Talk:Portunus haanii
 | This article is rated Stub-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||
| |||||||||||
haani or haanii?
[edit]Some online sources use "Portunus haani" instead of "Portunus haanii". Is there any authoritative source that indicates which is correct? Deli nk (talk) 13:43, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
- It probably should be two "i"s, but both spellings are curiously absent from some authoritative sources I've looked at. It looks a little complicated, I've asked at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Arthropods#Portunus_haanii. Plantdrew (talk) 02:17, 2 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Plantdrew: I'm assuming you never got an answer? There's also the question of whether Portunus gladiator is split up or not; apparently reliable sources treat P. haanii as a synonym of P. gladiator, as here. Peter coxhead (talk) 17:22, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Peter coxhead: I never got an answer and the link you provided isn't working for me. I haven't seen anything about P. gladiator being split. There's a mess with homonyms and unpublished names, and I'm not quite sure what the status of P. haanii is. It seems to be the name most frequently used in the fishing industry, so it's a red flag to me that WoRMS doesn't even have a record for it. Another red flag; the checklist paper by Ng et al. I linked on the project talk page mentions Portunus haani Stimpson 1858 and Amphitrite haanii Stimpson 1858; both names lacking parentheses for the authority. Perhaps Stimpson realized that Amphitrite haanii need to be replaced (due to a polychaete Amphitrite), but it seems unlikely that would've happened in the same year (and it seems like Ng would've mentioned if that was the case). Portunus gladiator seems to be the right name for this species, but the situation with of P. haanii isn't very clear (one "i" or two? author parentheses or no? has it even actually been published? are Ng et al. sloppy with author parentheses and other details?). Plantdrew (talk) 20:25, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- The link works for me still, so maybe try again. It has under Portunus gladiator: "As Portunus haanii (Stimpson, 1858) - a synonym cf. Ng et al., 2008". The site also has an extensive list of sources. Peter coxhead (talk) 21:41, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Peter coxhead: I never got an answer and the link you provided isn't working for me. I haven't seen anything about P. gladiator being split. There's a mess with homonyms and unpublished names, and I'm not quite sure what the status of P. haanii is. It seems to be the name most frequently used in the fishing industry, so it's a red flag to me that WoRMS doesn't even have a record for it. Another red flag; the checklist paper by Ng et al. I linked on the project talk page mentions Portunus haani Stimpson 1858 and Amphitrite haanii Stimpson 1858; both names lacking parentheses for the authority. Perhaps Stimpson realized that Amphitrite haanii need to be replaced (due to a polychaete Amphitrite), but it seems unlikely that would've happened in the same year (and it seems like Ng would've mentioned if that was the case). Portunus gladiator seems to be the right name for this species, but the situation with of P. haanii isn't very clear (one "i" or two? author parentheses or no? has it even actually been published? are Ng et al. sloppy with author parentheses and other details?). Plantdrew (talk) 20:25, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Plantdrew: I'm assuming you never got an answer? There's also the question of whether Portunus gladiator is split up or not; apparently reliable sources treat P. haanii as a synonym of P. gladiator, as here. Peter coxhead (talk) 17:22, 5 April 2016 (UTC)