Paolo, Subspecies was often used incorrectly for birds. If the northern and southern ends of a species differ but the populations in the middle merge and can't be distinguished, the distinct ends were (incorrectly) called subspecies (under the assumption that the two forms were in the process of splitting into two species.) Endemic shallow water gastropods living on isolated islands which differ slightly and consistently from the mainland species and do not interbreed with the mainland islands were also considered subspecies (because they are very small, unimportant population compared to the parent species) , but would now generally be considered good species. The bottom line is that subspecies are, with rare exceptions, best treated as either varieties or species. If, however, you do not have sufficient information to distinguish the two, and/or to check if they have already been accurately and validly named, the best thing to do is to clearly document what is known and what is questionable and leave the question for future workers to try to answer. If you have a subspecies name and it has not been updated anywhere (in print or on a trusted web list) leave it as a subspecies name with the author and date. Same for form names. If it has not been updated by an expert, document what you have and note that it may need to be updated. Question marks have a place on labels in the best of collections. It is not convenient and rather messy when you simply want accurate names, but you are dealing with living organisms, and they cannot be catalogued as easily as postage stamps. Do not allow the search for 'perfection' to overwhelm the 'good'. Allen Aigen [log in to unmask] -- "Paolo G. Albano" <[log in to unmask]> wrote: At 02.34 03/05/2007 -0300, you wrote: >The dilema of of the "validity" of various types of >subspecific taxonomy >is an old one, and really, i think the question is >largely moot: while >the concept of "subspecies" (reliably different, >reproductively >isolated populations which clearly belong to the >same species) seems to >be quite valid and useful on almost all levels - >even if difficult to >determine in some cases - , the practice of calling >different >combinations of color, pattern and form by "forma" >or varietal names >does little harm within the context of a community >of collectors. But reproductively isolated populations wouldn't be different species since unable to interbreed? Still I am struggling to understand the subspecies concept. Regards Paolo Paolo G. ALBANO Bologna, ITALY Webmaster of Società Italiana di Malacologia website at http://www.sim-online.it __________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ---------------------------------------------------------------------- [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. ----------------------------------------------------------------------