Lycopodiaceae name changes
Kia ora,
You might have noticed changes in iNaturalist to the scientific names of many of the species of Lycopodiaceae in New Zealand. (NZPCN has also adopted these changes.)
For what it is worth, I don't agree with these changes as it is against the principle of minimising taxonomic change while having a classification that recognises only monophyletic groups. The broader genera, as previously circumscribed, were monophyletic, so no change was needed, in my opinion. Maintaining the previous circumscriptions seems in the best interests of general users (and therefore best for the field of taxonomy).
However, others don't ascribe to the principle of minimising change, which is unfortunate for general users who are disrupted unnecessarily. I asked the person who made the changes in iNaturalist why they did it. If you'd like to know more, the conversation is here:
https://inaturalist.nz/taxon_changes/105434
Kind regards, Leon
Tagging the major observers and identifiers of Lycopodiaceae in New Zealand, in case you're interested:
@john_barkla, @brucedc, @naturewatchwidow, @rempson, @david_lyttle, @lloyd_esler, @mark_smale, @dave_holland, @johnvandenhoeven, @chrise, @bylsand, @johnb-nz, @peter_sweetapple, @meurkc, @rowan_hindmarsh_walls, @jacqui-nz, @fergus, @melissa_hutchison
Comentarios
Thanks Leon, I fully support your views.
Regards
Chris
Hi Leon, very much concur with your view. As a general user , constant taxonomic name changes are not particularly helpful and are quite irritating. The people I interact with ie students, conservation workers, volunteers, gardening public find it even less helpful.
🙄 damn taxonomists!
Añade un comentario