Questions on status field in FishBase

[Marc van Arc]

I have been digging through FishBase lately and come up with 2 questions with regard to the Status field.
I don't know what to do with/how to interpret :
- other
- questionable (might this status effect the valid name??)
I'm almost certain HH will react, but everyone is invited to do so.

[Jools]

We ran a number of logical checks to identify possible erroneous records, such as: list all synonyms that match valid names in the SPECIES table and are not classified as misidentifications; list all synonyms that point to more than one valid species; list all junior synonyms with the same specific name as the valid species to which they are attached; list all original or new combinations with an author different from the author of the valid name; list all synonyms with the characters â??nonâ??, â??notâ??, or â??necâ?? in either the author or the comment field, and which are not classified as misidentifications; etc. Since FishBase 98, we have also compared all original descriptions and most junior synonyms with Eschmeyerâ??s (1998) Catalog of Fishes. We believe that, through this exercise, we have identified and repaired most errors.

I looked at this too, I have no idea about "other", "questionable" appears to imply an error that cannot be immediately discounted. I would suggest further investiagtion of a specific name with this status would yeild an anomoly.

Jools

[enarem]

In many cases the status "Other" refers to an "Unavailable name", as defined by ICZN, typically when first published as an infrasubspecific name or without an accepted description. There may be more resaons.

The status "Questionable" indicates an uncertainty of the current status. That may be due to a vague original description and/or the loss of the type specimen(s), or any other relevant reason.


Cheers

[Marc van Arc]

The status "Questionable" indicates an uncertainty of the current status. That may be due to a vague original description and/or the loss of the type specimen(s), or any other relevant reason. Cheers

Hi Enarem,
I still wonder what the use would be of this status, regarding the fact that all "Questionables" refer to synonyms, thus invalid names.

[enarem]

I still wonder what the use would be of this status, regarding the fact that all "Questionables" refer to synonyms, thus invalid names.

No, they don't necessarily refer to synonyms, but they may. In fact it may end up a junior synonym or a senior synonym. Either is possible.

In many a case there are reasons for true uncertainty. For example, if an early 19th century description is very vague and the the type series is lost, e.g. because of fire, then the true identity of the name is not certain. If the name is old the risk/chance of it being a senior synonym is higher.

Thus, "Questionable" are not necessarily invalid names. We just don't know yet what their status is.

[Marc van Arc]

Thanks for your explanation. I've left them out of the synonyms list I'm working on at the moment to avoid further confusion.

[sidguppy]

So no "Corydoras elongatus" for this fish, Marc?

[Marc van Arc]

Alas, no. But it actually was Corydoras edentatus...