Taxonomic Swap 111165 (Borrador)

Añadido por loarie el 27 de mayo de 2022
Reemplazado con


Please give the reference for this!!

@beetledude - they are messing up again! - despite that fact that we have G. scutellatus in the synonyms as a misapplied name!

Publicado por tonyrebelo hace 6 días (Marca)


@beetledude Do you have a paper to send the curators to lay this to bed for once and for all.?

Unless the curators have another reference showing otherwise. But then they should please provide the source to justify this swap.

Publicado por tonyrebelo hace 6 días (Marca)

Thank you for summon(s)ing me, @tonyrebelo. This matter is dispiriting.

@loarie:       Scott, please withhold the commitment of this taxon swap until I've stated the case of|for this weevil in Africa. Tony asked whether I have a paper to "send" to curators. Ja well, I don't have money for postage, but I can certainly provide links to the papers and books in which this placeholder name has become established in anticipation of the species being named and described -- which will not be soon at all.

Please allow me until the coming weekend. I have a tough workload, and in four minutes' time the lunch break is over.

Thank you indeed,

Publicado por beetledude hace 6 días (Marca)

And so I found looking at these weevils more interesting than returning from lunch. Which led me to discover this comment by @sdjbrown, international weevil expert. He added his opinion here:

Cheers again,

Publicado por beetledude hace 6 días (Marca)

"Scott, please withhold the commitment of this taxon swap "

No withholding: this must be cancelled!!!

Publicado por tonyrebelo hace 6 días (Marca)

Unfortunately, the name Gonipterus scutellatus has been misapplied over many decades to multiple different Gonipterus species, both outside and within Australia. The work by Mapondera et al (2012) started to sort out the issues, but unfortunately work hasn't progressed much beyond it in the past decade. Regrettably, the authors of that paper didn't describe any of the five undescribed Gonipterus species that they found in that work. One of those (which Mapondera et al designated as "species 2") is the one from South Africa.

Mapondera et al considered that the true G. scutellatus is restricted to Tasmania, and can only really be safely identified using genitalia characters or DNA sequences. My IDs of overseas Gonipterus (especially G. platensis) has been largely based on geography, though I think (hope?) that I can see some characters to differentiate between the three invasive species. The situation in Australia is different, with a myriad of poorly-defined and poorly-known species found throughout the country. I've been reluctant to identify many of those to species, instead leaving them as they are. I expect that most of the observations identified as G. scutellatus are misidentifications.

All the above is just a long way of saying what I said much more succinctly (admirably so, if I may say myself!) in the identification linked to by Riaan. This is an undesirable situation, but this taxon swap would only make it even less comfortable than it already is.

Mapondera TS, Burgess T, Matsuki M, Oberprieler RG. 2012. Identification and molecular phylogenetics of the cryptic species of the Gonipterus scutellatus complex (Coleoptera: Curculionidae: Gonipterini). Australian Journal of Entomology 51: 175-188.

Publicado por sdjbrown hace 6 días (Marca)

Thanks Sam.

Publicado por tonyrebelo hace 6 días (Marca)

Agregar un comentario

Acceder o Crear una cuenta para agregar comentarios.