Reptile & Amphibian Forums

One of the posts mentioned the problem was that science did not have the ability to accurately name them at this time. I believe, that nailed it square on the head.

Please do not get all in an uproar. As the rules are precieved in everchanging ways, with all the new taxonomist(more graduate every year) As they discover and rediscover the errors of the exsisting names, they change them.

But the epiphany is, at this time, there is a new and more accurate method being worked on, thats DNA. At this time, its not very good, as I have been told, each researcher uses a slighly different gene or gene type(some such nonsense) Its just not consistant. So as we sit in limbo, waiting for these methods to be perfected, there is lots of confusion and unrest.

Soon, with the improvement of DNA, as a tool, there will be many many many more species, and a clear picture of who is related to whom. My bet is, most of these local types, will be named. Hopefully that will last the rest of my lifetime.

Unfortunately, from the conversations I have had, they will be named full species. I wish, they would be subspecies or races. Maybe it will be reconsidered before then.

A thought, when I first became involved in the varanid world, I was told that Bohme, was the taxonomic god. He was doing great work. So I did some looking, and what I found was disturbing. I saw that he was naming lots of new species. But, I felt he was using a very poor approach. He had alined himself, with commerial collectors, and picked up(nice term) the first of many new monitors. The problem was, he did not do any actual research. Many of these newly named monitors, were named and discribed, without any real information, only heresay from the collectors. It indeed proved out, that the localities were not accurate. I was under the impression, with scientific nomenclature, the evidence must be verified, and local is a key component in naming a species. In other words, no one actually looked to see if the information was right. That sirs and sirsettes, is poor taxonomy.

Oh, let me add a similiar occurance. The problems I have with the MS and librarian, are almost exactly the same. As progress has allowed us to breed monitors successfully and commonly, just check our site, a week of all kinds of events, of many species(i think I am proud) The MS and librarian, are still clinging to the old ways, when no one had to have results. No one had to test theories on husbandry. But again, times have changed and its all about changing times. Thanks for the epiphany. FR

When I was in college, I studied Marine Biology. I picked this as my major because I loved the sea and I love animals of all types. Studying them, viewing them in their natural state, understanding their unique biology and life cycles all intrigued me to no end. I had been around the outdoors and animals all my life, so it just made sense. Well, fast forward three years, I dropped the major. Why? I was basically failing out. I had a "c" average, but this was nowhere near high enough to get into any decent grad school.

("So what Mike, we are talking about monitor toxonomy here."

Well, in a sense, the challenges with toxonomy are exactly the type of issues I had that motivated me to move on. Science isn't always an exact science. Many times, the further you look into an area of science, the more questions arise. And fewer become answered.

We as a community of reptile keepers CAN NOT blame scientists for making mistakes and then debating over the best way to correct those mistakes. Technology, system understanding, techniques, even "the rules" of engagement all change. As they change, new problems and discoveries challenge established understanding. But a MAJOR part of science is for new "facts" to withstand the test of time before we further accept marginal data and make drastic changes based on this data.

With Toxonomy, DNA will certainly change the field dramatically. But the more important issue will remain to be, what level of diversity is needed to qualify a new species, sub-species or regional variant. In these questions, DNA will provide the data to a greater level of detail, but not the criteria for change. Even with DNA, this issue will still be around.

OK, who the heck are you? Lets see, mtbiker=mountain biker, hmmmmm hey I do that. Marine biology, hmmmmmmmmm I took that too. A side interest in varanids, hmmmmmmmmm me too. ARE U ME? hahahahahahahahahahaha

Sorry, didn't mean to offend you.

I think I agree with direction your going.

Which is the basis of my war with our particular science fellas(They call themselves that) I call them that, as a parody(satirical), as I do not believe in this case, they are using good science. To offer methods or conclusions without result, proof, support, substandiation, is not good science. Our mister sciences, in a sense are a fish out of water(marine biology) with captive husbandry.

I have no arguement with science, just with these two and their application here. Understand, nowhere else, just here. My main question was and is, why are they here?

On a side note, varanids(the production of) has allowed me to dive the seas, from the bahamas, thru the St. islands, thru the antillies, to the coast of venezuela. Boths sides of central america, hawaii, polynesia, and both sides of Australia. Next is Somoa. Thanks FR

Hi,
I could not agree with you more on ALL of the things you wrote. Thank you. I too was a Marine Biology major, with animal behavior minor, and took every course at the numerous colleges, universities all around I could find - I met Jacques Y'ves Cousteau and both his sons twice, and seen alot of marine fauna and flora (did the sea weed lesson confuse you too? If it is brown, it can be red, not all greens are green, but browns etc..)...it is hard to get jobs in biology, and epsecially marine biology w/out Ph.D. or two of them!

As we know, 'Science' is not in stasis, it just appears that way to many who do not understand how it works...or maybe just impatient. If the latter is true, then they are welcome to get their hands dirty and try to change things! Klauber was a good example of a man w/tremendous passion and patience and changed rattlesnake biology even today! Nobody said you have to have a degree to do 'science', just the passion for it and that can take you far and wide...

Thanx, Cheers,
mbayless

Why do you think they have a problem with naming them subspecies or races? Didn't that used to be a common thing what made it change I wonder?

I too would like to see subspecies or races being used.

I tried to address that below in the long list of discussion but I got no place.

My field partner has explained it to me(he graduated under Dixon, at texas a&m, masters) but I forget, hahahahahahahahahhaha

The history of taxonomy, has been lumping and splitting, over and over again. Its also a history of different schools of thought, cladist vs. taxonomist, etc.

But as I mentioned below, its a battle amoung and for the scientists. Not about the utility of the names. You see, there are very few actual new animals, so the effort is spend, farting with eachother, naming and renaming, the exsisting ones.

Its not abnormal for taxo people to lose sight, with who they are naming the animals for. I would imagine, they should read their "mission statement" each and every mourning. I also think, Sam and Mark should do that.

I am sure you are keen on your mission, as am I. My mission is to go out each and everyday and enjoy the progress our monitors and other reptiles are making. Its surely not to follow dogma, that does not effect me or my charges.

My mission here on this forum is to allow others to see our success(whatever that is), so they have goals to work to(if they choose). The fighting is purely for fun and daily entertainment, no real goal. It does prompt me to show more. Thanks FR

Advancements in DNA recognition will be very useful in helping taxonomists identify which animals are related to which animals.

However, I expect the name changing to continue ad infinitum. First we will see one scientist change a bunch of names, lumping and splitting like scientists before him and then, some more advancements in DNA technology will require more lumping and splitting.

It will just end up being more of the same.

We may actually make advancements in the science of which animals are related, but we will never reach a point where the animal's names remain the same for any extended period of time.

Yet, a "Caramel" ball python will always be a Caramel ball python.

I did mention, they have to settle on a consistant approach, and you are right, that most likely will not happen. Reason, poor or no guidance. They really need a boss to fire the ones who get out of line. They can get the Donald, "your fired"

So you are right. what you said is most likely what will happen. Cheers FR

You didn't make it to Anahiem and I have been trying to email you and call you for a week.

Read your email at the goannaranch email address!

fr,
ON THE POINT YOU MADE BELOW, I AGREE WITH YOU ABSOLUTELY - BUT IN TAXON-WORLD, YOU NAME FIRST OR YOU'RE FORGOTTEN - IT DOES NOT MAKE FOR GOOD SCIENCE OR OF (Some of) THE SCIENTIST WHO DO THAT....YOU'RE NOT THE FIRST TO RAISE AN EYE-BROW TO THIS!

mbayless

A thought, when I first became involved in the varanid world, I was told that Bohme, was the taxonomic god. He was doing great work. So I did some looking, and what I found was disturbing. I saw that he was naming lots of new species. But, I felt he was using a very poor approach. He had alined himself, with commerial collectors, and picked up(nice term) the first of many new monitors. The problem was, he did not do any actual research. Many of these newly named monitors, were named and discribed, without any real information, only heresay from the collectors. It indeed proved out, that the localities were not accurate. I was under the impression, with scientific nomenclature, the evidence must be verified, and local is a key component in naming a species. In other words, no one actually looked to see if the information was right. That sirs and sirsettes, is poor taxonomy.

This thread has been moved from the Monitors forum.
-----
_____

PHWyvern