>>The ICZN is simply a set of rules governing the correct publication of names and various related matters. It does not decide between alternative classifications.

Yes I agree with this, since the ICZN is not setup to decide whether any single taxonomic proposal has scientific merit or not.

>>If you want to know if you should call a corn snake "Pantherophis guttatus" or "Elaphe guttata", that's a question the ICZN does not answer. You have two basic choices in answering it: 1) "go with the flow" and use whichever name is typically used by the people you associate with or is advocated by a particular herpetological society; 2) read the publications and make up your own mind.

I also agree with this.

>>Following option "2", my own opinion is that "Pantherophis" is the correct genus for the various U.S. critters recently placed in Elaphe (except Senticolis triaspis, Bogertophis subocularis, and Bogertophis rosaliae). This opinion seems to be shared by most professional herpetologists as well, although I'm not sure how widespread it is in the hobbyist community.

Since you apparently claimed to have read this paper, it is unfortunate that you did not tell us why Utiger et al. is correct in resurrecting Pantherophis. As to whether other herpetologists think it is a valid proposal, that becomes option "1". Personally I oppose the proposal because Utiger et al. did not even attempt to define each genus morphologically. If someone were to find a new species of ratsnake somewhere in China, or perhaps the Balkans, there is no way to figure out which of Utigers dozen or so genera this new species rightfully belong. A new phylogenetic analysis would need to be performed. Depending on the results of the new analysis, there can be wholesale changes to Utiger's taxonomy. We may need to disqualify some of their genera, rearrange the others and name new genera. Taxonomy based on a religious intolerance of paraphyletic taxa is not the best way to classify organisms.

[ Reply To This Message ] [ Subscribe to this Thread ] [ Hide Replies ]