Suppr超能文献

解决一个长期存在的命名争议:为南海狮(Otaria flavescens (Shaw, 1800))指定一个新模式标本。

Solving a long-standing nomenclatorial controversy: designation of a neotype for the southern sea lion Otaria flavescens (Shaw, 1800).

作者信息

Lucero Sergio, RodrÍguez Sara M, Teta Pablo, Cassini Guillermo, D'elÍa Guillermo

机构信息

División Mastozoología, Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales "Bernardino Rivadavia" Avenida Ángel Gallardo 470, C1405DJR Buenos Aires, Argentina. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET), Argentina..

出版信息

Zootaxa. 2019 Feb 12;4555(2):296-300. doi: 10.11646/zootaxa.4555.2.13.

Abstract

During almost two centuries, two available specific epithets have competed for the southern sea lions of the genus Otaria Péron, 1816 (Fig. 1), which is classically regarded as monotypic (but see below). The species distributes more or less continuously along the Atlantic coast from southern Brazil south to Cape Horn and along the Pacific from northern Peru to the west South American Pacific coast . While some researchers have argued that the correct name for this species is Phoca flavescens Shaw, 1800 (e.g., Cabrera, 1940, Rice, 1977; Rodriguez Bastida, 1993; Teta et al., 2018), others have used P. byronia de Blainville, 1820 (e.g., Allen, 1905; Hamilton, 1934; King, 1978, Oliva, 1988; Berta Churchill, 2012). This controversy originates from the fact that the diagnosis of the type of flavescens, the oldest epithet and as such the one that has priority, would not match the phenotypic features of the genus Otaria. This view, which favors the usage of byronia for populations of southern sea lions, was strongly defended by Oliva (1988:768), who argued that "…(1) the total length of the holotype [of flavescens]; (2) the size of the external ear; and (3) the color and length of the specimen's fur do not correspond to any developmental stage of the species." However, Rodríguez and Bastida (1993:378) discussed these same features reaching a very different conclusion, by indicating that "Shaw's holotype, collected in the Strait of Magellan, could only have been a newborn pup of Otaria or Arctocephalus australis; its body size (circa 62 cm) could correspond to either species, but the uniform yellowish color is found exclusively in some molted pups of the Southern sea lion. Ear length, though not matching well with the described body length, lies within the recorded range of Otaria, but outside that for Arctocephalus australis."

摘要

在近两个世纪里,两个可用的种本名一直用于1816年佩龙所命名的南海狗属(Otaria)的南海狗(图1),传统上该属被视为单型属(但见下文)。该物种或多或少连续分布于从巴西南部向南到合恩角的大西洋沿岸,以及从秘鲁北部到南美洲太平洋沿岸西部的太平洋沿岸。一些研究人员认为该物种的正确名称是1800年肖所命名的黄褐海豹(Phoca flavescens)(如卡布雷拉,1940年;赖斯,1977年;罗德里格斯·巴斯蒂达,1993年;泰塔等人,2018年),而另一些人则使用1820年德·布兰维尔所命名的拜氏海豹(P. byronia)(如艾伦,1905年;汉密尔顿,1934年;金,1978年;奥利瓦,1988年;贝尔塔·丘吉尔,2012年)。这场争议源于这样一个事实,即最古老的种本名黄褐海豹(flavescens)的模式标本诊断与南海狗属的表型特征不匹配。奥利瓦(1988年:768)强烈支持对南海狗种群使用拜氏海豹(byronia)这一观点,他认为“……(1)[黄褐海豹(flavescens)]模式标本的全长;(2)外耳大小;(3)标本皮毛的颜色和长度与该物种的任何发育阶段都不相符。”然而,罗德里格斯和巴斯蒂达(1993年:378)讨论了这些相同的特征,得出了截然不同的结论,他们指出“肖在麦哲伦海峡采集的模式标本只能是南海狗属或南极海狗属(Arctocephalus australis)的新生幼崽;其体长(约62厘米)可能与这两个物种中的任何一个相符,但均匀的淡黄色仅在一些南海狗的换毛幼崽中发现。耳长虽然与所描述的体长不太匹配,但在南海狗属的记录范围内,而在南极海狗属的记录范围之外。”

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验