[Zoobank-list] zoobank prototype

Geoff Read g.read at niwa.co.nz
Thu Sep 14 04:14:42 BST 2006


Adorian Ardelean wrote:
>     I would argue that a taxonomist NEEDS those names that are
>     passionately called here "rubbish names."  Otherwise you may discard
>     important information.

I appreciate the point of view, but am unconvinced they are directly a 
taxonomist's problem (my prime point). I'm sure they can be 
auto-filtered into categories by the ever-more clever computer 
techniques of David Patterson and others (perhaps yourself). The horror 
comes if taxonomists are then expected to work through and validate and 
apportion this low grade stuff (especially 'stuff' not arising in 
taxonomic works), just to have a database of names that works.

>     4. How many variants of specific epithets can we find for names
>     derived from the *New Zealand* name? In the synonym list of a single
>     species!

One of my least favourites is 'novaezelandiae' where there is a strong 
inclination to put in the middle missing 'a' or an extra 'e' or take an 
'e' out. Yes, there are many such variants in the original epithets.

Back to ZooBank. It was said that "... we are developing a coordinated 
system by which authoritative taxonomic databases can be compared with 
the data presently in ZooBank." Now we know that Zoological Record data 
entry analyses each paper and extracts and tags the taxonomically 
significant categories of new taxa, new combinations, new synonyms, plus 
lesser changes. Pretty much what ZooBank wants to display. No need for 
anyone to repeat that one would think — but perhaps this information is 
commercially too valuable and not released to ZooBank.

I think it would be helpful to know if the data available from Thompson 
for ZooBank to use (now or in the future) is or isn't going to be 
provided categorised more usefully than that on display at present. Or 
if that is as yet undecided.

Geoff
-- 
   Geoff Read <g.read at niwa.co.nz>
    http://www.annelida.net/


-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.



More information about the Zoobank-list mailing list