unless i'm mistaken the WSC is the one spot of truth so to speak for looking up all the genera/species and changes. It's "official" when it's posted there.
-
Are you a Tarantula hobbyist? If so, we invite you to join our community! Once you join you'll be able to post messages, upload pictures of your pets and enclosures and chat with other Tarantula enthusiasts. Sign up today!
Name changes
- Thread starter IamKrush
- Start date
- Messages
- 1,729
- Location
- The arm pit of The United States
I only have one on that list. Versicolor. I still need to make a new labelHaha, sorry about that, @IamKrush - I didn't even see it. Mind is gone, what with all the name changes.
- Messages
- 1,729
- Location
- The arm pit of The United States
They are very nice.even as slingsTo be honest I was thinking about getting a versicolor
- Messages
- 1,729
- Location
- The arm pit of The United States
I need a purp as well. Waiting for the breeder i deal with to restock againthey're my favorite, 2nd is the A. sp. peru purple and A. purpurea. Have to get one of those 2 to have an "avic"
- Messages
- 325
- Location
- The Black Lodge
Well not quite. The WSC actually has no more authority than you or I do in deciding whether or not a paper is valid. It used to be that it listed all proposed changes then it started listing only those that it felt met the criteria of the ICZN so a lot of poor Schmidt papers were ignored (no bad thing IMO). Bizarrely now it seems they think that they can cherry pick changes from individual papers (not accepting the moving of L. violaceopes to Omothymus but accepting the other changes in the Smith & Jacobi being a prime example).
In the case of the Avicularia revision, it is a really solid, well written paper published in a peer reviewed scientific journal that has been years in prep, not some badly written rushed article published in a hobby journal.So there will be no doubts over the proposed changes.
- Messages
- 10,909
- Location
- Malton, UK
So where is the best, most reliable source?
- Messages
- 5,547
- Location
- Outside San Antonio, TX
"is a really solid, well written paper published in a peer reviewed scientific journal that has been years in prep".
- Messages
- 10,909
- Location
- Malton, UK
"is a really solid, well written paper published in a peer reviewed scientific journal that has been years in prep".
Yes, but if they are cherry picking where do we find the rest. There must be just one place we can go to find any and all reclassifications
- Messages
- 1,729
- Location
- The arm pit of The United States
I posted this seperatly. But it relates to the main post.
http://blog.pensoft.net/2017/03/06/...the-solution-to-a-200-year-old-hairy-mystery/
http://blog.pensoft.net/2017/03/06/...the-solution-to-a-200-year-old-hairy-mystery/
- Messages
- 5,547
- Location
- Outside San Antonio, TX
Enn I always just type in revisions Theraphosanae into google to be honest..when i feel like reading dry stuff with occasional moments of understanding
- Messages
- 10,909
- Location
- Malton, UK
Enn I always just type in revisions Theraphosanae into google to be honest..when i feel like reading dry stuff with occasional moments of understanding
I tend to look at http://tarantulacanada.ca/price.php, they're usually prett quick to update.
- Messages
- 10,909
- Location
- Malton, UK
- Messages
- 686
- Location
- Corcelles-près-Payerne, Switzerland
WSC has agreed on the Avicularia revision now, as far as I can see (I haven't checked all the paper...)
- Messages
- 325
- Location
- The Black Lodge
The WSC IS
If we use the Lampropelma violaceopes situation I mentioned earlier we see the bottom entry on L. violaceopes on their page that they say - "Omothymus violaceopes Smith & Jacobi, 2015: 29 (T of f to Omothymus not followed here - not sufficiently justified, m probably misidentified Omothymus schioedtei)." Yet the other changes proposed in that paper such as the transfer of the Haplopelma species to Cyriopagopus and the transfer of the former Cyriopagopus species to Omothymus have been followed. This you can't do. Either the paper meets the requirements of the ICZN and you accept all the proposed changes until someone proves otherwise in another peer reviewed paper or it doesn't meet the criteria and you ignore it completely. So in this case you would ignore the WSC and call it Omothymus violaceopes (or ignore the Smith and Jacobi paper and call it Lampropelma violaceopes as well as ignoring the changes to Haplopelma and Cyriopagopus).
The WSC is still the best place online to keep up with name changes. Just be aware that they are not any kind of authority so you don't need to wait for their approval of a paper to start changing labels. Also pay attention to any notes they make on the names.
If we use the Lampropelma violaceopes situation I mentioned earlier we see the bottom entry on L. violaceopes on their page that they say - "Omothymus violaceopes Smith & Jacobi, 2015: 29 (T of f to Omothymus not followed here - not sufficiently justified, m probably misidentified Omothymus schioedtei)." Yet the other changes proposed in that paper such as the transfer of the Haplopelma species to Cyriopagopus and the transfer of the former Cyriopagopus species to Omothymus have been followed. This you can't do. Either the paper meets the requirements of the ICZN and you accept all the proposed changes until someone proves otherwise in another peer reviewed paper or it doesn't meet the criteria and you ignore it completely. So in this case you would ignore the WSC and call it Omothymus violaceopes (or ignore the Smith and Jacobi paper and call it Lampropelma violaceopes as well as ignoring the changes to Haplopelma and Cyriopagopus).
- Messages
- 5,547
- Location
- Outside San Antonio, TX
So someone didn't agree..or is there politics involved, even in science? @plessey..
Latest posts
-
-
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=61558754032343
- Latest: georgemmannion
-
-