Species complexes

Examples of where species complexes would be useful.

Tomopterna cryptotis complex
Field guide says: "morphologically indistinguishable from (each other), but chromosome number and call differ." - about 60% of range overlaps, so some IDs can be based on distribution.
Tomopterna cryptotis 36 (no range map on iNat)
Tomopterna tandyi 21
IDs only to genus level (8 spp s Afr): 21 (out of 161: = 13%) - many of the notes refer to a "T. cryptotis, T. krugerensis, T. tandyi." issue - ID of krugerensis requires pictures of hand underside.

Amietia fuscigula complex
IDs only to genus level (7 spp s Afr): 36 (out of 692: = 5%)
Amietia fuscigula 472
Amietia poyntoni 13 (no range map on iNat; not in 2009 field guide)

Amietia angolensis complex
Amietia drakensbergensis was indistinghishable except by call, but this got sunk into Amietia delalandii (A. d.: no range map on iNat, not in 2009 field guide - 124 observations)
Taxonomic Notes from AmphibiaWeb (sourced IUCN Red List):
"(Amietia delalandii) was resurrected from synonymy with Amietia angolensis by Channing et al. (2016) and now also includes the names Amietia dracomontana and Amietia quecketti. It occurs in sympatry with Amietia inyangae, A. fuscigula, A. vertebralis and A. poyntoni.
(Note:) A. quecketti records from Namibia have been assigned to A. poyntoni."
Amietia angolensis, as the new species concept is restricted to Angola, so the complex is redundant. However the range maps on iNat is now incorrrect, and at least 10 of the 18 observations are still incorrectly identified as A. angolensis (a geographical taxonomic swap is called for))

Leptopelis bocagei complex
IDs only to genus level (6 spp s Afr - this complex is north of us, so no mentions in field guides): 27 (out of 193: = 14%)
Leptopelis bocagei 8
Leptopelis parbocagei 1

Some rules for species complexes:

  • do not add superspecies which are synonymous with their genus, subspecies, section or series: merely use those instead.
  • use the earliest published species name for the superspecies name.
  • dont use compound names (such as Hypsiboas calcaratus–fasciatus group - especially when there are six species in the group).
  • the complex must be recognized in the literature - dont create complexes for observations where IDs can be done, but diagnostic features are often missing from some photographs - rather inform and train users to provide the additional evidence.
  • dont go overboard with adding "complexes" to the dictionary unless there are observations present for them.
  • complexes should be exclusive: any species can only belong to a single complex - in the event of complications: merge.
  • complexes are complex: subcomplexes are not an option - rationalize.

Lähettänyt tonyrebelo tonyrebelo, 29. marraskuuta 2018 07:31

Kommentit

Ei vielä kommentteja.

Lisää kommentti

Kirjaudu sisään tai Rekisteröidy lisätäksesi kommentteja