lewis20126
Well-known member
I don't see them (any sp nov) as under review on the BTWG spreadsheet - perhaps they'll go through as a side project. I don't imagine Amazonian sub-oscines are (yet) high on the list of priorities?
cheers, alan
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Undescribed (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Daniel Philippe
- Start date
I don't see them (any sp nov) as under review on the BTWG spreadsheet - perhaps they'll go through as a side project. I don't imagine Amazonian sub-oscines are (yet) high on the list of priorities?
cheers, alan
lewis20126
Well-known member
thomasdonegan
Former amateur ornithologist
Scoop: one of the new species seems to be an Epinecrophylla antwren, if you look at the sample pages (which, if someone wants to use a magnifying glass and special reading software, may create an interesting novel usage of an almost unreadable nomen nudum):
http://www.lynxeds.com/hbw/special-..._content=samples&utm_campaign=mailing_special
http://www.lynxeds.com/hbw/special-..._content=samples&utm_campaign=mailing_special
Last edited:
lewis20126
Well-known member
Hmmm, can't see the sample pages enlarged in IE, with pop-up blocker enabled; any ideas anyone? I'll use Chrome later.
cheers, alan
Mysticete
Well-known member
I think the issue is that a lot of his "papers" only exist as webpages. My understanding is that does not count as a valid publication unless it has been indexed in hardcopy form somewhere. Otherwise, anyone in this thread could create a webpage and start producing names. Granted this is less a problem in birds, where very few critters DON'T have some name, but would be a problem with fossils,inverts, etc.
lewis20126
Well-known member
The sonograms are from the E. haematonota complex, locations various, but I don't see the new names (if any)!
cheers, alan
thyoloalethe
Well-known member
Looks something like "demei", although I'm sure that's not it, unless anyone knows of someone named Deme
I was always hoping HBW would include a scientific description of a new species in one of their volumes; looks like my wish has been granted 12 times over (at least)! 2013 looks set to become the year with the most valid species descriptions since the 1930's.
If the total number of newbies is still in the peer review stage, I'm somewhat skeptical of the May publication date...
Cheers,
Liam
McMadd
You should see the other bloke...
Mine are in storage but fairly certain an earlier volume already did this?
Over to Mr K...
McM
Richard Klim
-------------------------
John Fitzpatrick described the new tribe Contopini in HBW 9 (2004). :smoke:
Millionaire-ess
Member
Born Digital, Born Free? Taxonomic publishing comes of the digital age
http://iczn.org/content/iczn-amendment-electronic-publication
PRESS RELEASE
Embargoed: 7:00 GMT Tuesday 4 September 2012
Born Digital, Born Free? Taxonomic publishing comes of the digital age
International body responsible for animal scientific names passes landmark amendment legitimising electronic publication for the first time
Following four years of highly charged debate, the rules for publication of scientific names of animals have been changed to allow electronic publications to meet the requirements of the stringent International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. In a landmark decision, the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN) has passed an amendment to its rules that will accept an electronic-only publication as
‘legitimate’ if it meets criteria of archiving and the publication is registered on the ICZN’s official online registry, ZooBank.
“For the past 250 years the simple, consistent system proposed by Linnaeus in his Systema Naturae in 1758 has allowed worldwide communication about animals. Keeping names sensible and stable is a key task for our ability to understand and communicate about the living world. The change in ICZN publication rules is intended to speed the process of publishing biodiversity information, to improve access to this information, and to help reduce the ‘taxonomic impediment’ that hinders our cataloguing of the living world. This really is an important development for the ICZN, and parallels a similar, though less far-reaching, decision in botany. The expectation is that this has modernised and further democratised taxonomy, though some scientists see the move as a risky experiment in unmooring a previously well-anchored system of linking publications, names and taxonomic concepts. Whether electronic archiving stands the test of time, as have paper-based libraries, remains a concern for some scientists.” said Dr Ellinor Michel, Executive Secretary of ICZN.
The decision has not been without controversy because the rules of the ICZN are considered, and intended, to be among the most rigorous for scientific publication. The task of keeping correct information on animal names is immense and critical, as almost all information on the living world is linked through names. Animals comprise the vast majority of the world’s recognised living species and currently stands at around 1.9 million, growing at a rate of about 20,000/year. For each of these groups there are as many as 2–10 legitimately published names due to past debate and poor information exchange. Estimates of the total of living animal biodiversity are 4–20 times this number (8–50 million species), with fossils adding many more. When the task of cataloguing biodiversity approaches completion, this vast amount of information will be linked through names.
The new decision means that the difficulty in naming some species such as the case of Darwinius masillae can be avoided. In 2009 a fossil discovery was announced that was supposed to profoundly change our views on human evolution. The 47 million year old fossil nicknamed ‘Ida’, was published in the electronic journal PLoS One. The publishers had an 11th hour realisation that this publication would not be legitimate under ICZN rules. The name could even have been scooped by an unscrupulous author. A ‘special paper copy’ of the journal had to be published, which would not be needed under the new rules.
“ZooBank is a major step towards completing the Linnaean enterprise, which is essential for mapping Earth's still poorly known fauna. With the firm foundation of an authority on scientific names, the rest of biology will be immensely strengthened, and humanity correspondingly benefited" commented Professor Edward O. Wilson, a leading authority on biodiversity.
Georgina Mace OBE and Professor of Biodiversity and Ecosystems Univ. College London said "This is a hugely significant step for animal conservation. With ZooBank in place we will all have access to a single reference list of animal names, and so discussions about priority species and habitats can proceed with greater clarity and speed."
The ICZN ruling is explicit that while the publication can exist in an electronic-only format, it must still be published through a recognised scientific journal. Purely web options such as blog posts, forums, Wikimedia, Wikipedia, Scratchpads and other potentially ephemeral, unarchived web-only sources still do not qualify as legitimate publications under the new ICZN rules.
“The new rules will open the door to electronic publication and facilitate a truly web-based taxonomy. The next few years will be interesting times for scientific publishing as the debate resolves between expediency and durability.” said Dr Michel.
Notes to editors
The official amendment and brief discussion are available from:
Zootaxa : http://www.mapress.com/zootaxa/list/2012/3450.html
Zookeys: http://www.pensoft.net/journals/zookeys/article/3944/
http://iczn.org/content/iczn-amendment-electronic-publication
PRESS RELEASE
Embargoed: 7:00 GMT Tuesday 4 September 2012
Born Digital, Born Free? Taxonomic publishing comes of the digital age
International body responsible for animal scientific names passes landmark amendment legitimising electronic publication for the first time
Following four years of highly charged debate, the rules for publication of scientific names of animals have been changed to allow electronic publications to meet the requirements of the stringent International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. In a landmark decision, the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN) has passed an amendment to its rules that will accept an electronic-only publication as
‘legitimate’ if it meets criteria of archiving and the publication is registered on the ICZN’s official online registry, ZooBank.
“For the past 250 years the simple, consistent system proposed by Linnaeus in his Systema Naturae in 1758 has allowed worldwide communication about animals. Keeping names sensible and stable is a key task for our ability to understand and communicate about the living world. The change in ICZN publication rules is intended to speed the process of publishing biodiversity information, to improve access to this information, and to help reduce the ‘taxonomic impediment’ that hinders our cataloguing of the living world. This really is an important development for the ICZN, and parallels a similar, though less far-reaching, decision in botany. The expectation is that this has modernised and further democratised taxonomy, though some scientists see the move as a risky experiment in unmooring a previously well-anchored system of linking publications, names and taxonomic concepts. Whether electronic archiving stands the test of time, as have paper-based libraries, remains a concern for some scientists.” said Dr Ellinor Michel, Executive Secretary of ICZN.
The decision has not been without controversy because the rules of the ICZN are considered, and intended, to be among the most rigorous for scientific publication. The task of keeping correct information on animal names is immense and critical, as almost all information on the living world is linked through names. Animals comprise the vast majority of the world’s recognised living species and currently stands at around 1.9 million, growing at a rate of about 20,000/year. For each of these groups there are as many as 2–10 legitimately published names due to past debate and poor information exchange. Estimates of the total of living animal biodiversity are 4–20 times this number (8–50 million species), with fossils adding many more. When the task of cataloguing biodiversity approaches completion, this vast amount of information will be linked through names.
The new decision means that the difficulty in naming some species such as the case of Darwinius masillae can be avoided. In 2009 a fossil discovery was announced that was supposed to profoundly change our views on human evolution. The 47 million year old fossil nicknamed ‘Ida’, was published in the electronic journal PLoS One. The publishers had an 11th hour realisation that this publication would not be legitimate under ICZN rules. The name could even have been scooped by an unscrupulous author. A ‘special paper copy’ of the journal had to be published, which would not be needed under the new rules.
“ZooBank is a major step towards completing the Linnaean enterprise, which is essential for mapping Earth's still poorly known fauna. With the firm foundation of an authority on scientific names, the rest of biology will be immensely strengthened, and humanity correspondingly benefited" commented Professor Edward O. Wilson, a leading authority on biodiversity.
Georgina Mace OBE and Professor of Biodiversity and Ecosystems Univ. College London said "This is a hugely significant step for animal conservation. With ZooBank in place we will all have access to a single reference list of animal names, and so discussions about priority species and habitats can proceed with greater clarity and speed."
The ICZN ruling is explicit that while the publication can exist in an electronic-only format, it must still be published through a recognised scientific journal. Purely web options such as blog posts, forums, Wikimedia, Wikipedia, Scratchpads and other potentially ephemeral, unarchived web-only sources still do not qualify as legitimate publications under the new ICZN rules.
“The new rules will open the door to electronic publication and facilitate a truly web-based taxonomy. The next few years will be interesting times for scientific publishing as the debate resolves between expediency and durability.” said Dr Michel.
Notes to editors
The official amendment and brief discussion are available from:
Zootaxa : http://www.mapress.com/zootaxa/list/2012/3450.html
Zookeys: http://www.pensoft.net/journals/zookeys/article/3944/
Millionaire-ess
Member
New owl created for menopausal craft enthusiasts
Some owl levity:
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/...or-menopausal-craft-enthusiasts-2013021559917
Some owl levity:
http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/...or-menopausal-craft-enthusiasts-2013021559917
Millionaire-ess
Member
Some reasonably recent, local Northern Territory news on HOSER, quite bizarre really. But often he is ahead of the game, splitting island forms that probably should be split - not this case though:
http://www.ntnews.com.au/article/2012/07/26/312001_ntnews.html
http://www.ntnews.com.au/article/2012/07/26/312001_ntnews.html
On Hoser's names:
My understanding is that a recent paper was published by some australian herpers who basically labeled all his names as invalid, given that they were not published via a real peer-reviewed journal. So I mean, his taxonomy has a lot worse problems than naming stuff after himself
If being ahead means naming as many isolated populations as possible and then hope some of the names stick when others do the hard science and prove they really are separate species, then yes ahead of the game. That is why his A.wellsi is used and the rest of his death adder names aren't....... yet. Most scientists do it the other way around: Prove it is a new....... then name it
Melanie
Well-known member
Seems that the scientists have lost their interest in that bird. Ten years research work and still no results. That is strange.
Last edited:
Markus Lagerqvist
Well-known member
And still, that's nothing compared to the "Sulawesi Flycatcher" Ben King found in 1997; 16 years and still not described! Seems like thing are moving slow in Sulawesi...:-C
Daniel Philippe
Well-known member
Well ! My list of undescribed taxa amounts to 250: see attached. I guess some have been elucidated.
Comments welcome B
Comments welcome B
Richard Klim
-------------------------
Melanie
Well-known member
Well, maybe birdwatching on Sulawesi is not so easy. I still miss a photograph of a living Snoring rail.
Last edited:
Daniel Philippe
Well-known member
But should we trust a list posted on April 1st...?
I knew somebody would say that (you ?), but it is an answer (somehow) to the previous posts and all entries in the list can be checked. o
James Lowther
Well-known member
Well ! My list of undescribed taxa amounts to 250: see attached. I guess some have been elucidated.
Comments welcome B
Hi Daniel,
Chilean Warbling Doradito = Ticking Doradito has been split by SACC
http://www.museum.lsu.edu/~Remsen/SACCprop420.html
not sure if it counts as fully described though?
cheers,
James
Similar threads
