William Vannerson wrote:
Those in the scientific community are very aware of the hobby publications and include them in their literature review.ICZN rules state that new species be described in a publication that has sufficient distribution and relatedness that a diligent search can reasonably expect the paper be found. For fish descriptions this would mean hobby pubs would be acceptable but not Time magazine. No one has really decided what number of pubs constitutes "sufficient distribution". This probably will be addressed in the latest revision of the ICZN Code - including electronic publication - due out next year.
What usually doesn't happen and really is needed, is for suitable type specimens to be placed in collection at an readily accessible museum or such facility. Then future describers have a chance in accurately describing potential new species. Otherwise we're stuck with tons of synonyms as eventual duplications are weeded out over the years.ICZN rules now require that type specimens be listed in the original description as to which museums and catalog numbers they belong before a species can be considered scientifically described. No museum/catalog numbers, no valid species. This avoids the problems that occurred with A. kleei and A. amoena.
Mike Wise
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is the apistogramma mailing list, apisto@majordomo.pobox.com.
For instructions on how to subscribe or unsubscribe or get help,
email apisto-request@majordomo.pobox.com.
Search http://altavista.digital.com for "Apistogramma Mailing List Archives"!