Posted by:
richardwells
at Sat Nov 20 03:38:22 2004 [ Report Abuse ] [ Email Message ] [ Show All Posts by richardwells ]
Hi Scott,
Just a few little corrections to your comments. Firstly, Acanthophis rugosus was not a Wells and Wellington name. It was actually first described by that true gentleman of herpetology the late Arthur Loveridge - as Acanthophis antarcicus rugosus - in the Memoirs of the Museum of Comparative Zoology (Harvard), 101: p. 392. We have however, always regarded it as a valid species in its own right from the island of New Guinea. I would also respectfully like to suggest that anyone who seriously entertains the idea that rugosus is conspecific with Acanthophis hawkei should apply for a white cane and a guide dog as soon as possible.
Secondly, the name Cannia was not described by Gray ! It was in fact described by that pair of imbeciles Wells and Wellington in 1984 (see the Synopsis). Not being picky...just keeping you on your toes Scott.
Best Regards from
Richard Wells
[ Reply To This Message ] [ Subscribe to this Thread ] [ Show Entire Thread ]
|
