Sender: |
|
Date: |
Sat, 3 Oct 1998 21:26:33 PDT |
Reply-To: |
|
Subject: |
|
MIME-Version: |
1.0 |
Content-Transfer-Encoding: |
quoted-printable |
In-Reply-To: |
|
Content-Type: |
text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; X-MAPIextension=".TXT" |
From: |
|
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
Dear Ross,
A subspecies has to be different from a species in almost 2 differences.
Since a certain date (I have to look for this day) it's no more allowed by
the international commision of nomenclature to describe a form a
variety you have to decide to describe a full species or a subspecies.
forms until that point of date are allowed to use but don't have any
specific value. In the next time I am looking for a better explanation
for you.
yours sincerly Helmut
----------
> I imagine this topic has been kicked around several times already, but
> as they say "what the L??"
> 1) Are the terms "form" and "variety" interchangeable? If not, are
> there commonly-accepted principles for assigning a proposed taxa to one
> or the other?
> 2)Could some qualified person refresh our memories as to how to
> differentiate a "subspecies" from a "form or variety"?
>
> opinions on this topic differ even today, so could someone perhaps
> give
> a good "defence" of their particular viewpoints on these matters?
>
>
> Hopefully not too Redundantly Yours,
>
> Ross M.
>
|
|
|