The zonata subspecies are back...
Moderator: Scott Waters
- Brian Hubbs
- Posts: 4735
- Joined: June 7th, 2010, 11:41 am
- Location: "Buy My Books"-land
The zonata subspecies are back...
on the database...please edit your L. zonata entries...
Re: The zonata subspecies are back...
Hey Don - what else is back?
- Don Becker
- Posts: 3312
- Joined: June 7th, 2010, 4:21 am
- Location: Iowa
- Contact:
Re: The zonata subspecies are back...
Err.. I don't recall which other ones I put back already. Look over the species lists, tell me what else we need to make active again.
-
- Posts: 273
- Joined: June 8th, 2010, 8:28 pm
- Location: Southern California
Re: The zonata subspecies are back...
I think there were some that wanted Masticophis back, but i'm not sure.
- Brian Hubbs
- Posts: 4735
- Joined: June 7th, 2010, 11:41 am
- Location: "Buy My Books"-land
Re: The zonata subspecies are back...
Masticophis was voted down...can we add it now? Huh, huh...?
- Don Becker
- Posts: 3312
- Joined: June 7th, 2010, 4:21 am
- Location: Iowa
- Contact:
Re: The zonata subspecies are back...
That will be handled differently with the type in box.Taylor Henry wrote:I think there were some that wanted Masticophis back, but i'm not sure.
http://www.naherp.com/test/ac/
You will be able to type in Coluber flagellum or Masticophis flagellum and it will will store what you entered, and also find the name in our species list and assign it to the more recent synonym.
- Brian Hubbs
- Posts: 4735
- Joined: June 7th, 2010, 11:41 am
- Location: "Buy My Books"-land
Re: The zonata subspecies are back...
That's a great test ya got there, it didn't do anything except give me a blank page...
- Chris Smith
- Posts: 2291
- Joined: June 7th, 2010, 9:13 pm
- Location: Minnesota
Re: The zonata subspecies are back...
Worked for me (type into box on upper left part of the screen).Brian Hubbs wrote:That's a great test ya got there, it didn't do anything except give me a blank page...
-Chris
- Brian Hubbs
- Posts: 4735
- Joined: June 7th, 2010, 11:41 am
- Location: "Buy My Books"-land
Re: The zonata subspecies are back...
Oh, thanks...didn't see the box...
- Fieldnotes
- Posts: 1474
- Joined: June 7th, 2010, 6:12 pm
- Location: Anaheim, California
- Contact:
Re: The zonata subspecies are back...
Is there some novel research, PDF Paper, or some other documentation supporting the return of Masticophis and zonata subspecies, or is this return simply because people like confusion?
Re: The zonata subspecies are back...
State agencies and other entities still use those subspecies when making conservation determinations and data requests. It was decided that we would bring back traditional subspecies on a case-by-case basis when it would reduce confusion for those entering data and those requesting data.Fieldnotes wrote:Is there some novel research, PDF Paper, or some other documentation supporting the return of Masticophis and zonata subspecies, or is this return simply because people like confusion?
- Don Becker
- Posts: 3312
- Joined: June 7th, 2010, 4:21 am
- Location: Iowa
- Contact:
Re: The zonata subspecies are back...
Jonathan explained correctly with the zonata subspecies. With Masticophis, I hadn't planned on bringing it back. What will happen, is that people will be able to type Masticophis into to the taxon box, and it will change it to the current synonym. With specific regards to the taxon lists on NAHERP, you could say that I am against lumping species and subspecies together. By lumping things together, we lose a bit of information about the animal that was found.Fieldnotes wrote:Is there some novel research, PDF Paper, or some other documentation supporting the return of Masticophis and zonata subspecies, or is this return simply because people like confusion?
Re: The zonata subspecies are back...
From my perspective, where there is a clear physical phenotype that consistently matches geographical range, subspecies designation is appropriate even if they have the same maternal non coding DNA lineage.
I believe that is the case with Zonata.
That being said, from people who have found zonata in the huge gigantic intergrade zone that goes from Shasta County all the way up through Oregon and into Washington - I think that "intergrade" zone of such vast size is pretty good indication that our phenotype definition of the differences between St. Helena and Sierra subspecies needs some work, so anything in that integrade zone I would just consider to be St. Helena (because St. Helena is the nominate subspecies).
I believe that is the case with Zonata.
That being said, from people who have found zonata in the huge gigantic intergrade zone that goes from Shasta County all the way up through Oregon and into Washington - I think that "intergrade" zone of such vast size is pretty good indication that our phenotype definition of the differences between St. Helena and Sierra subspecies needs some work, so anything in that integrade zone I would just consider to be St. Helena (because St. Helena is the nominate subspecies).
Re: The zonata subspecies are back...
Now, what we need to do is get rid of the Oregon Alligator Lizard. It's the same thing as California, just lacks red, which California also sometimes lacks, and head mottling, which California also sometimes lacks.