Taxacom: Order Anura - correct authorship?

Wed Feb 22 23:33:54 CST 2023

BTW if the above gets mangled by the Taxacom display software on account of
the embedded hyperlinks, here is the same in plain text:
-----------
Anoures Dum?ril, 1805, Zool. Analyt. Meth. Nat. Class. Anim.: 91, 93.
Unavailable family-group name for frogs within Dum?ril's order Batracii.
Dubois, 2004, Alytes, 22: 1?14, regarded this as the original use of Anura,
but Frost, Grant, Faivovich, Bain, Haas, Haddad, de S?, Channing,
Wilkinson, Donnellan, Raxworthy, Campbell, Blotto, Moler, Drewes, Nussbaum,
Lynch, Green, and Wheeler, 2006, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 297: 357, who
beyond the fact that this is an explicit family-group name, saw no
justification in recognizing non-Latin names in ranks not regulated by the
International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Dubois and Raffa?lli, 2012,
Alytes, 28: 86, and Fouquette and Dubois, 2014, Checklist N.A. Amph. Rept.:
253, continued to argue for this being the oldest available name for the
taxon composed of all frogs, avoiding Dumeril's own words that this is the
"Famille. Anoures".

Anuri Fischer von Waldheim, 1813, Zoognosia Tab. Synopt. Ill., Ed. 3, 1:
58. Unranked taxon (above family-group) for frogs. Identical in content to
Fischer von Waldheim's Ecaudati. Presumably a reranking and latinization of
Anoures Dum?ril, 1806, an unavailable family-group name.

Anuria Rafinesque, 1815, Analyse Nat.: 78. Suborder for frogs. Presumably a
reranking and latinization of Anoures Dum?ril, 1806.

Anoura Gray, 1825, Ann. Philos., London, Ser. 2, 10: 213. Explicit order
for all frogs, attributed to Dum?ril and considering Salientia Laurenti to
be a synonym (although Laurenti's Salientia included Proteus). A reranking
and latinization of Anoures Dum?ril, 1806.

Anura Hogg, 1839, Mag. Nat. Hist., N.S., 3: 270. Explicit order for frogs.
Presumably an emendation of Anoura Gray, 1825, although possibly a
reranking and latinization of Anoures Dum?ril, 1806.

Anoures Dum?ril and Bibron, 1841, Erp. Gen., 8: plate opposite page 53.
Non-Latin suborder for frogs. Presumably a reranking of Anoures Dum?ril,
1806.

Anouri Mayer, 1849, Verh. Naturhist. Ver. Preuss. Rheinlande, 6: 198.
Suborder for frogs. Presumably a latinization of Anoures Dum?ril, 1806, or
of Dum?ril and Bibron, 1841.

Anura Lichtenstein and Martens, 1856, Nomencl. Rept. Amph. Mus. Zool.
Berol.: 36. Order for frogs. Presumably a subsequent usage of Anura Hogg,
1839.

Anura Romer, 1945, Vert. Paleontol., Ed. 2: 592. Order of superorder
Salientia to contain living frogs.

Anura Ford and Cannatella, 1993, Herpetol. Monogr., 7: 99. Group of frogs
defined as the last common ancestor of living frogs and all of the
descendants of that species.
---------------------------
Tony Rees, New South Wales, Australia
https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2FTonyRees&data%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C0d651d18fc1145b5307a08db155f966e%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638127272546635476%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=%2BZswE3N87FJYoQLjTPhMnREzTi4eHHu3AA9mDx17yYw%3D&reserved=0

On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 at 16:31, Tony Rees <tonyrees49 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Returning to the subject of my original post - The AMNH Amphibian Species
> of the World database, version 6.1 as at today, has this to say about
> "Anura" and apparently related names (subset of a very large number of
> names above family rank applicable to frogs). For some reason that I cannot
> imagine, the authors of this system decline to give an authorship for
> "Anura" as an accepted order. So, once again I throw this back to the
> community of Taxacom for any advice and assistance that may be available in
> selecting a preferred authorship for "Anura"...
> ----------------------
> *Anoures* Dum?ril, 1805, Zool. Analyt. Meth. Nat. Class. Anim.
> <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Famphibiansoftheworld.amnh.org%2FBibliography%2FD%2FDumeril-1805-Zool.-Analyt.-Meth.-Nat.-Class.-Anim&data%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C0d651d18fc1145b5307a08db155f966e%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638127272546635476%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata(WLD8LJh1VPOl%2FGi7oWb1coHWrNh2BpEUgIoWq%2FTqc%3D&reserved=0>:
> 91, 93. Unavailable family-group name for frogs within Dum?ril's order
> Batracii. Dubois, 2004, Alytes, 22
> <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Famphibiansoftheworld.amnh.org%2FBibliography%2FD%2FDubois-2004-Alytes-22&data%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C0d651d18fc1145b5307a08db155f966e%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638127272546635476%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fVzrOD2TAdKWf3%2FInM%2BwQ%2BUt4dcQe01mojyv3G9pX%2FM%3D&reserved=0>:
> 1?14, regarded this as the original use of Anura, but Frost, Grant,
> Faivovich, Bain, Haas, Haddad, de S?, Channing, Wilkinson, Donnellan,
> Raxworthy, Campbell, Blotto, Moler, Drewes, Nussbaum, Lynch, Green, and
> Wheeler, 2006, Bull. Am. Mus. Nat. Hist., 297
> <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Famphibiansoftheworld.amnh.org%2FBibliography%2FF%2FFrost-Grant-Faivovich-Bain-Haas-Haddad-de-Sa-Channing-Wilkinson-Donnellan-Raxworthy-Campbell-Blotto-Moler-Drewes-Nussbaum-Lynch-Green-and-Wheeler-2006-Bull.-Am.-Mus.-Nat.-Hist.-297&data%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C0d651d18fc1145b5307a08db155f966e%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638127272546635476%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdatanXQ%2B%2FZwYy3hOIyNwz%2F1TZI1SigV8mz2DfpuQQoT6fI%3D&reserved=0>:
> 357, who beyond the fact that this is an *explicit* family-group name,
> saw no justification in recognizing non-Latin names in ranks not regulated
> by the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Dubois and
> Raffa?lli, 2012, Alytes, 28
> <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Famphibiansoftheworld.amnh.org%2FBibliography%2FD%2FDubois-and-Raffaelli-2012-Alytes-28&data%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C0d651d18fc1145b5307a08db155f966e%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638127272546635476%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=UgRSBW2LifA6tyM545hSxoc%2B7AQKpfPlD2reh1E4L2o%3D&reserved=0>:
> 86, and Fouquette and Dubois, 2014, Checklist N.A. Amph. Rept.
> <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Famphibiansoftheworld.amnh.org%2FBibliography%2FF%2FFouquette-and-Dubois-2014-Checklist-N.A.-Amph.-Rept.-1-Amph&data%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C0d651d18fc1145b5307a08db155f966e%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638127272546635476%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=vzxJOhBOuTxZU%2BL0xp655GgE%2BeD41kBsYkFIvKbfzQw%3D&reserved=0.>:
> 253, continued to argue for this being the oldest available name for the
> taxon composed of all frogs, avoiding Dumeril's own words that this is the
> "Famille. Anoures".
>
> *Anuri* Fischer von Waldheim, 1813, Zoognosia Tab. Synopt. Ill., Ed. 3, 1
> <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Famphibiansoftheworld.amnh.org%2FBibliography%2FF%2FFischer-von-Waldheim-1813-Zoognosia-Tab.-Synopt.-Ill.-Ed.-3-1&data%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C0d651d18fc1145b5307a08db155f966e%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638127272546635476%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=uKJvVEU048N%2B5bzV7936culEG%2Fc9PpShcCi3ukQxVc4%3D&reserved=0>:
> 58. Unranked taxon (above family-group) for frogs. Identical in content to
> Fischer von Waldheim's Ecaudati. Presumably a reranking and latinization of
> Anoures Dum?ril, 1806, an unavailable family-group name.
>
> *Anuria* Rafinesque, 1815, Analyse Nat.
> <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Famphibiansoftheworld.amnh.org%2FBibliography%2FR%2FRafinesque-1815-Analyse-Nat&data%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C0d651d18fc1145b5307a08db155f966e%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638127272546635476%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=mxdpuZyvHk%2FrOUbY4N6nRPl2pasBHm7Zx9ZcVq7itsI%3D&reserved=0>:
> 78. Suborder for frogs. Presumably a reranking and latinization of Anoures
> Dum?ril, 1806.
>
> *Anoura* Gray, 1825, Ann. Philos., London, Ser. 2, 10
> <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Famphibiansoftheworld.amnh.org%2FBibliography%2FG%2FGray-1825-Ann.-Philos.-London-Ser.-2-10&data%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C0d651d18fc1145b5307a08db155f966e%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638127272546635476%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=chPdpeEPMLgV2RCAcxqufvru%2FEwWNjvy%2FZTBaqQpg1Y%3D&reserved=0>:
> 213. Explicit order for all frogs, attributed to Dum?ril and considering
> Salientia Laurenti to be a synonym (although Laurenti's Salientia included
> *Proteus*). A reranking and latinization of Anoures Dum?ril, 1806.
>
> *Anura* Hogg, 1839, Mag. Nat. Hist., N.S., 3
> <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Famphibiansoftheworld.amnh.org%2FBibliography%2FH%2FHogg-1839-Mag.-Nat.-Hist.-N.S.-3&data%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C0d651d18fc1145b5307a08db155f966e%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638127272546635476%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=i3no2r5YlLoqPe07KKfuhjv8BOSzFJ62zoZ5m%2BTAeKQ%3D&reserved=0>:
> 270. Explicit order for frogs. Presumably an emendation of Anoura Gray,
> 1825, although possibly a reranking and latinization of Anoures Dum?ril,
> 1806.
>
> *Anoures* Dum?ril and Bibron, 1841, Erp. Gen., 8
> <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Famphibiansoftheworld.amnh.org%2FBibliography%2FD%2FDumeril-and-Bibron-1841-Erp.-Gen.-8&data%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C0d651d18fc1145b5307a08db155f966e%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638127272546635476%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdataéT2cgoPjI2vXtJzN%2FCOm1DvK1G%2B%2Fe0QN6%2FTvOXwppQ%3D&reserved=0>:
> plate opposite page 53. Non-Latin suborder for frogs. Presumably a
> reranking of Anoures Dum?ril, 1806.
>
> *Anouri* Mayer, 1849, Verh. Naturhist. Ver. Preuss. Rheinlande, 6
> <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Famphibiansoftheworld.amnh.org%2FBibliography%2FM%2FMayer-1849-Verh.-Naturhist.-Ver.-Preuss.-Rheinlande-6&data%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C0d651d18fc1145b5307a08db155f966e%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638127272546791718%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=y9gYgil2NJcv6HQM2jFfl59kYj00%2BJ4DRNxz99BhJ4I%3D&reserved=0>:
> 198. Suborder for frogs. Presumably a latinization of Anoures Dum?ril,
> 1806, or of Dum?ril and Bibron, 1841.
>
> *Anura* Lichtenstein and Martens, 1856, Nomencl. Rept. Amph. Mus. Zool.
> Berol.
> <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Famphibiansoftheworld.amnh.org%2FBibliography%2FL%2FLichtenstein-and-Martens-1856-Nomencl.-Rept.-Amph.-Mus.-Zool.-Berol&data%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C0d651d18fc1145b5307a08db155f966e%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638127272546791718%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=jXkGRnQAeAohviBOXe0E2hpWkcdEHNfHqerkkJ%2Bvjis%3D&reserved=0>:
> 36. Order for frogs. Presumably a subsequent usage of Anura Hogg, 1839.
>
> *Anura* Romer, 1945, Vert. Paleontol., Ed. 2
> <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Famphibiansoftheworld.amnh.org%2FBibliography%2FR%2FRomer-1945-Vert.-Paleontol.-Ed.-2&data%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C0d651d18fc1145b5307a08db155f966e%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638127272546791718%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=fTZtHdH1LyoZBjgu9n7Pq480sZfB9PpWWFoEIXfrZ5Y%3D&reserved=0>:
> 592. Order of superorder Salientia to contain living frogs.
>
> *Anura* Ford and Cannatella, 1993, Herpetol. Monogr., 7
> <https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Famphibiansoftheworld.amnh.org%2FBibliography%2FF%2FFord-and-Cannatella-1993-Herpetol.-Monogr.-7&data%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C0d651d18fc1145b5307a08db155f966e%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638127272546791718%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdataºTtYdWF6IgeNkz86YMh%2Bw9MOfhlkfaw9QfMSXh61NI%3D&reserved=0>:
> 99. Group of frogs defined as the last common ancestor of living frogs and
> all of the descendants of that species.
> -------------------------
>
> - Tony
>
>
> On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 at 16:04, Tony Rees <tonyrees49 at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Yes Stephen, one could do that, with a certain amount of re-engineering
>> (not under my control any more in this case)... however 99%+ of the time
>> the "name+author+year" system does work (which is why it has been adopted
>> as the de facto standard in virtually all taxonomic data systems as well as
>> the taxonomic literature) - e.g. in the example given above, the crustacean
>> order is Decapoda Latreille, 1802 while the cephalopod order is Decapoda
>> Leach, 1818 (now Teuthoidea - or possibly Teuthida - Naef, 1916 (Teuthida
>> is accepted in ITIS at this time but not in WoRMS, more on that would be a
>> separate thread...)
>>
>> Go e.g. to ION/Zoological Record and you will find "name+author+year" as
>> de facto taxon identifiers, same in Neave, same in Global Names Index, same
>> in ITIS, same in GBIF, etc. etc. At least some attempt at standardization
>> in these matters is clearly helpful :) There are a few instances where such
>> a construct is not unique, where indeed some workarounds are required -
>> e.g. in my case I tend to use name|| ||authority, name|| ||authority|| [2]
>> and so on, others may have their own preference...
>>
>> Regards - Tony
>>
>>
>> On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 at 15:31, Stephen Thorpe <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> One could disambiguate homonyms in other ways, e.g. Decapoda (Crustacea)
>>> vs. Decapoda (Cephalopoda). What you actually need is a separate
>>> disambiguation field associated with each name in your database. Sometimes,
>>> you can disambiguate by author, sometimes by parent taxon or anything else
>>> that does the job.
>>> Stephen
>>>
>>> On Thursday, 23 February 2023 at 04:34:57 pm NZDT, Tony Rees <
>>> tonyrees49 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Hi Stephen, once again I agree with you to a point, but then differ: for
>>> example, it is a fact that Blackburn & Wake, 2011 cite the order as Anura
>>> Fischer von Waldheim, 1813. So one could give (on WikiXXX if desired) a
>>> particular authorship "according to [wherever]"; and note any alternative
>>> views as published. Just my take of course. Sometimes it becomes important,
>>> for example according to my recollection there are 2 different orders
>>> Decapoda, one a Crustacean group in current use, the other something else
>>> (cephalopods? cannot remember), so once again authorship of the name in
>>> question is a desirable feature.
>>>
>>> Regards - Tony
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, 23 Feb 2023 at 12:52, Stephen Thorpe <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> The problem with putting your preferred authorship on names like Anura
>>> on Wikimedia is that your preferred authorship is just that and not an
>>> objective fact because there is no such thing as authorship for such names.
>>> It is a common misconception, but a misconception nonetheless. There are no
>>> codified rules to define the authorship of such names. Nothing to say that
>>> the authorship is the first author. Nothing to say that the work in which
>>> the name was published must be published according to the Code, etc., etc.
>>> It is all just pointless dust in the wind.
>>> Stephen
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>