Classifying Sciences: Systematics and Status in mid-Victorian Natural History

2005 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jim Endersby
Keyword(s):  
Natural History ◽  
Natural System ◽  
British Association ◽  
Zoological Nomenclature ◽  
Sexual System ◽  
Quinary System ◽  
Formal Rules

This chapter discusses mid-Victorian natural history sciences, focusing on the disputes over the classification within both the zoological and botanical communities. Zoologists argued over the merits of William Macleay’s quinary system, claiming that all organisms could be classified in groups of five. Botanists attacking the Linnaean or sexual system were divided over what should replace it; the most widely used of its rivals was known as the natural system. Several metropolitan naturalists felt the need to bring stability by settling these arguments. Hugh Strickland was the most prominent zoological stabiliser, an opponent of quinarianism and other forms of classificatory radicalism. Strickland established the world’s first formal rules of zoological nomenclature and attempted to use the authority of the British Association to impose them on naturalists.

Schweigger’s (1812) chelonian types from the extinct eighteenth century Portuguese “Royal cabinet of natural history of Ajuda”: some contributions for their identification and nomenclatural implications

Zootaxa ◽  
2012 ◽  
Vol 3395 (1) ◽  
pp. 18 ◽  
Author(s):  
LUIS M. P. CERÍACO ◽  
ROGER BOUR
Keyword(s):  
Eighteenth Century ◽  
Natural History ◽  
Zoological Nomenclature ◽  
Historical Sources ◽  
History Of ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Intense Debate

The work Prodromus Monographiae Cheloniorum, published by Schweigger in 1812, has recently been the subject ofseveral studies. One result of these studies—the rediscovery of the Testudo gigantea Schweigger, 1812holotype—triggered an intense debate in The Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature, where, among other issues in dispute,the identity and nature of the specimen indicated as the holotype for the species is put in question. Using historical sources,mostly unpublished, and analysis and comparison of taxidermic characteristics of the specimen with other specimens ofthe same nature, we can clearly trace its origin to the extinct Royal Cabinet of Natural History of Ajuda in Lisbon, fromthe “philosophical journey” of Alexandre Rodrigues Ferreira to the specimens transported to Paris by Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire in 1808, thus helping dispel any doubts regarding the identity and nature of what is being identified as the Testudogigantea holotype, along with other chelonian specimens. This information is of great importance in the current taxonomicdebate as well as in recognizing the historic importance of the Royal Cabinet of Natural History of Ajuda and Geoffroy Saint-Hilaire’s 1808 mission to Lisbon.

Incorporation of nomina of higher-ranked taxa into the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature: the nomenclatural status of class-series zoological nomina published in a non-latinized form

Zootaxa ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 2106 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
ALAIN DUBOIS
Keyword(s):  
Internal Consistency ◽  
Zoological Nomenclature ◽  
International Code ◽  
Modern Language ◽  
Phylogenetic Hypotheses ◽  
Formal Rules

Many new higher-ranked taxa are currently recognized by taxonomists as a result of the numerous phylogenetic hypotheses which are regularly published. The absence in the Code of Rules for the nomenclature of taxa above the rank superfamily (class-series nomenclature) is a factor of growing chaos in zoological taxonomy. This is why Dubois (2005) proposed a set of formal Rules for this nomenclature, which should be discussed and considered for incorporation into the Code. This paper focuses on a particular point regarding these proposed Rules, i.e., whether class-series nomina should be considered nomenclaturally available from their first publication in any modern language, provided they were latinized subsequently, or only from their first use in a latinized form. It is argued that the first solution should be retained, not only “to render unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s”, but also for simple internal consistency within the Code. According to the Rules of the Code, generic nomina may be available, with their original authors and dates, even if directly transferred unchanged from modern languages, and family-series nomina, first published in a nonlatinized form, may be available, with their original authors and dates, provided they have been subsequently latinized. These general statements are illustrated with the higher nomenclature of several taxa including amphibians. According to the proposed Rules, the following nomina, authors and dates are the valid ones for the taxa they designate: VERTEBRATA Cuvier, 1800; AMPHIBIA De Blainville, 1816; GYMNOPHIONA Rafinesque-Schmaltz, 1814; BATRACHIA Brongniart, 1800; ANURA Duméril, 1806; URODELA Duméril, 1806; AMPHIPNEUSTA Merrem, 1820.

scholarly journals Primary Insect Types in the Illinois Natural History Survey Collection, Exclusive of the Collembola and Thysanoptera

1980 ◽  
Vol 32 (1-4) ◽  
pp. 55-191 ◽  
Author(s):  
Donald W. Webb
Keyword(s):  
Natural History ◽  
Zoological Nomenclature ◽  
Systematic Research ◽  
International Code ◽  
Type Specimens ◽  
University Of Illinois ◽  
The Past ◽  
Illinois Natural History Survey ◽  
History Survey ◽  
The University

In 1927 T. H. Frison published a list of all the insect types in the collections of the Illinois Natural History Survey and the University of Illinois and the Bolter collection. This list contained 1,067 primary types. Type-specimens in the University of Illinois have subsequently been transferred to the collection of the Illinois Natural History Survey. In the past 50 years 2,113 primary types have been added to the Survey's collection, primarily through the systematic research of T. H. Frison in Plecoptera and Hymenoptera; H. H. Ross in Trichoptera, Plecoptera, Homoptera, and Hymenoptera; H. B. Mills in Collembola; and L. J. Stannard, Jr., in Thysanoptera. The acquisitions of the personal collections of J. W. Folsom in Collembola and C. A. Robertson in Hymenoptera added numerous primary types to the Survey's collections. In addition, several active workers have periodically, or occasionally, deposited their types in the Survey's permanent collection upon completion of specific revisionary studies. Recently, Gerdes (1977) and Mari Mutt (1978) have published lists of all of the types of Thysanoptera and Collembola, respectively, in the Natural History Survey collection. In this list only primary types currently located in or on loan from the Illinois Natural History Survey collection are listed along with the original citation for each species. The literature citation for the designation of ach neotype and lectotype is also cited. To clarify the type designation within the bees of the Robertson collection, lectotype specimens have been designated by W. E. LaBerge for those species not previously designated in the literature. The genera under which the species are listed are those under which they were originally described. Where possible the sex of each type is given. The term syntype is used in the sense of Article 73c of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (1964) and replaces the term cotype used by Frison (1927). For simplicity, the within each order alphabetically, the genera are arranged alphabetically within each family, and the species are arranged alphabetically within each genus.

scholarly journals IV.—Remarks on the Genus Megalichthys, Agassiz, with Description of a New Species

1884 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 115-121 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. H. Traquair
Keyword(s):  
New Species ◽  
Royal Society ◽  
The Other ◽  
British Association ◽  
Zoological Nomenclature ◽  
The Real ◽  
Original Memoir ◽  
History Of ◽  
A New Species ◽  
Incontrovertible Evidence

There can be no doubt that the name Megalichthys was originally suggested to Agassiz by the gigantic teeth of the great round-scaled fish first brought into notice by the researches of Dr. Hibbert, in the quarries of Burdiehouse, though indeed some of its remains had long previously been figured by Ure in his “History of Rutherglen and East Kilbride.” Incontrovertible evidence of this may be found by referring to the Proceedings of the British Association for 1834, and to Dr. Hibbert's original memoir on the Burdiehouse Limestone published in the Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, vol. xiii. 1835. But with the remains of this enormous creature were also associated and confounded certain rhombic glistening scales, belonging really to a considerably smaller fish of a totally different genus, and when Agassiz, subsequently to the meeting of the British Association at Edinburgh in the year above quoted, found in the Museum at Leeds a head of this latter form, or at least of an allied species, he adopted it, by description and by figure, as the type of his Megalichthys Hibberti, relegating the other to the genus Holoptychius. This latter, the real “big fish,” is now known as Rhizodus Hibberti, the founder of the genus being Prof. Owen; and though it may be a matter of regret that it did not retain the name Megalichthys, the laws of zoological nomenclature do not admit of any alteration now.

Neotype of Neofelis diardi (Mammalia: Carnivora: Felidae)

Zootaxa ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 2110 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
PER CHRISTIANSEN
Keyword(s):  
Natural History ◽  
The Netherlands ◽  
Type Locality ◽  
Zoological Nomenclature ◽  
International Code ◽  
National Museum ◽  
Clouded Leopard ◽  
Neofelis Nebulosa

The recent recognition that the clouded leopard (Neofelis nebulosa) is, in fact, two different species, which differ substantially with respects to craniodental and pelage morphology and genome characters, and the confusion about the initial descriptions of this taxon prompt designation of a neotype of Neofelis diardi. In this paper a neotype specimen consisting of a mounted skin, a skull, and a mandible (RMNH1981) is designated, which are housed at the National Museum of Natural History (Naturalis), in Leiden, the Netherlands. The type locality of Neofelis diardi is fixed as Palembang, Sumatra, under Article 76 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, rather than the original and erroneous locality of Java by Cuvier.

Type specimens of beetles (Insecta: Coleoptera) at the museo entomológico Francisco Luís Gallego, Medellín, Colombia

Zootaxa ◽  
2009 ◽  
Vol 2017 (1) ◽  
pp. 65-68
Author(s):  
PAULA A. SEPÚLVEDA-CANO ◽  
MANUEL A. RAMÍREZ-MORA
Keyword(s):  
Natural History ◽  
Liquid Medium ◽  
Species Level ◽  
Zoological Nomenclature ◽  
International Code ◽  
Immature Stages ◽  
Type Specimens ◽  
Northeastern Region ◽  
Natural History Collections ◽  
Almost All

Type specimens are the most scientifically valuable specimens of the natural history collections, and are very important to because they represent standards of reference that provide objectivity in scientific nomenclature (IZCN, 1999). In consideration of the recommendation 72F.4 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, which indicates that the type lists should be published, we provide a list of the species of Coleoptera with types housed in the Museo Entomológico Francisco Luis Gallego (MEFLG). The MEFLG collection originated in 1937 at the Universidad Nacional de Colombia Sede Medellín is the most important insect collection of the northeastern region of Colombia. This museum contains nearly 200,000 specimens of which about 50,000 represent the order Coleoptera, a majority of them are pinned adults and some are immature stages conserved in a liquid medium. The Coleoptera have been identified to subfamily and genus, and some to species level. Almost all of them were collected in Antioquia state, and others are from different localities in Colombia or are donations by foreign institutions.

scholarly journals A revision of the green Anoles of Hispaniola with description of eight new species (Reptilia, Squamata, Dactyloidae)

2016 ◽  
pp. 1-135 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gunther Köhler ◽  
S. Blair Hedges
Keyword(s):  
New Species ◽  
Natural History ◽  
Conservation Status ◽  
Molecular Genetic ◽  
Genetic Data ◽  
Species Level ◽  
Zoological Nomenclature ◽  
Distribution Maps ◽  
Dichotomous Key ◽  
Molecular Genetic Data

We revise the species of green anoles (i.e., the species related to Anolis aliniger, A. chlorocyanus, and A. coelestinus) occuring on Hispaniola. Based on our analyses of morphological and molecular genetic data we recognize 16 species of green anoles, eight of which we describe as new species (A. apletolepis sp. nov., A. chlorodius sp. nov., A. divius sp. nov., A. eladioi sp. nov., A. gonavensis sp. nov., A. leucodera sp. nov., A. prasinorius sp. nov. and A. viridius sp. nov.) and three of which are raised from subspecific to species level (A. cyanostictus, A. demissus and A. pecuarius) and one is resurrected from synonymy with A. chlorocyanus (A. peynadoi). Because the six syntypes of A. chlorocyanus (MNHN 785, 787, 2007.2066–09) are conspecific with the only available syntype of A. coelestinus (i.e., MCZ 3347), we have petitioned the International Commission of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN) to use its plenary power to set aside the type status of the syntypes of Anolis chlorocyanus and to allow the designation of a neotype in order to stabilize the current and long established usage of the names A. chlorocyanus and A. coelestinus. For each species we provide a standardized description of external morphology, color descriptions in life, color photographs in life, description and illustration of hemipenis morphology (if available), distribution maps based on the specimens examined, comments on the conservation status, and natural history notes. Finally, we provide a dichotomous key for the identification of the 16 species of green anoles occuring on Hispaniola.

CANONS OF SYSTEMATIC NOMENCLATURE FOR THE HIGHER GROUPS

1873 ◽  
Vol 5 (3) ◽  
pp. 55-59
Author(s):  
Samuel H. Scudder
Keyword(s):  
American Association ◽  
British Association ◽  
Zoological Nomenclature ◽  
Strict Adherence ◽  
Linnean Society ◽  
Systematic Nomenclature ◽  
The Subject ◽  
Growth Of Science

Several years ago, the American Association for the Advancement of Science appointed a committee to reconsider the canons of biological nomenclature, and to report whether, with the growth of science, they requrired any additions or alterations. No report has yet been made, nor, so far as we are aware, is any likely to be presented, until the subject is again brought prominently forrvard and new instructions given. Professor A. E. Verrill has since repubiished the Revised Rules of Zoological Nomenclature adopted by the British Association for the Advancement of science in 1865, and has accompanied them by a few apt comments; in England, Mr. W. F. Kirby, in a paper read before the Linnean Society of London, has called attention to the extensive changes which a strict adherence to the laws of priority would cause in the generic nomenclature of butterflies; and quite recently has put the same into practice in his catalogue of these insects.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document