[Coral-List] Bleaching Report
Gustav Paulay
paulay at flmnh.ufl.edu
Thu Aug 21 10:10:19 EDT 2008
Hi All,
As a point of clarification to Doug's email, ICZN rules are pretty
black and white, and accordingly the name A. muricata is now the
proper name for this coral as a result of Wallace's lectotype
designation. Whether you agree with that designation or not is
irrelevant from a nomenclatural rules' perspective. The reason
Wallace did that designation is that A. muricata is the type species
of Acropora, thus leaving it undefined creates a nomenclatural can of
worms.
Cheers,
Gustav
Gustav Paulay
Florida Museum of Natural History
University of Florida
Gainesville FL 32611-7800 USA
Email: [1]paulay at flmnh.ufl.edu
Phone: 1 (352) 273-1948
FAX: 1 (352) 846-0287
Douglas Fenner wrote, On 8/20/2008 3:38 AM:
Wallace 1999, p. 2 details the situation for Acropora muricata and A.
formosa. A. muricata was described by Linnaeus in 1758, but he referred to
a work by Rumphius that included a drawing. Linnaeus did not designate a
type specimen or illustrate a specimen. Wallace, 1999 designated a neotype
from the area in Indonesia where Rumphius worked that looks like his
drawing. It is a species named A. formosa by Dana, 1846, so A. formosa is
now a junior synonym. As I understand it, the old rules of Zoological
nomenclature allowed designating a neotype this way, but the new rules, in
effect as of Jan 1, 2000, do not. (Also, the new rules require designating
the type specimen in the original description.)
For an alternate view, see Veron, 2000, Vol. 1, p. 176. His view is
that the name A. formosa has long been applied to one of the best known
corals, and changing it would create confusion where there is none, and this
is not allowed by the rules.
Anyone confused?
As much as the taxonomic naming system is a pain, we still use it
because it is useful, and no one has come up with a better system. I've
read one opinion that much of the task of modern taxonomists is just trying
to untangle the mess left them by earlier taxonomists. That is certainly
part of the task, but not all of it. -Doug
Wallace, C. C. 1999. Staghorn corals of the world, A revision of the genus
Acropora. CSIRO Publishing, Australia.
Veron, J. E. N. 2000. Corals of the World. AIMS, Australia. 3 volumes.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Keven Reed" [2]<reedkc at comcast.net>
To: "shashank Keshavmurthy" [3]<iamshanky15 at yahoo.com>;
[4]<coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov>
Sent: Tuesday, August 19, 2008 10:22 AM
Subject: Re: [Coral-List] Bleaching Report
Thanks, Shashank.
On a taxonomic sidebar, however, isn't Acropora formosa (Dana, 1846) now A.
muricata?
I realize all our old texts and even fairly new field guides use "A.
formosa", but I believe the precedent goes to Rumphius who described the
coral when he lived on Ambon in Indonesia from 1660-1670 (he thought the
animals were plants??)
Looking forward to an update, correction to my impression above about
current Acroporid nomenclature. Here's a recent pub' (2008) for genetic
work on A. muricata if anyone's interested:
[5]http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18322634
Regards,
Keven
Keven Reed
Orange Park, Florida
_______________________________________________
Coral-List mailing list
[6]Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
[7]http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
References
1. mailto:paulay at flmnh.ufl.edu
2. mailto:reedkc at comcast.net
3. mailto:iamshanky15 at yahoo.com
4. mailto:coral-list at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
5. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18322634
6. mailto:Coral-List at coral.aoml.noaa.gov
7. http://coral.aoml.noaa.gov/mailman/listinfo/coral-list
More information about the Coral-List
mailing list