I had forgotten about those shells that
> were only accompanied by a figure. I hope the illustrations were more
> like the quality of Poli (1795), because Wood's illustrations are not
> very helpful.
>
> Bret
Bret,
Usually author's referenced other works where illustrations could be
found. For instance you will find references to Martini and Chemnitz in
Wood's work. Althought M&C is not felt to be available for nomenclatural
purposes (they did not always follow the rules of binominal nomenclature)
one could use the figures; and they are quite a bit larger than those in
Wood's. Now to defend Wood, his work was to make a good summary of
conchological works for the common person who could not afford an extensive
library. Here I feel he successed admirably.
Regards,
Charlie
******************************************************************************
Charlie Sturm, Jr
Research Associate - Section of Mollusks
Carnegie Museum of Natural History
Pittsburgh, PA, USA
Assistant Professor - Family Medicine
[log in to unmask]
On Mon, 18 Feb 2002, Bret Raines wrote:
> Henk,
>
> Thank you for the information I had forgotten about those shells that
> were only accompanied by a figure. I hope the illustrations were more
> like the quality of Poli (1795), because Wood's illustrations are not
> very helpful.
>
> Bret
>
> Henk and Zvia Mienis wrote:
>
> > Bret, the Pectenid species you mentioned was not validly described
> > because of the word "prickly"; the scientific name was accompanied by
> > a figure! That's the reason why Wood's name was accepted as a valid
> > one. Many of the early names were simply based on a figure and
> > scientific name only, without any addition like "prickly", "smooth" or
> > whitish". Henk K. Mienis [log in to unmask]
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Bret Raines
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 6:09 PM
> > Subject: World Record for the Shortest Description.
> > Hello Fellow Shellers,
> >
> > I believe, that I know what the World Record is for the
> > shortest shell description, which is still considered valid
> > under the ICZN.
> >
> > Aequipecten muscosus (Wood, 1828) ... "prickly"
> >
> > Can anyone bet that?
> >
> > Bret
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
|