Talk:Ia (genus)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject Mammals (Rated Start-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Mammals, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of mammal-related subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
Start-Class article Start  This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Subgenus[edit]

I looked for a source for the claim that Ia is a subgenus of Pipistrellus and could find none. I would love to see a reliable source for this. – Paine Ellsworth ( CLIMAX )  08:53, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

"Ellerman and Morrison-Scott (1951) placed Ia as a subgenus of Pipistrellus, whereas Menu (1987) considered the genus to be synonymous with Eptesicus". Thabah et al. 2007, p. 728. I'll add Eptesicus as another suggested senior synonym. Ucucha 09:24, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
None of this is mentioned in Wikispecies. Pipistrellus has 8 synonyms, none of them are Ia. Ia has one syn., and it's not Pipistrellus. Eptesicus mentions 11 syns., and no mention of Ia. Neither of the Wikipedia articles mentions Ia at all. What makes these placements valid? And if valid and notable, why the huge oversight in both the Wikipedia articles, Eptesicus and Pipistrellus, and especially the Wikispecies pages, Ia, Eptesicus, and Pipistrellus? – Paine Ellsworth ( CLIMAX )  09:44, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
This is a past placement that is no longer used in recent sources. And neither Wikispecies nor Wikipedia is a reliable source. Ucucha 09:51, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
No mention here, either. I did not refer to the wikis as reliable sources, but as wellsprings of knowledge that do not include any mention of this claim. Perhaps the lede needs to be a little clearer that these are no longer valid affiliations? – Paine Ellsworth ( CLIMAX )  09:58, 20 May 2011 (UTC)
  • PS. Never mind, I see you've cleared it up. It might be good to mention these past connections in the other two WP articles.
ITIS shouldn't be considered a reliable source either, at least for mammals; as far as I can see, it uses a 20-year-old classification without any discussion of alternatives. Although also slightly out of date by now, MSW 3 remains the best general reference on mammalian taxonomy; as it happens, it also mentions the former classification of Ia under Pipistrellus (but not Eptesicus). Both Pipistrellus and Eptesicus have quite complicated taxonomic histories that are interwoven with those of myriads of other vespertilionid genera; it'll be better to cover those comprehensively than add a mere mention of Ia. Ucucha 10:12, 20 May 2011 (UTC)