Dear Marcus,

I agree that the exclusive use of vernacular
names is inappropriate in a
scientifically-oriented collection. Understanding
the systematic and evolutionary context of a
mollusk shell depends on interaction with
scientific literature, which is not based on
taxonomic nomenclature, not a vernacular system.
Furthermore, even these carefully- and
wisely-crafted official North American/English
names cannot pretend to be universal - even among
English-speakers. To Americans Haliotis is an
abalone, but many New Zealanders call it a Paua, and Brits an ormer.

As far as bestowing vernacular names of obscure
and remotely-occurring taxa, this AFS Common and
Scientific names publication categorically
excludes any species which does not occur in less
than 200 meters depth. However, many Conch-L'ers
would find it curious that essentially every
terrestrial snail, and a vast majority of all
freshwater mollusks occurring in North America
have been given vernacular names. Many of these
are known from only a few specimens, and occur in
very small areas. That is precisely the reason
they're nominated! Conservation efforts are
generally aided by such a simplification,
expansion, and publicity of their identity.

While the non-marine element of the fauna is
extensively-named in this book, many marine
groups, particular in the micromollusk range, are
not given vernacular names. For instance, only
four of the over 300 species of listed
pyramidellids and none of the 41 cerithiopsids
were given vernacular names. The bias is not just
taxonomic as the closely-related and
similarly-sized rissoids (marine; 10 of 67) and
hydrobiids (mostly aquatic; 223 of 241 named)
received uneven attention. Perhaps the bias can
be assigned to the greater vulnerability of
non-marine ecosystems - at least as things stand
now. As you imply, why labor over the genesis of
a vernacular name if nobody gives a hoot?

As far as the use of a common name for an obscure
(or not) species in a scientific paper (other
than the work were discussing, a thoroughgoing
taxonomic monograph, or a conservation-oriented
work), I don't think this will be a frequent
occurrence, will exclude the scientific name, and
certainly will not vulgarize malacology.

Harry


At 03:11 PM 10/15/2006, you wrote:
>Thanks for the explanation Harry ­ of course if
>non-collectors need to know how to refer to these
>shells it is important to have a work done to make names standard.
>
>But I still can't imagine someone using them to
>refer to a deep water shell coming from the Marianas
>Trench... See my point? It is ok to use Volute,
>Olive, Cowrie in a conversation, but to use it on a
>scientific paper it does sounds strange.
>
>Of course to beginners it might sound easier to
>refer to shells using common names. But the logical
>next step collecting them is to use scientific
>names. I can't imagine a large collection labeled
>only with common names. This is why I asked if
>any collector uses them only. Anyone? Please note I
>am not diminishing  the value of such
>collections or trying to make collecting something too
>complicated to those who started it using vernacular names.
>
>Marcus
>
>
>
>Dear Marcus,
>
>On September 30, 1981 the American Fisheries
>Society (AFS) established a Committee on Names of
>Aquatic Invertebrates with the expressed purpose
>of creating a standardized list of such animals so
>as to "achieve uniformity and avoid confusion in the nomenclature."
>
>There was dialogue with the American
>Malacological Union, which in April, 1983 transferred
>responsibility for creating such a list of North
>American (north of Mexico; the US and Canada)
>mollusks to its subsidiary, the Council of
>Systematic Malacologists. The Council in turn created the
>Committee on Scientific and Vernacular Names of
>Mollusks, which has published two editions (1988 and
>1998) of Common and Scientific names of aquatic
>invertebrates form the United States and Canada
>under the auspices of the AFS.
>
>The underlying philosophy of the publication of
>vernacular names is to make them unambiguous and
>available to people who interact with mollusks
>in fisheries, conservation, recreation, etc. much in
>the same way that many of us have come to know
>the Golden Eagle and the Eastern Diamondback
>Rattlesnake with relative precision but without
>being able to quote their scientific names.
>
>Many species had to have vernacular names
>created from scratch, but some, such as many of the naiads
>had names that had been in use for over a
>century and had entered the American culture (Mucket,
>Pigtoe, Threeridge, Heelsplitter, Hickory nut,
>etc.). Many of the marine species had been given
>common names by Dr. Abbott in his published
>works, but a large number of them were changed to better
>express the natural attributes of the animal or
>its shell without intimately tying it to its
>scientific name.
>
>
>
>
>--
>No virus found in this outgoing message.
>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.4/476 - Release Date: 14/10/2006
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>[log in to unmask] - a forum for informal discussions on molluscs
>To leave this list, click on the following web link:
>http://listserv.uga.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=conch-l&A=1
>Type your email address and name in the appropriate box and
>click leave the list.
>----------------------------------------------------------------------

Harry G. Lee, M. D.
4132 Ortega Forest Dr.
Jacksonville, FL 32210 USA
voice (904) 389 4049
email: [log in to unmask]
look at www.jaxshells.org

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[log in to unmask] - a forum for informal discussions on molluscs
To leave this list, click on the following web link:
http://listserv.uga.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=conch-l&A=1
Type your email address and name in the appropriate box and
click leave the list.
----------------------------------------------------------------------