B. L. Turner is a rather (in)famous systematist. While he is
a very dynamic personality, I am not sure I trust his thorough
investigation into the existing nomenclature before he jumps
to name new species. He has bullied his way into a position
of status among systematists, but I think careful study of his
work reveals a lack of complete preparation. He and I had
a run-in some years ago about _Gaillardia_, a genus in which
he has named many new species. Clearly he was not aware
of the older literature and certainly had little awareness of named
cultivars. I was floored that someone naming new species
would not know the existing literature describing known
species. I would certainly approach his "new" find with
skepticism. I do not pretend to know much about Ping.
nomenclature, but I would certainly want to take his descriptions
to the test of older literature to be sure he was not "renaming"
or "splitting" extant species.
Jan's comment:
> but I cannot
>interpret these as really distinct at specific rank. However, as
>long as no comprehensive synopsis of the whole complex can be
>presented we have (preliminarily) to accept the existing names as
>valid.
makes some sense to me....but let's wait until the descriptions stand up
to scrutiny before accepting the new names as valid. I think we can all
be taken down a path that may have to be rerouted later and that can be
costly. I'd prefer to take a more conservative route. I also despise
new nomenclature that uses personal names rather than descriptors. I
thought that this kind "hero worship" was forbidden by the botanical
congress.
ross
Ross Koning Internet: Koning@ecsuc.ctstateu.edu
Biology Department Phone: (203)-465-5327
Eastern CT State University Fax: (203)-465-5213
Willimantic, CT 06226 USA