Re: Iris barnum(i)ae

 

I remember reading somewhere, a long time ago and, as I recall it was about orchids, which have masses on honourific names, that it was once typical to add the 'i' first and then the suffix.  Thus we had -iae and -ii as typical. This may have been an effort to reflect correct latin declination with honourific declination.  A masculine genus combined with a femimine honourific.  This was changed to just adding the masculine or feminine, therfore -ae or -i are now considered correct.  Of course, this change was not without conflict, but the modern school seems to be winning out.  Quite a few genera are having their species adjusted to reflect the new terminology, as well as correcting what were mis-gendered situations.  One that comes to mind is the genus Centropyge, which is now considered feminine.  Species that previously ended with -us now end with -ae.  I hardly think the fish concerned really cares, but the change does correct a previous error in judgement.  I suppose we could see this as a Linnean emmancipation!

This ring a bell with anyone?

Jamie

Am 03.02.2014 20:39, schrieb Dennis Kramb:
The ASI Checklist lists it as I. barnumae.

DK



On Mon, Feb 3, 2014 at 2:07 PM, Sean Zera <z*@umich.edu> wrote:


Anybody know what the correct spelling is for this species? Dykes, Mathew and the BIS species guide all list it as Iris barnumae, but Kew and the other online lists refer to it as Iris barnumiae. I checked the original publication, and it was actually written as Iris barnumi. Not helpful! It was named for a Mrs. Barnum, so I assume it was corrected to have a feminine suffix.


Sean Z




Other Mailing lists | Author Index | Date Index | Subject Index | Thread Index