Any ideas?

Re: Any ideas?

Postby Jeroen Speybroeck » Sun Mar 11, 2012 7:34 pm

Kamil Szepanski wrote:I hoped for a more comfortable solution!


So having to hit 2 keys makes you uncomfortable? ;) :lol:
Jeroen Speybroeck
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3159
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 10:18 am
Hometown: Merelbeke
country: Belgium

Re: Any ideas?

Postby Kamil Szepanski » Sun Mar 11, 2012 7:37 pm

:geek: I always forget to open it in a new tab and then forget that I have lost the forum and have to navigate around...
Kamil D. Szepanski
lungenlos.de
Kamil Szepanski
 
Posts: 55
Joined: Sun Jul 31, 2011 6:58 pm
Location: Aalen
Hometown: Aalen
country: Germany

Re: Any ideas?

Postby Michal Szkudlarek » Thu May 17, 2012 9:52 pm

Does it make sense "contact adresses" section to exists as empty folder?
User avatar
Michal Szkudlarek
 
Posts: 1092
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2011 12:09 pm
Location: Poland
Hometown: ...
country: Poland

Re: Any ideas?

Postby Michal Szkudlarek » Wed Jun 06, 2012 5:09 pm

According to paper 3501 in DB, Ichthyosaura alpestris lacusnigri should not be considered as separate subspecies but as an synonym of nominotypical subspecies. So fix it Mario please.
User avatar
Michal Szkudlarek
 
Posts: 1092
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2011 12:09 pm
Location: Poland
Hometown: ...
country: Poland

Re: Any ideas?

Postby Jeroen Speybroeck » Thu Jun 07, 2012 8:40 am

Michal Szkudlarek wrote:According to paper 3501 in DB, Ichthyosaura alpestris lacusnigri should not be considered as separate subspecies but as an synonym of nominotypical subspecies. So fix it Mario please.


Michal, I think it's best to act in uniform way here. There are quite a lot of subspecies which seem (or are proven) invalid, but still are maintained. Two options: (1) stick with a more traditional (or maybe rather: comprehensive) list of all names that have been around for a decent amount of time, or (2) edit each one as soon as shown (in)valid. Anything in between smells of chaos. Of course, this is not easy and requires time. I'm rather sure Mario wisely sets species as priority, before diving (too) deep into subspecies.
Jeroen Speybroeck
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3159
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 10:18 am
Hometown: Merelbeke
country: Belgium

Re: Any ideas?

Postby Mario Schweiger » Thu Jun 07, 2012 3:01 pm

I think its not necessary to add/change/delete every species/subspecies just if it is "recommended" in one paper, or even two ;)
This will end up in a never ending story.
By this reason, in the DB there still all toads under the genus Bufo, and not Epidalea, Pseudepidalea, Amietophrynus, ......

Mario
Mario (Admin)

Please visit also my personal Herp-site vipersgarden.at
User avatar
Mario Schweiger
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2195
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 7:57 pm
Location: Obertrum, Salzburg, Austria
Hometown: Obertrum
country: Austria

Re: Any ideas?

Postby Jeroen Speybroeck » Thu Jun 07, 2012 9:41 pm

Mario Schweiger wrote:I think its not necessary to add/change/delete every species/subspecies just if it is "recommended" in one paper, or even two ;)
This will end up in a never ending story.
By this reason, in the DB there still all toads under the genus Bufo, and not Epidalea, Pseudepidalea, Amietophrynus, ......


Hmmm... If you're talking subspecies, I can agree, but taxonomy IS a neverending story at any level ;)

Isn't it the beauty of internet resources that you can rapidly implement (meaningful) changes, whereas books unavoidably represent a snapshot in time?

The Bufo split seems warranted, but the precise names of the new genera are unclear (e.g. Bufotes instead Pseudepidalalalalala)
Jeroen Speybroeck
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3159
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 10:18 am
Hometown: Merelbeke
country: Belgium

Re: Any ideas?

Postby Michal Szkudlarek » Thu Jun 07, 2012 10:17 pm

There are quite a lot of subspecies which seem (or are proven) invalid, but still are maintained.

Any example?
User avatar
Michal Szkudlarek
 
Posts: 1092
Joined: Sat Oct 22, 2011 12:09 pm
Location: Poland
Hometown: ...
country: Poland

Re: Any ideas?

Postby Jeroen Speybroeck » Fri Jun 08, 2012 7:26 am

Michal Szkudlarek wrote:
There are quite a lot of subspecies which seem (or are proven) invalid, but still are maintained.

Any example?


These are a few species from the top of my head, of which I find (= subjective!) that (very) often still some invalid subspecies are still used - Mediodactylus kotschyi, Podarcis erhardii, a few Salamandra salamandra subspecies that keep popping up, Proteus anguinus, Vipera ammodytes, Podarcis melisellensis, P. siculus. I'm rather sure proof is to be found to add P. lilfordi and pityusensis to that list, to name a few more. Old habits die hard ;)

In general, though, I think you shouldn't care too much about subspecies (see also viewtopic.php?f=43&t=995).
Jeroen Speybroeck
Site Admin
 
Posts: 3159
Joined: Wed Nov 18, 2009 10:18 am
Hometown: Merelbeke
country: Belgium

Re: Any ideas?

Postby Mario Schweiger » Sat Jun 09, 2012 9:07 am

..... and not to forget Lacerta agilis!
The ssp. argus can´t be separated from the nominat form, either in morphology nor in genetics.
The only reason for this ssp. are the erythronotus morphs, not occuring in agilis agilis. Borderline approx. a line from Allgäu to Kiel (Germany).

P. siculus? Only two ssp. left => siculus and campestris ;)

Mario
Mario (Admin)

Please visit also my personal Herp-site vipersgarden.at
User avatar
Mario Schweiger
Site Admin
 
Posts: 2195
Joined: Wed May 06, 2009 7:57 pm
Location: Obertrum, Salzburg, Austria
Hometown: Obertrum
country: Austria

PreviousNext

Return to Making the Forum better ......

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest