Flag for Taxon: Splendid Peacock Spider (Maratus rainbowi)
| Flagger | Content Author | Content | Reason | Flag Created | Resolved by | Resolution |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| jurgen_otto | Splendid Peacock Spider (Maratus rainbowi) |
the name Maratus rainbowi is not used or accepted by those who photograph or conduct research on this spider. The name that should be used instead is Maratus splendens. I am happy to provide further details. |
Aug. 29, 2019 22:26:32 +0000 | zdanko |
change fully updated |
Comments
Hi,
the world spider catalogue indeed lists that name, but it is pretty much the only that uses it. Those who have done research on this spider or photographed it all use the name Maratus splendens and a google search will quickly show you that virtually all photographs and videos that are now circulating on the internet have the name Maratus splendens attached to it.
In our “catalogue of peacock spiders http://peckhamia.com/peckhamia/PECKHAMIA_148.2.pdf you can find on p 14 some recent references for that species and it is clear that since 2010 all publications dealing with this spider have used the name Maratus splendens including a recently published and widely acclaimed book on Australian spiders by Robert Whyte and Greg Anderson (not yet included in our catalogue). https://queenslandreviewerscollective.wordpress.com/2017/07/27/a-field-guide-to-spiders-of-australia-by-robert-whyte-and-greg-anderson/ We are currently in the process of updating our peacock spider catalogue, with a new edition appearing in the next couple of weeks, and there too of course we call it Maratus splendens.
When I rediscovered this spider in 2011 (no specimens had been known since its original 1896 description) near Sydney David Hill and I thought long and hard about what name we would be using. After carefully considering all our options and studying the rules of the International Code for Zoological Nomenclature we concluded that it must be called Maratus splendens, the name previously used also by Zabka in 1991, and since then most people followed our usage.
Using the name Maratus rainbowi for this spider on iNaturalist would have several undesired effects. Firstly, people looking for records for the spider, which they will know as Maratus splendens, would not find any since typing in Maratus splendens will not bring them up. Secondly, people who come across photographs on iNaturalist that show this spider would be confused, since that is not the name this spider is widely known as. Some people may even think we are dealing here with some kind of sibling species complex. And thirdly, the main aim of the International Code for Zoological Nomenclature is to provide stability for scientific name. Using the name Maratus rainbowi at this point in time, after our usage of Maratus splendens has been widely accepted would be counterproductive.
I can more clearly explain to you the reasons why we concluded that Maratus splendens is the correct name to use here, if you wish.
Kind regards,
Dr Jurgen Otto
Thanks for your insight, Dr. Otto.
Searching up “Maratus splendens” actually does redirect users to Maratus rainbowi because it is listed as a junior synonym in M. rainbowi's lexicon, so I don’t necessarily believe there is too much confusion.
@cmcheatle is the current spider curator in the site and he should probably be looked into this conversation. I have no preference and would ultimately defer to what you guys believe best represents the species.
Usually I would prefer we adhere to our external authorities, but your reasoning is sound. According to the WSC the spider was originally described as “Attus splendens”, but that name was already in use for an unrelated spider. However, the original species described as “A. splendens” currently goes by Habronattus decorus, and neither species are within the Attus genus anyways, so the name Malathus splendens is (a) unoccupied and (b) could arguably be the epithet prioritized over rainbowi.
Thanks, I just tried searching again for splendens and it works, it was my mistake, pressing the "go" button but not clicking on the actual thumbnail that popped up. So I accept that this in itself is no longer a hurdle.
Ultimately every catalogue or database is free to use the name they think is valid or acceptable, we can’t force them to accept our name. By the same token the WSC has no authority over names either (even though many people seem to be thinking it has) and does not even constitute a publication as defined by the ICZN, so it does not even count when it comes to usage of a name for example. Therefore we are equally justified to use the name that we think complies with the ICZN.
David Hill and I have discussed this with Norm Platnick when we were looking for the correct name to use and I also briefly touched on this in an email exchange with Theo Blick in 2017, a time he was updating the catalogue when he got in touch I asked him to change the name. Theo wrote back that the WSC needed a published and accepted decision by the ICZN and he urged me to get one. I haven’t communicated with him since, so don’t know what his opinion is today.
David Hill and I already went down the path of trying to get a ruling on that matter from the ICZN. We petitioned the ICZN to suppress the name rainbowi but they refused to decide on that matter, without giving clear reasons, so we were left where we started from. Comforting for us however was the fact that several of the reviewers of our petition suggested we should simply continue the use of splendens, and wait for “usage” to ultimately decide this case, and that is what we did from there on.
The reason we decided on splendens was that indeed that both splendens were never actually in the same genus at the same time and Article 23.9.5 of the current (2000) ICZN prohibits the automatic (without a Commission ruling) replacement of a junior primary homonym when the respective names are not considered congeneric after 1899. The current code also makes it clear that it supersedes all previous versions of the code.
In my opinion there is no merit for any of the catalogues to still hang on to the name rainbowi when those who actually deal with this spider, scientists and photographers, overwhelmingly decided to use a different name. I think that eventually the WSC also will have to change if it doesn’t want to be completely out of step. The acceptance of the name splendens will only get stronger from hereon.
Cheers,
Jurgen
@peacockspiderman - What did Norm Platnick have to say on the matter? As he used to be the editor of the World Spider Catalog, I imagine his opinion would carry some weight with Theo Blick and the other editors of the current WSC.
From memory it was David Hill who communicated with him about this matter, I never had any direct interactions with him. You can contact David via his email platycryptus@yahoo.com I can't remember what it was what Norm said, David will know. I am currently in Germany and don't have access to any old emails.
We consulted with a number of people at the time, and neither then nor today have we heard any convincing argument why we should not use splendens instead of rainbowi. Whatever people said against it turned out to be inconsistent or incoherent. Of course the rules of the ICZN are not always that clear and there can be debate and interpretation, but now that the community of scientists and photographers have decided to use splendens, I cannot fathom why the WSC choses to call it something different.
@peacockspiderman - I imagine the main reason that the WSC calls it rainbowi is just because that's what they've always called it (since the days when Platnick was the editor). And Platnick probably went with rainbowi simply because it was in Roewer's earlier catalog, which was the most comprehensive and authoritative catalog until the World Spider Catalog was published. I'll email David and see if he has any more information.
Sorry, it is far too easy for flags and mentions to get lost. I agree based on the information to make this change makes sense. Just curious if there was any feedback received when you reached out to WSC ?
Theo Blick contacted me some years ago about the splendens/rainbowi issue and after explaining to him why we use splendens instead of rainbowi and suggested to change the WSC also use splendens he replied that he needed a ruling by the ICZN do this. That makes no sense to me, in particular since David Hill and I already have tried to go down that path but the ICZN did not want to rule on that matter. Feel free to also contact David Hill on this matter, his email is platycryptus@yahoo.com
Regardless of what taxonomy the WSC, there is no reason why we couldn’t adopt the splendens epithet here on iNaturalist.
Thanks for your support, I agree. While it is useful to have a catalogue, nobody is bound by it. The WSC is not an arbiter of nomenclature, even though many people seem to think that way. It would be useful if iNaturalist would change to splendens, it makes sense from every angle I look at it.
I will make the change, I just can't guarantee exactly when I will be in front of a PC to do it, I'm not going to try and do it on my mobile. It should be done in the next few days. If someone wants to create the draft swap in the interim, activating the swap is something I can do via my mobile.
It's all yours, Chris. https://www.inaturalist.org/taxon_swaps/62980
Activated
Great, though the Framework Relationship still needs to be updated at some point.
Thanks for making the change, I greatly appreciate it.
I believe this can be resolved?
The Taxon Framework Relationship still needs to be fixed.
Done.
Hi, @peacockspiderman. Additional context would be appreciated. Maratus rainbowi is the name preferred by our external taxonomic authority on spiders, the World Spider Catalog (https://wsc.nmbe.ch/species/30569).