Neue Huftiertaxonomie verursacht Probleme.

MILU Berlin 13 (2012): 866-873

Volltext PDF

Problemstellung:

Änderungen der taxonomischen Ansichten begleiten die Arbeit der wissenschaftlich geleiteten Zoologischen Gärten natürlich schon seit sie bestehen. Selten sind sie aber so zahlreich geworden wie heute. Im Jahre 2011 sind zwei wichtige und umfassende Neubearbeitungen der Huftiertaxonomie erschienen, die wir nicht einfach ignorieren können:

• WILSON,D. E., & MITTERMEIER, R. A.: Handbook of the Mammals of the World 2. Hoofed Mammals. Barcelona.

und

• GROVES, C.P. & GRUBB, P. (2011): Ungulate Taxonomy. Baltimore.

In beiden wird eine große Anzahl von bisherigen Unterarten von Huftieren in den Rang von Arten gehoben, ohne dass es in allen Fällen eine umfassende Begründung gibt.
Nimmt man die bisherige, als verbindlich angesehene Artenliste von Säugetieren:

• WILSON, D. E. & REEDER, D. M. (2005): Mammal Species of the World. A Taxonomie and Geographie Reference, Third edition, 2 Vols. Baltimore.

und vergleicht die Anzahl z. B. der dort verzeichneten Arten der Bovidae, es sind 143 Arten incl. der kürzlich ausgerotteten, mit denen bei WILSON & MIITERMEIER {2011), so stellt man mit 279 Arten fast eine Verdopplung fest.

Die bewährten Konzepte des biologischen Artbegriffs und der geografischen Unterarten werden dabei teilweise verlassen und Einzelbefunden, meist am Erbgut, z.B. aus Mitochondrien und Mikrosatelliten, untergeordnet.

schürer-biblio

Mammals of the Neotropics - Vol. 1 - The Northern Neotropics, Panama, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, Suriname, French Guiana.

550 Seiten, mit 110 Farbtafeln, 310 Verbreitungskarten und 103 Sreichzeichnungen.

The Univeristy of Chicago Press. ISBN 0-226-19539-2.  

Verlagstext:

In recent decades, growing numbers of researchers have been drawn to the rich and highly threatened biotic diversity of the Neotropics, where mammals are among the most difficult animals to observe and study in detail. Mammals of the Neotropics fills the need for a comprehensive, up-to-date survey of existing knowledge of the area's wild mammals, both terrestrial and marine. This first of three planned volumes covers the northern Neotropics, including southern Central America.

John Eisenberg, a leading researcher of Neotropical fauna, begins the volume with a discussion of historical biogeography and contemporary habitats of the northern Neotropics. Each of the chapters that follow presents a mammalian order, with data for all indigenous species. Eisenberg has provided physical descriptions and summaries of range and habitat for nearly 450 species. For those species that have been studied in the field or in captivity, additional notes on natural history are included. For the larger taxa, field keys to help to identify the specimens. Range maps, line drawings, and color plates supplement the text, further aiding identification.

Throughout the book, Eisenberg provides a larger context for the species descriptions. He comments on the diversity of forms within each order, places the Neotropical species in a worldwide geographical perspective, and reviews taxonomic questions and controversies. At the end of each chapter, an extensive bibliography directs readers to related articles on systematics, behavior, ecology, and evolution. Eisenberg concludes with chapters on speciation events and mammalian community ecology.

No comparable account of South and Central American mammals has ever been published in any language. This volume of Mammals of the Neotropics and the forthcoming companion volumes will be an invaluable reference for students and professionals and will help further the research that is so vital to conservation efforts.

Die Familie der Warane (Varanidae) Teil 1-3.

Abh. Senck. Natufor. Ges. 462-466. Frankfurt / Main.

1997 erschien die Abhandlung als Taschenbuch im Chimaira-Verlag.

Prof. Dr. Wolfgang Böhme, Bonn, hat eine ausführliche Übersicht der rezenten validen Arten und eine vergleichende Nomenklatur angefügt, so dass das Standardwerk von Mertens auch wieder einen hohen aktuellen Wert hat. Nachdem Teile des Werkes schon kurz nach Erscheinen wegen der hohen Nachfrage nachgedruckt wurden, sind die Teile 1 und 2 schon seit mehreren Jahren vergriffen und antiquarisch entsprechend teuer. Die Auflage ist numeriert und auf 500 Exemplare limitiert.

mertens-biblio

06.04.2013 - 1'838

Intellagama lesueurii (Gray, 1831), the correct binomial combination for the Australian Eastern Water Dragon (Sauria, Agamidae).

Zootaxa 3390: 65–67. ISSN 1175-5326 (print edition), ISSN 1175-5334 (online edition)

The Eastern Water Dragon is a large, conspicuous agamid, well known to many inhabitants of eastern Australia. It was first described in the scientific literature as Lophura lesueurii by Gray (1831). Gray’s allocation of this taxon to his earlier genus Lophura Gray, 1827, created for the species Lacerta lophura Shaw, 1802, does not mention that Cuvier (1829) had erected Istiurus for amboinensis Schlosser, 1768, which Cuvier treated as a senior synonym of Lophura.

Cuvier considered the generic name Lophura to be too similar to Lophyrus Latreille, 1802, a genus of conifer sawflies belonging to the family Diprionidae, hence the need for a new genus. Both Gray and Cuvier were evidently unaware that Lophura was unavailable as this name had already been assign ed to a genus of phasianid birds (Fleming 1822). The Eastern Water Dragon has subsequently appeared in the taxonomic literature under the following synonyms: Iguana paramatensis Fitzinger, 1843; Amphibolurus maculiferus Girard, 1857; Amphibolurus heterurus Peters, 1866 and Amphibolurus branchialis De Vis, 1884. The combination Physignathus lesueurii was first used in 1845 by Gray in his Catalogue of the Specimens of Lizards in the British Museum and has been in use ever since. The only other generic name proposed for this taxon is Intellagama Wells and Wellington, 1985, by which the authors implied its distinctiveness from the other member of Physignathus,  the Chinese Water Dragon P. cocincinus Cuvier, 1829. However, as their description provided no evidence to demons trate that Australian water dragons are generically distinct from their foreign congener, this name has not been adopted by subsequent authors, and has been informally treated as a synonym of Physignathus. ....

Applications of Ecological Niche Modeling for Species Delimitation: A Review and Empirical Evaluation Using Day Geckos (Phelsuma) from Madagascar.

Systematic Biology 56 (6): 907 - 923. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150701775111

Abstract:

Although the systematic utility of ecological niche modeling is generally well known (e.g., concerning the recognition and discovery of areas of endemism for biogeographic analyses), there has been little discussion of applications concerning species delimitation, and to date, no empirical evaluation has been conducted. However, ecological niche modeling can provide compelling evidence for allopatry between populations, and can also detect divergent ecological niches between candidate species. Here we present results for two taxonomically problematic groups of Phelsuma day geckos from Madagascar, where we integrate ecological niche modeling with mitochondrial DNA and morphological data to evaluate species limits. Despite relatively modest levels of genetic and morphological divergence, for both species groups we find divergent ecological niches between closely related species and parapatric ecological niche models. Niche models based on the new species limits provide a better fit to the known distribution than models based upon the combined (lumped) species limits. Based on these results, we elevate three subspecies of Phelsuma madagascariensis (P. m. madagascariensis, P. m. grandis, and P. m. kochi) to species rank and describe a new species of Phelsuma from the P. dubia species group. Our phylogeny continues to support a major endemic radiation of Phelsuma in Madagascar, with dispersals to Pemba Island and the Mascarene Islands. We conclude that ecological niche modeling offers great potential for species delimitation, especially for taxonomic groups exhibiting low vagility and localized endemism and for groups with more poorly known distributions. In particular, niche modeling should be especially sensitive for detecting recent parapatric speciation driven by ecological divergence, when the environmental gradients driving speciation are represented within the ecological niche models.

Aktuelles zur Taxonomie und Systematik asiatischer Grubenottern.

TERRARIA elaphe Heft 1/2012: 52-61.

gumprecht-biblio

Dwarf Crocodile - Osteolaemus tetraspis.

In: Crocodiles.Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan: 127-132.
Third Edition, ed. by S.C. Manolis and C. Stevenson. Crocodile Specialist Group: Darwin.

Aus dem Inhalt:

The African dwarf crocodile historically ranged throughout the lowland regions of West and western Central Africa, from Senegal and The Gambia in the west to the eastern border of the Congo Basin in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Uganda. Northern Nigeria and Cabinda Province (Angola) are considered to be the northern and southern extents of the genus, respectively. The Central and West African dwarf crocodile (O. tetraspis) is now distinguished from Osborn’s dwarf crocodile (O. osborni), and new research suggests that populations further west are signifi cantly differentiated from lineages in Central Africa and the Congo Basin and warrant a unique species designation (Osteolaemus cf. tetraspis) (Eaton et al. 2009).

The taxonomy of the African dwarf crocodile has been under debate for almost 80 years. Osteolaemus tetraspis was first described in 1860 from Gabon. A second morphological form, discovered in the upper Congo River Basin, was described as a new genus (Osteoblepharon osborni, Schmidt 1919). This new genus was subsequently considered to be unwarranted, resulting first in osborni being relegated as species of Osteolaemus and then to a subspecies, Osteolaemus tetraspis osborni (Wermuth 1953). Some authorities have even suggested that sub-species status may not be merited. A recent morphological study, however, has confirmed fixed differences between tetraspis and osborni, suggesting that each should be resurrected as a distinct taxon. Additionally, a recent molecular  phylogenetic analysis of samples collected from the Republic of Congo, Gabon, Ivory Coast and Ghana supports the evolutionary distinctiveness of dwarf crocodiles in the Congo Basin (osborni) from those further west. This same investigation also revealed that the nominal form of O. tetraspis from Gabon’s Ogooué Basin is genetically distinct from dwarf crocodiles in West Africa, suggesting that at least one new morphologically cryptic species exists in the latter region.

Doppelt publiziert hält besser: ein "neues Nilkrokodil".

TERRARIA - elaphe, Heft 2012/1: 50-51.

Inhalt:

Aufgrund molekulargenetischer Untersuchungen wurde das Westafrikanische oder Wüstenkrokodil von niloticus abgespaltet und unter dem Namen suchus als eigene Art postuliert

Distribution and Taxonomy of Birds of the World.

11'360 Seiten. Yale University Press, New Haven and London, 1990. ISBN-0-300-04969-2

Verlagstext:

In this book two eminent ornithologists, Charles G. Sibley and Burt L. Monroe, Jr., present authoritative and comprehensive descriptions of the geographic distributions, and comments about the species-level taxonomy, of the living birds of the world. The accounts of the 9672 species are arranged according to the classification developed by Sibley, Monroe, and Jon Ahlquist. Sibley and Monroe provide new and detailed information on the distribution of each species and an appendix includes twenty-four maps and a gazetteer giving the positions of the localities mentioned in the text.

Each species account begins with the specific name of the bird, the author of the name, and the year of the original description. Superspecies groups are indicated where relevant. At least one English name and a system of numbers for computer storage and retrieval are given. The habitat of each species is briefly described and geographic distributions are given in sufficient detail to make it possible to outline the area on a large-scale map. Taxonomic comments include notes about the status of many species and subspecies, occurrence of hybrids and references to the literature. Complete references are given in a bibliography, and an index provides cross-references to the scientific and English name of species. These attributes make the book an essential source of information for anyone interested in birds.

A review of black rhino systematics proposed in Ungulate Taxonomy by Groves and Grubb (2011) and its implication for rhino conservation.

Pachyderm 50: 72-76.

Auszug:

A new and comprehensive taxonomy of all groups of ungulates was recently published by Colin Groves and Peter Grubb (1935-2006). After an insightful introduction covering methods and species concepts, an arrangement is presented of all recent (and a few extinct) ungulate groups. In the Rhinocerotidae, the list includes six species: Rhinoceros unicornis (no subspecies), R. sondaicus (3 subspecies), Dicerorhinus sumatrensis (3 subspecies), Diceros bicornis (8 subspecies), Ceratotherium simum (no subspecies) and C. cottoni (no subspecies). This treatment is very similar to that in previous work by Groves, except for the recognition of the Nile rhinoceros (C. cottoni) as a separate species (Groves et al., 2010) and for the addition of an eighth subspecies of D. bicornis (D.b.occidentalis, separated from D.b.minor).
...
It is certainly understandable that to most field workers the conclusions proposed by Groves (1967) resembled a bombshell. Where there were to all intents and purposes no subspecies before, now suddenly there were seven. Not only that, but a cursory look at his paper reveals a rather intricate discussion of clines in Kenya and Tanzania, illustrated by a bewildering array of dots and lines on a map of the region. The budding conservation society in East Africa all at once had to come to grips with the possibility that they would have to cope with a set of at least three subspecies with all kinds of intergrades. And of course, even the best observers of rhinos in the field would have felt unable to differentiate the various subspecies when observing the animals in the field. Rhinos differ in size of skulls and skeletons, but there was little to distinguish one from another in the bush.
....
It is high time that the discrepancy in the understanding of subspecific differentiation in the black rhino is resolved (Rookmaaker, 1995, 2005). It should not be allowed to continue any longer. Groves and Grubb (2011) have presented a classification of the recent rhinos, which is certainly the best achievable reflection of their diversity. It is based on sound theoretical premises, correct application of modern methodologies, accurate adherence to the rules of nomenclature, a wealth of morphometric data from the majority of available specimens, a wide-ranging knowledge of the literature and life-long interests in the biology of the rhinoceros. We must now deal with their results and cherish the great biodiversity in nature...

rookmaker-biblio