. T. 2013. The science of herpetology is built on evidence,
> ethics,
> quality publications and strict compliance with the rules of nomenclature.
> *Australasian Journal of Herpetology *18:2-79.
>
> http://www.smuggled.com/AJH-I18-Split.htm
> Smuggled.com <http://www.smuggled.com/AJH-I18-Split.htm>
> Australasian Journal of Herpetology. Issue 18, published 29 April 2013. To
> download the individual paper or the journal in full, click on the relevant
> linked text below:
> www.smuggled.com
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Taxacom <taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> on behalf of Scott
> Thomson via Taxacom <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> *Sent:* Friday, 15 October 2021 3:49 AM
> *To:* John Grehan <calabar.john at gmail.com>
> *Cc:* taxacom <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> *Subject:* Re: [Taxacom] Describing taxa for conservation purposes
>
> Followup as requested the paper on Consequences came out today.
>
>
> https://www.researchgate.net/publication/355208487_Towards_a_global_list_of_accepted_species_II_Consequences_of_inadequate_taxonomic_list_governance
>
> Is on my Research Gate.
>
> Cheers Scott
>
> On Sat, Sep 4, 2021 at 2:13 PM John Grehan <calabar.john at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Scott - please make sure to announce your article on Taxacom when it is
> > published (and a link if it is open access).
> >
> > On Sat, Sep 4, 2021 at 11:20 AM Scott Thomson via Taxacom <
> > taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> wrote:
> >
> >> Hi Daniel,
> >>
> >> sorry I forgot to answer your specific question.
> >>
> >> In the paper I have in press we look at several case studies. For
> >> different
> >> points. On this issue the two we use are the tupunali orangutan and
> >> giraffe
> >> though from different perspectives.
> >>
> >> One we did not use is in the description of Chelodina mccordi rotiensis
> it
> >> was stated that it was made a subspecies so it would inherit the CITES
> >> status of Chelodina mccordi without the need for assessment. Work since
> >> this time would indicate it is a species.
> >>
> >> There are numerous examples of this, some are less obvious than others.
> >>
> >> Cheers Scott
> >>
> >> On Sat, Sep 4, 2021 at 12:47 AM Daniel Gustafsson via Taxacom <
> >> taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> wrote:
> >>
> >> > Hi all,
> >> >
> >> > I recently came across this publication:
> >> > https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/24750263.2020.1857852
> >> >
> >> > In it, the authors "describe" a new subgenus for a species of North
> >> > American squirrel (Tamiasciurus mearnsi). The driving force behind
> this
> >> > seems to be that "Tamiasciurus" means "hoarder squirrel", and T.
> mearnsi
> >> > doesn't hoard, so the genus name in inappropriate. They instead
> suggest
> >> > "pseudotamias" (sic) as a subgenus (narrowly avoiding the already
> >> > proposed Pseudotamia Stephens, 1829), despite also making clear that
> >> > this species is "a descendant of T. douglasii, phylogenetically as
> well
> >> > as biogeographically".
> >> >
> >> > Another driving force behind this new subgenus appear to be for pure
> >> > conservation reasons. The authors spend a lot of time complaining
> about
> >> > how little funds are allocated to squirrel conservation in North
> America
> >> > (only 0.00001% of GDP! and that is for all small mammals, not just
> >> > squirrels!), and the hunting policies of North American squirrels.
> They
> >> > conclude:
> >> > "Also, a wider structural change is needed in the approach of how
> >> > taxonomy, research and conservation management are done for a more
> >> > sustainable human-nature interaction."
> >> >
> >> > This comes at the heels of this confused gem:
> >> > "Taxonomy as a field of study is rather complex and classifications
> >> > remain widely disagreed upon and unclear. Often chaotically dominated
> by
> >> > just a few players, institutions, and mindsets, this system leaves out
> >> > the wider public. It is not sustainable, hardly meaningful, and
> >> > certainly not scientific or democratic. This can be resolved by a more
> >> > holistic classification system, including all
> >> > species-/genera-interfering characteristics rather than only single
> ones
> >> > (morphological appearance, genetical relations etc.). Additionally,
> >> > increased budget assignments for small mammals, especially squirrels,
> >> > can have a major impact on their conservation success. Higher law
> >> > enforcement for hunting regulations can additionally strongly
> contribute
> >> > to science-based management for these squirrels."
> >> > and a few tables where they show how "taxonomy and classification
> >> > disputes exist and affect conservation efficiency", some of which
> >> > examples seem to have no connection to taxonomy, and many of which do
> >> > not reference any taxonomic or phylogenetic research more recent than
> >> > the 1990s.
> >> >
> >> > The part about how we should use a "holistic classification system,
> >> > including all species-/genera-interfering characteristics" is
> >> > particularly weird, as the only "characteristics" they use to
> establish
> >> > this new subgenus are morphometrics (average body length and average
> >> > body mass) and the differences in hoarding behaviour, while
> disregarding
> >> > all genetic and other moprhological data.
> >> >
> >> > This is a long and rambling paper, but the essence (as far as I can
> >> > tell) is that the authors think that more money should be spent on
> >> > conserving a squirrel (more than 0.00001% of GDP), and the best way to
> >> > do so is to move it to a new subgenus. I assume this subgenus is also
> >> > available from this publication, as they do include measurements that
> >> > purportedly separate the type species from the other two species in
> the
> >> > genus (which according to the sources they cite would the form
> >> > paraphyletic nominate subgenus).
> >> >
> >> > ---
> >> >
> >> > The same journal also published this:
> >> > https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/11250003.2014.895060
> >> >
> >> > Abstract (in part):
> >> > "While we are fully aware of the high degree of arbitrariness of
> >> > subspecific designations, it is also a fact that taxonomic recognition
> >> > supports conservation, because subspecies are a legal category whereas
> >> > other designations (such as evolutionarily significant units, ESUs)
> are
> >> > not. We therefore argue that the Mesola red deer should be assigned
> to a
> >> > subspecies of their own, and give an official description of Cervus
> >> > elaphus italicus nova ssp., including the designation of a holo- and a
> >> > paratype specimen."
> >> >
> >> > They seem to make a much better argument than the first paper, but
> still
> >> > base their decision to describe a new taxon partially on how this will
> >> > make it easier to get funding for conservation work.
> >> >
> >> > ---
> >> >
> >> > I am wondering, does anyone know more examples like this? Where
> >> > conservation issues are driving or influencing taxonomic decisions?
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> > Dr. Daniel R. Gustafsson, Research Assistant Professor
> >> > Institute of Zoology Guangdong Academy of Sciences, Guangzhou, China.
> >> >
> >> > Ask me about chewing lice!
> >> > _______________________________________________
> >> > Taxacom Mailing List
> >> >
> >> > Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >> > For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, 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
> >> > The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> >> > http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >> >
> >> > Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 34 years,
> >> 1987-2021.
> >> >
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Scott Thomson
> >>
> >> Centro de Estudos dos Quelônios da Amazônia - CEQUA
> >> Petrópolis, Manaus
> >> State of Amazonas, 69055-010
> >> Brasil
> >>
> >> http://www.carettochelys.com
> >> ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1279-2722
> >> Lattes: *http://lattes.cnpq.br/0323517916624728*
> >> <
> >>
> https://wwws.cnpq.br/cvlattesweb/PKG_MENU.menu?f_cod=1E409F4BF37BFC4AD13FD58CDB7AA5FD#
> >> >
> >> Skype: Faendalimas
> >> Mobile Phone Brasil: +55 11 98178 7270
> >> Whatsapp: +55 11 98178 7270
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Taxacom Mailing List
> >>
> >> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, 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
> >> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> >> http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >>
> >> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 34 years,
> 1987-2021.
> >>
> >
>
> --
> Scott Thomson
>
> Centro de Estudos dos Quelônios da Amazônia - CEQUA
> Petrópolis, Manaus
> State of Amazonas, 69055-010
> Brasil
>
> http://www.carettochelys.com
> ORCID: http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1279-2722
> Lattes: *http://lattes.cnpq.br/0323517916624728*
> <
> https://wwws.cnpq.br/cvlattesweb/PKG_MENU.menu?f_cod=1E409F4BF37BFC4AD13FD58CDB7AA5FD#
> >
> Skype: Faendalimas
> Mobile Phone Brasil: +55 11 98178 7270
> Whatsapp: +55 11 98178 7270
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
>
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, 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
> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 34 years, 1987-2021.
>

More information about the Taxacom mailing list