Taxonomic tree
I love the taxonomic tree and iNat certainly has played a big part in solidifying the structure in my mind in a comprehensible way. But in some perverse way I also love to come across it's shortcomings and imperfections. For those who so stringently admonish those who would use vernacular instead of scientific terms, be aware that the system has a long ways to go... and alienating laypeople by insisting on scientific names over common for the sake of this system isn't really helpful.
https://www.nature.com/articles/546025a
https://www.quantamagazine.org/phyla-and-other-flawed-taxonomic-categories-vex-biologists-20190624/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5646648/
an interesting forum discussion
https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/who-establishes-a-new-subspecies/2855
List of different organizations for taxonomy of plants - there is no single authority.
Catalog of Life
Plants of the World Online
WCSP
PhyloCode?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/APG_III_system
How iNaturalist uses data from other organizations to create its taxonomic tree
https://www.inaturalist.org/blog/19977-introducing-taxon-frameworks
Interesting and semi-related -
https://forum.inaturalist.org/t/list-of-sources-for-common-names-wiki/10249
When homonyms get confused on iNaturalist, they wind up in the "Life" category
https://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/List_of_valid_homonyms
definition of hemihomonym
https://mapress.com/bionomina/content/2011/f/b00004p072f.pdf
paranyms are also fun, like Micrommata and Micromata. Nobody seems to be making lists of these, though.
Comentarios
Agregar un comentario