Nuper venit per aliquid ridicule horrendum genus a Sinis (.pdf). Si librum usque ad frenum potes videre translationem anglicus. Hoc primo aspectu similis est chartae normae taxonomiae cum descriptionibus osseis nudis speciebus. Etiam te ipsum putare potes, “huh, mirentur cur species ex uno tantum specimine describuntur”. Non est finis mundi, Ego quidem feci. CALLIDE, pulchrum esse, Vitam integram habui historias et DNA ad illa iudicia promovenda. Hic – nec habent. Et, semel inspice exempla exempla, quid mirum facti apparent. Quid haec specimina communia habent? (quam pauper imago qualis)?
(continued infra)
Etiam si lepidopterista non es, haec papiliones suspectum. Quare? Quia sunt aberrationes specierum communis. 15Vanessa cardui et a est – Picta domine! Hoc est quam error sophomoric, est simpliciter turpis. Auctores clare habent vel nullam notitiam taxonomiae fundamentalis nullius interest. Gratam synonymy visio nocturna – the senior author has a track record of cranking out publications of this magnitude. Triste, non solum stare-. Omnis popularis coetus suos taxonomy horror historias habet, at papiliones saepe maxime pati videtur apud terroristas taxonomicos abstinentes.
Unus e meis fabulis ventus involvit aliquem qui passalidae cantharidas laboravit (Ted, probabiliter hanc fabulam emendare debebis). Alta eius devotio et numinis et numerorum species in disticha nominare compulit 8. Si habuit 5 speciei se nominare extra 3 sicut facere est usque 8 – agnoscentes quod nondum notum esse. interdum, recognitio taxomica me velle capillos extrahere et in Pacifico natare. At certe tempestas est incipiens ad nice quod hic.
“Taxonomic terrorists” – what a great term!
Every group with any level of avocational popularity suffers such abuse. The lure of immortality through described species is powerful – even when a tarnished legacy is sure to follow. We have (and have long had) similar characters in coleopterology – no matter how many publication outlets are unavailable to them, they always seem to find some way to get their work (or lack of it) out. But really, I don’t know what’s worse – the prospect of cleaning up messes such as this, or facing groups with literally dozens upon dozens of small, cryptic species that all need description.
“Two Distatrix escaped during specimen transfer and two died and rotted after eclosion”
The most forthright justification for a unique holotype that I’ve ever come across 🙂
Vanessa pulchra ….
Vanessa pulchra Chou, Yuan, Yin, Zhang & Chen,2002 : Entomotaxonomia 24(1) : 54,58,65, figs.15a,15b Holotype ♂(Up & Un). TL. Ganzi, Sichuan.
it is considered a synonym for Vanessa cardui.
But I agree, sometimes I do not understand what’s going on inside the heads of such self-appointed scientists.
Has it already been officially synonymized?
I don’t know, paenitet.