Results 1 to 10 of 10
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    550
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default Is Strophurus intermedius burrelli accepted as valid?


    LOG IN TO CLOSE THIS AD   


    Hi

    I just stumbled upon the formal describtion of a new subspecies of Strophurus intermedius by Raymond Hoser.

    Raymond is as many of you know, known for describing new species, genera and subspecies based on little evidence, and mostly on assumptions - and this seems to be the case here as well.

    Strophurus intermedius burrelli is differentiated from the nominat form by the following characters.

    "1. Strophurus intermedius burrelli subsp. nov. is characterized by darker, more brown than orange spines on the rear body and tail than is seen in S. intermedius intermedius. The easiest way to see this difference is by comparing typical specimens of each subspecies.

    2. The two forms can also be separated by distribution.

    3. Strophurus intermedius burrelli subsp. nov. is also separated from S. intermedius intermedius in terms of biology and habits.

    4. Strophurus intermedius burrelli subsp. nov. is more inclined to open it's mouth and make a sound than is S. intermedius intermedius. It is also more likely to squirt fluids from it's tail than is seen in most S. intermedius intermedius.

    5. While S. intermedius intermedius has a preference for resting by day under bark, in upright hollow logs or occasionally under rocks, Strophurus intermedius burrelli subsp. nov. instead prefers to hide in vegetation."

    Maybe i'm just an old conservative fool, but i see nothing in these differentiations that make it possible for anybody to differentiate the subspecies clearly on morphological grounds.

    Raymond has been claimed for not using present standards of describtions, which would also mean taking DNA into consideration. He does this in his new article by writing this

    "Notwithstanding this, it is evident that DNA properties between the two subspecies would differ and that specimens of both subspecies could be separated from one another by comparative DNA analysis"

    Which must be regarded as of no relevans.

    Again it seems that Raymond has decided to describe a species, mostly to get his name on animals if they through future studies should be shown to differentiate from nominat intermedius - but which he do not provide any clear evidence for.

    http://www.smuggled.com/DipInt1.htm
    Kind regards

    Jan Grathwohl

    Keeping:

    Geckos: Eublepharis macularius, Oedura castelnaui, Oedura monilis, Rhacodactylus ciliatus

    Other Reptiles: Hemisphaeriodon gerrardi, Pantherophis guttatus, Philodryas baroni, Sternotherus odoratus

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    San Jose, CA
    Posts
    245
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Jan,

    I don't see a description on the web page and without a description I pretty sure it can't be a new species, no matter what the author thinks. Look like a naked name (n.n.) to me.

    Best,

    Chuck
    Charles Powell, II
    powell2@sbcglobal.net

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    550
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hi Chuck

    The describtion is basically what i have already listed above

    Technically this hold for a valid describtion unfortunately - and Raymonds way of doing things has untill now mainly been a problem to snake herpetologist, but it seems he now also want to describe geckos unfortunately.
    Kind regards

    Jan Grathwohl

    Keeping:

    Geckos: Eublepharis macularius, Oedura castelnaui, Oedura monilis, Rhacodactylus ciliatus

    Other Reptiles: Hemisphaeriodon gerrardi, Pantherophis guttatus, Philodryas baroni, Sternotherus odoratus

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    sunshine Coast , QLD, Australia
    Posts
    730
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I certainly agree that his "burrelli" is probably a distinct subspecies but as usual Lord Ray has gone about it via all the wrong channels.
    Dr Danny Brown
    Private Breeder of Australian Lizards and Birds
    Specialising in Geckoes/pygopods/skinks and Finches/softbills/waterfowl.

    "Just one more gecko, just one more gecko......"

    http://www.geckodan.com/

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    sunshine Coast , QLD, Australia
    Posts
    730
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    The most distiguishing feature of"burrelli" seems to be the one feature he overlooked, the wavy bands of blunt brown spines that should position this species as assimilis if not for mouth colour.

    Here is one of my "burreli"


    Here is another undescribed intermedius form from Alice Spring (500km+ outside of accepted intermedius range)
    Dr Danny Brown
    Private Breeder of Australian Lizards and Birds
    Specialising in Geckoes/pygopods/skinks and Finches/softbills/waterfowl.

    "Just one more gecko, just one more gecko......"

    http://www.geckodan.com/

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Denmark
    Posts
    550
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    Hi Danny

    Very interesting information

    Then we just have to hope that somebody will clean up the mess after Mr. Hoser and make a descent describtion of the two forms in a peer-reviewed journal based on facts and not just assumptions.
    Kind regards

    Jan Grathwohl

    Keeping:

    Geckos: Eublepharis macularius, Oedura castelnaui, Oedura monilis, Rhacodactylus ciliatus

    Other Reptiles: Hemisphaeriodon gerrardi, Pantherophis guttatus, Philodryas baroni, Sternotherus odoratus

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    411
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I think the latin naming should stop at the "species"' level.
    - Joe Farah

    Breeding Phelsuma klemmeri and Phelsuma m. grandis

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    sunshine Coast , QLD, Australia
    Posts
    730
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    May I ask, Why??
    Dr Danny Brown
    Private Breeder of Australian Lizards and Birds
    Specialising in Geckoes/pygopods/skinks and Finches/softbills/waterfowl.

    "Just one more gecko, just one more gecko......"

    http://www.geckodan.com/

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Orange County, CA
    Posts
    130
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default

    I know this is a really old thread, but does anyone have more information on this? Is anyone outside of Australia still keeping this form of intermedius?

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    125
    Post Thanks / Like
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)
    Tagged
    0 Thread(s)

    Default


    LOG IN TO CLOSE THIS AD   


    The answer to Jan’s question is…
    Yes, Strophurus intermedius burrelli is a VALID trinomial

    For a name-bearing type (species or subspecies) to be valid it must follow the rules of the Code (ICZN), which are, among others:
    1.it must contain a description, definition or diagnosis
    2.it must have a type specimen indicated.
    3. it must be published for permanent scientific record, must be obtainable to the public, it must be possible to reproduce numerous identical copies.
    (as of 2012 the Commission allows digital copies, with certain caveats)

    The last rule might be questioned. Is the Journal of the Herpetological Society of Queensland published according the rules? Dr. Dan should be able to answer that definitively (i.e., it that journal in any library in Queensland)
    Hoser may be crazy, but he is very knowledgeable. That is the problem as many see it; he follows all the rules of the Code.

    For a subspecies to be accepted is more a matter of herpetological consensus: It this variation limited geographically limited? Dr. Dan seems to think it is.
    Of course, that is a whole school of thought that thinks subspecies are nonsense. Especially the ‘lab rats’ – molecular taxonomists

    If a species or subspecies does not in time become accepted by the larger herpetological community, it is relegated to synonymy. But it does not become invalid. Many a taxon has been resurrected from synonymy later on.

    The big problem with Hoser (and others) is that they see a loophole in the Code. There are very few rules on naming genera. So, genera are very subjective, leading to what has been termed a “morbid thirst for naming new genera.” (Kaiser et al., 2013)
    Likes manapiare, SpinyTailz liked this post

Similar Threads

  1. Strophurus intermedius burrelli
    By Tom Martensson in forum CLASSIFIEDS (Buy/Sell/Trade)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-27-2007, 04:44 PM
  2. 1.0 Strophurus intermedius
    By hople in forum CLASSIFIEDS (Buy/Sell/Trade)
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 09-07-2006, 07:14 AM
  3. strophurus intermedius
    By nepta in forum Aussie geckos | Diplodactylus, Strophurus, Saltuaris, Phyllurus, Oedura,
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 05-12-2006, 05:58 AM
  4. New Strophurus Intermedius
    By Sarah in forum Aussie geckos | Diplodactylus, Strophurus, Saltuaris, Phyllurus, Oedura,
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 01-03-2006, 02:30 AM
  5. Strophurus intermedius
    By Tom Martensson in forum Aussie geckos | Diplodactylus, Strophurus, Saltuaris, Phyllurus, Oedura,
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 12-16-2005, 05:55 PM

User Tag List

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •