| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Kungmjolon
Member Demonax
Sweden
83 Posts |
|
|
dryobius
Member Rosenbergia
USA
1885 Posts |
 Posted - 06/03/2023 : 04:48:32
|
just like his paper on Clytini from a couple of years ago, he is proposing changes which can be accepted or NOT accepted. Personally, I would just ignore it for now, until multiple other researchers can verify his work.
I'm sure there are many families and tribes of beetles that have genera which are incorrectly placed, so are we supposed to change names on labels and re-arrange our collection, and change our database every time one researcher does a DNA study?
Clearly, it is not possible to get DNA from every genus which has been described, so there will always be holes in this type of study. There will ALWAYS be disagreements on many things with taxonomy.
|
 |
|
|
Xavier
Scientific Collaborator
France
12002 Posts |
Posted - 06/03/2023 : 07:31:22
|
Ok with you Dan, but I'm having trouble finding my way around the clytini now that you've adopted this author's position on your website. |
|
|
|
coptosia
Member Nathrius
Russia
46 Posts |
Posted - 06/03/2023 : 13:19:20
|
| But there is also the Ozdikmen`s system of Clytini)). With numerous adjectives in generic group taxa names ... |
|
|
|
Francesco
Forum Admin
Luxembourg
9402 Posts |
Posted - 06/03/2023 : 21:36:18
|
Some years ago Miss M. Sýkorová published a Bachelor thesis on the "Molecular phylogeny of subfamilies Spondylidinae and Lepturinae (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) using mitochondrial 16S rDNA" (available here) supervised by Dr. Svacha.
The thesis is written in Czech, but the phylogenetic trees are well comprehensible.
There are several oddities, e.g. Moechotypa paired with Leiopus or Centrodera with Tetrops, but some confirmations as well, as Necydalini nested in (i.e., tribe of) Lepturinae.
Interestingly, Miss Sýkorová was wise enough to not propose taxonomic novelties.
I strongly agree with the use of genetic research to corroborate or clarify taxonomic doubts. I myself published a paper about the genus Cereopsius. Drumont, Bouyer (to quote people of our forum) published very interesting taxonomic articles about Prioninae.
In all these cases, morphology and genetics were used "coupled".
Very different is the case of genetic studies used without any consideration of the morphology and sometimes, even of the rules of the zoological nomenclature. |
|
|
|
Kungmjolon
Member Demonax
Sweden
83 Posts |
Posted - 07/03/2023 : 12:08:32
|
| Thanks for your input! I strongly agree with you both, Francesco and Dan. |
|
|
|
dryobius
Member Rosenbergia
USA
1885 Posts |
Posted - 08/03/2023 : 12:36:56
|
hi Xavier,
I don't have a web site 
Are you referring to Larry's ? At first glance, it's great to have so many researchers, but if only a part of a problem is studied, then the results can be a problem.  |
|
|
|
Xavier
Scientific Collaborator
France
12002 Posts |
Posted - 08/03/2023 : 13:16:40
|
Sorry, because you use a "pseudo", I never know who is who ! Of course, I spoke about Larry's site !... |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
Changes within Rhagiini and Stenurella/Rutpela
