Genus Allomyrina vs. Trypoxylus
- Thread starter Dynastes
- Start date
- Status
Lucanus
Lucanus
Last time my friend checked, author of "Dynastini of the world" disagreed with you (and Dr. Ratcliffe also).
Your reference may not be wrong but is confusing and lacks basic facts: your friend who authored a book I'm not familiar with printed only in another language (?) and we don't know what year disagrees with me and Dr. Ratcliffe (I'm not sure any of us know who Dr. Ratcliffe is and there are tons of them on google that practice all different sorts of medicine as I did try to look him up). We can only go by the most recent taxonomy, agreeing doesn't make a name right or wrong unless you publish a paper in the proper format to support your position. If you know a good taxonomic site supporting your position feel free to edit your post to add in the link.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ryan Minard
Eudicella
As for Trypoxylus?
http://eol.org/pages/17257/names
Look here. Allomyrina does not include dichotoma. It is moved to Trypoxylus and as "T dichotomus". Look at the Species 2000 & ITIS Catalogue of Life: May 2012 one.
EOL is pretty well known. Also... one thing to think about is how Taxanomy is quite relative as of now. People are still not 100% about some things.
I once tried to build a taxanomic library with a few biologists and we ran into various walls... such as the many different ways to classify things. There are like a million "valid" ways to set things up.
So I don't think you should be so set on Allomyrina.
There is much confusion in other genera. Why not this one?
http://eol.org/pages/17257/names
Look here. Allomyrina does not include dichotoma. It is moved to Trypoxylus and as "T dichotomus". Look at the Species 2000 & ITIS Catalogue of Life: May 2012 one.
EOL is pretty well known. Also... one thing to think about is how Taxanomy is quite relative as of now. People are still not 100% about some things.
I once tried to build a taxanomic library with a few biologists and we ran into various walls... such as the many different ways to classify things. There are like a million "valid" ways to set things up.
So I don't think you should be so set on Allomyrina.
There is much confusion in other genera. Why not this one?
Last edited by a moderator:
Your single link for Trypoxylus cites zero references, says it was reviewed by 0 curators, and uses only the Wikipedia page as an information source and the wiki page recognizes Allomryina as the correct name. Take a closer look at your link.
Last edited by a moderator:
Lucanus
Lucanus
http://www.uniprot.org/taxonomy/273928
This is a link you gave. It's funny how it sites NCBI (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Taxonomy/Browser/wwwtax.cgi?lvl=0&id=273928) which states that Trypoxylus is the correct name.
This is a link you gave. It's funny how it sites NCBI (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Taxonomy/Browser/wwwtax.cgi?lvl=0&id=273928) which states that Trypoxylus is the correct name.
Last edited by a moderator:
If you look you'll see Allomyrina is a reviewed entry. It does include see also sites that use Allomyrhina or Trypoxylus but those aren't labeled as citations. Some of the older sources you're referencing were right at the time because they were made before the name was changed back.
If someone wants to provide valid taxonomic sources or links instead of personal opinion send them by PM and I'll post, otherwise the topic is closed.
Last edited by a moderator:
- Status