Names are not enough.
Names are not enough.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1126/science.158.3808.1525
复制
发表时间：
1967-12
期刊：
影响因子：
56.9
通讯作者：
J. Lloyd;T. J. Walker
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
J. Lloyd;T. J. Walker
里德的愤怒（信件，8月25日）生物学家未能给他们所做实验的生物体命名是有道理的。为使数据正确编入索引和进行比较，必须识别所用的微生物。然而，应该指出的是，许多生物学家对研究人员在研究他们的材料时没有正确地分析材料感到恼火。（蟋蟀，青蛙，果蝇，萤火虫）已经表明，物种繁殖隔离繁殖种群，因此分离的进化实体-在对保存标本的形态学进行最仔细的分析时往往被忽视。然而，科学名称，特别是无脊椎动物的科学名称，主要是基于这样的分析。这意味着，即使一个合格的分类学家为研究人员将一个科学名称与某些生物联系起来，这种识别也可能是不够的。
Reed's exasperation (Letters, 25 Aug.) with the failure ofbiologists to name organisms upon which they hatve experimented is warranted. For data to be properly indexed and com-pared, organisms used must be identified. However, it should be noted that many biologists are exasperated with researchers who do n1ami7e their material but who, in doing so, fail to properly i (lemitif) y it.Studies of reproductive behavior in diverse groups (crickets, frogs, fruit-flies, fireflies) have shown that species-reproductively isolatedbreeding popu-lations and therefore separate evolu-tionary entities-are often overlooked in the most careful analyses of the morphology of preserved specimens. Yet scientific names, especially in in-vertebrates, are based largely on such analyses. This means that even if a competent taxonomist has associated a scientific name with some organisms for a researcher, the identification may be inadequate.