Day 259: I don't feel so badly now. I wasn't quite sure of this lichen's identity, so I sent it off to Katherine Glew at the UW for confirmation. She replied with taxonomy new to me, sparking a discussion covering the logic behind renaming species. When I couldn't find any reference to "Polycauliona elegans" in any of my customary sources, I asked her if she could provide me with a link to the updated information. At that point, she said, "Oops! Correct that genus to 'Rusavskia.'"
Even among professionals like Katherine (lichens) and Arnie (vascular plants), confusion is rampant because nomenclature can change overnight. Largely, we are not privy to the molecular studies and genetic research behind the changes, so they take us by surprise. We struggle to keep up, worried that we'll embarrass ourselves by using an older synonym in conversation with colleagues, concerned that we'll be marked as resistant to change. I rail against taxonomists constantly because the changes make my work more difficult, but at the same time, I am thankful for the better understanding of the species which has necessitated reclassification. That said, I wish the taxonomists would stick to descriptive terms. "Xanthoria" tells you something memorable about this lichen, i.e., that it's orangy-yellow, xanthous. "Rusavskia" only gives us a clue to a person or place (Rusavski) related to it. To further confuse matters, not all Xanthorias were removed to the new taxon. Indeed, some were reclassified as "Polycauliona," hence the hiccup in Katherine's communication.
Will I remember "Rusavskia" the next time I find this orange lichen's beautifully symmetrical rosettes? Not likely. I will say as I did on the occasion of this discovery, "Oh, it's xanthous and it's utterly elegant. Joe, look! I've got another Xanthoria elegans over here."
No comments:
Post a Comment