Discussion in 'Reptile and Amphibian Identification' started by warwolf, Jul 10, 2017.
IN the Dorrigo rainforest:
This is commonly known as Murray’s Skink, a member of the water skink group - Eulamprus murrayi. As with most members of this genus, they seek open areas close to cover in which to sun themselves. They are particularly common in the Dorrigo region and therefore frequently encountered along walking tracks in the area.
I live in Bellingen which is located at the foot of Dorrigo and have had the pleasure of observing these beautiful little critters on quite a number of occasions and must say they look spectacular in their natural habitat. Given that over the years they have been identified under a number of genus (more recently Karma - Wells 2009 and Silvascincus - Skinner, Hutchinson & Lee 2013) I have always wondered about their correct classification.
I believe that as it appears at the moment the exact genus of this species is still debatable and as such is described under several genus in a lot of current literature e.g Eulamprus (Wilson & Swan - 4th Edition of "A complete Guide to Australian Reptiles") and Karma ( Qld Government Species List/Profile) as well as Concinnia (Cogger 7th Edition "Reptiles & Amphibians of Australia").
It's interesting to note that in the Addenda section of Cogger's 7th Edition he states that a proposal by a group of Scientists to have all scientific names published after 2000 by Mr Wells and Mr Hoser be ignored has not been ratified by the Commission of Zoological Nomenclature and as such under the current rule of the code the name Karma must be used until the Commission rules otherwise. I'm not aware if the Commission has made a ruling to date and would be grateful to hear if anyone knows if a decision has been reached.
decision has not been reached by the iczn- they are Karma rule of priority is very clear
Yeah thanks for that, I'm well aware of the rule of priority but couldn't locate anything regarding a decision and was just wondering if anyone knew if the Commission had made a ruling. What I do find interesting is that Wilson & Swan still class it as Eulamprus in their 2013 edition an Cogger as Concinnia in his 2014 edition.
If that is the same person I am thinking of then anything to do with him should most definitely be ignored.
Maybe some of Ray's stuff but definitely not Wells.
Definitely Ray's stuff! That guy is a looney tune. He once threatened to sue someone I know for using the word Snakeman in his reptile relocation business.
Some of his python reclassification ideas are definitely a bit odd.
Also his venom gland removal 'research'. How that guy still has the right to have anything to do with reptiles, especially in any scientific capacity, is beyond me.
His methods and ideas may be a bit "outside of the usual box" but there is no doubt that the guy is extremely intelligent and very experienced in (and obviously dedicated to) the field of herpetology.
Whilst he may be very experienced and intelligent the very fact that he performed his venom gland removal without any relevant scientific research permissions and or the proper university degrees should mean a lifetime ban from the field of herpetology.
Cogger did use Karma and Magmellia in the 2014- its in the appendix, Wilson 2015 used Karma, Swan, Shea and Sadlier 2017 used it too and Wilson and Swan 2017 have used it too (its not out yet though)
Disregarding nomenclature because you don't like an author does not make it invalid. Each of the papers by Richard, Ross and Ray should be viewed on their own merits regardless of their other papers. I might disagree with many of the decisions and so I won't use those ones I don't agree with- at this point.
Those last three words are the important part......if further information proves the name IS justified then the correct name should used regardless of whom the author is.
At first, I thought it's a Murray Skink as well.