[tcs-lc] Misspelled Names and Orthographic Variants (Issue 005)

Mon May 2 08:57:13 PDT 2005

Hi Rich,

I think we all know that nomenclature is complex but it is made up of a 
relatively few types of problem that can be chewed one at a time.

Your list is still pretty long and would take the best part of a day to 
mark up completely by hand. I have made a start on it to show how it 
could be done. You can see it here:

http://biodiv.hyam.net/schemas/TCS_0.95.2/Asterropteryx_01.xml

I have added a link to it on the LC wiki here

http://bdei.cs.umb.edu/twiki/bin/view/UBIF/LinneanCoreExampleNames

I have just done the genus and a species and added some notes.

Please have a go at adding some other stuff yourself (anyone who fancies 
it) and see how it goes.

It really is pretty straight forward. The only problems come in deciding 
what you want to say. Is it worth creating concepts for things if we 
know nothing about the concept and no one uses it for anything? What are 
we trying to communicate?

I have started another thread which may or may not get us anywhere with 
the names debate.

Anyhow have fun.

Roger

Richard Pyle wrote:

>>I didn't expect quite so much by way of real examples! I was thinking
>>more of one or two names that illustrated your point.
>>    
>>
>
>So was I!!!  I originally only wanted to send the genus "Asterropteryx" and
>the species "semipunctata", and the two alternate spellings thereof.  But
>then I figured I ought to provide you with an example of a subspecies and a
>synonym, just to see how v0.95.2 would deal with them.  Then I thought I'd
>provide a couple of type species...and that led me down the rabbit hole that
>produced such a convoluted mess.
>
>But here's the thing:  I think you could probably pick almost any random set
>of names that have been around for a while, and discover a mushrooming
>complexity once you identified the types and other nomenclaturally important
>aspects of he history.
>
>  
>
>>I have cut and paste your examples onto the LinneanCoreExampleNames
>>page of the LC wiki. I am working through these trying to add
>>instance document examples but this is a long and time consuming
>>business. I don't think I will be able to illustrate all of them.
>>    
>>
>
>O.K., how about just focusing on this subset:
>
>=======================================================
>Rüppell (1830) established the new genus "Asterropterix" on p. 138.
>In the same publication (same page), he also described the new species,
>"Asterropterix semipunctatus".  Because this was the only species Rüppell
>included in his new genus, this species is established as the type species
>of the genus (monotypy).
>In the same publication, he included an illustration of a specimen that now
>bears the catalog number SMF 1691, and is the Holotype of his new species A.
>semipunctatus.  In the caption for that figure, Rüppell spelled the name
>"Asterropteryx semipunctatus" ("-yx" for the genus, instead of "-ix" for the
>genus).
>
>Rüppell (1835) listed the same genus and species, but consistently spelled
>the genus "Asterropteryx". In doing so, by ICZN rules he serves as the
>"first reviser", and thereby establishes the "-yx" spelling of the genus as
>the "correct original spelling".  We can only assume that Rüppell's 1935
>concept circumscription of the species is congruent to his 1830 concept
>circumscription. Because the genus is monotypic in both publications, we can
>also assume congruency between the two genus concept circumscriptions.
>
>Bleeker (1874a) established the new genus Brachyeleotris (p. 306). He
>designated Eleotris cyanostigma Bleeker (1855) as the type species.
>
>Bleeker (1874b) described the new species ensifera (p. 375), and included it
>within his genus Brachyeleotris.
>
>Snyder (1904) placed the species Eleotris cyanostigma Bleeker (1855) within
>the genus "Asterropterix" (incorrect spelling).
>
>Whitley (1932) described the new subspecies, "Asterropterix semipunctatus
>quisqualis" (incorrect spelling of genus).
>
>Dor (1984) regarded Eleotris cyanostigma Bleeker (1855) to be a junior
>synonym of Asterropteryx semipunctatus Rüppell (1830).
>In doing so, he (by definition) also considered the genus Brachyeleotris
>Bleeker (1874a) to be a junior synonym of Asterropteryx Rüppell (1830).
>
>Randall et al. (1997) placed Brachyeleotris ensifera Bleeker (1874b) in the
>genus "Asterropteryx" (correct spelling), and spelled the species epithet
>"ensiferus".
>
>Privitera (2001) published on the reproductive biology of Asterropteryx
>semipunctatus Rüppell, but pointed out that the genus "Asterropteryx" is
>feminine, and thus spelled A. semipunctatus as "Asterropteryx semipunctata".
>
>Nakabo (2002) also recognized the feminine gender of Asterropteryx, and
>followed Dor in placing Brachyeleotris ensifera Bleeker (1874b) in
>Asterropteryx, and thus spelled it "Asterropteryx ensifera".
>
>Allen & Adrim (2003) also placed Brachyeleotris ensifera Bleeker (1874b) in
>the genus Asterropteryx, but spelled the species epithet "ensifer".
>
>Randall et al. (2004) used the spelling "Asterropteryx ensiferus".
>
>Greenfield & Randall (2004) mistakenly used the spelling "Asterropterix
>semipunctatus" in their treatment of that species.
>=======================================================
>
>This list includes a couple of alternate spellings, a couple of synonyms
>(both genus and species), and a subspecies.  We can safely ignore all the
>pre-Rüppell stuff.  Assume that all publications except Privitera (2001)
>provided sufficient information to define concept circumscriptions for each
>name used (they didn't really -- but let's not go down that rabbit hole just
>yet).
>
>  
>
>>It is perfectly possible to have verbatim strings for names in the new TC
>><Name> element and the ref attribute pointing to a NameObject with a
>>different spelling. Have you tried doing it?
>>    
>>
>
>O.K., I see now that the "Name" element serves the function of my
>"VerbatimNameString" -- sorry for confusing the issue.  But it's not clearly
>indicated whether the contents of the <Name> tag should be the "verbatim
>name-string as used in the AccordingTo publication", or some sort of
>automated concatination of the parsed elements in the linked NameObject.
>
>I also see that Name & authorship are combined into one tag.  It *might* be
>preferable to split them up with a VERY simple structure like this:
>
><Name ref="123">
>  <NameSpelling>Aus bus</NameSpelling>
>  <NameAuthor>Smith (Jones)</NameAuthor>
></Name>
>
>Separating verbatim name and verbatim authorship will be beneficial in the
>long run, I think -- but I wouldn't make it any more complex than this.
>Anything more parsed belongs in whatever structure ref="123" points to.
>
>  
>
>>Bearing this in mind what you say below can be done in the current schema
>>    
>>
>I believe. Please feel free to have a go!
>
>  
>
>>You can do something like this if you want to:
>>    
>>
>
>[etc.]
>
>...but I thought from your earlier message that "Mygenus" and "Migenus"
>would automatically be considered as separate name objects?
>
>Maybe it's only an issue when you're not sure whether "Mygenus" and
>"Migenus" are intended to refer to the same Name object.  In that case,
>however, I would suggest simply *not providing* any ref value within the
><Name> element of a TC instance, and rely only on the verbatim text string
>in the Name tag.  Under what circumstances would you ever need to create a
>unique NameObject for "Migenus"?
>
>Aloha,
>Rich
>
>
>
>  
>

-- 

==============================================
 Roger Hyam
----------------------------------------------
 Biodiversity Informatics
 Independent Web Development 
----------------------------------------------
 http://www.hyam.net  roger at hyam.net
----------------------------------------------
 2 Janefield Rise, Lauder, TD2 6SP, UK.
 T: +44 (0)1578 722782 M: +44 (0)7890 341847
==============================================

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mercury.nceas.ucsb.edu/ecoinformatics/pipermail/tcs-lc/attachments/20050502/adb861c6/attachment.htm
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: roger.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 275 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mercury.nceas.ucsb.edu/ecoinformatics/pipermail/tcs-lc/attachments/20050502/adb861c6/roger.vcf