[tdwg-content] Name is species concept thinking

[Richard Pyle]

I know the Parent Taxon is itself a circumscription of its included
children.  But my question was whether the parent taxon is an intrinsic
property of each child?

Basically, assuming that "Aedes triseriatus" and "Ochlerotatus triseriatus"
refer to precisely the same set of individual organisms, should they be
regarded as separate "taxon concepts", because the same species epithet in
each case is the child of a different parent?  If "Parent Taxon" is an
intrinsic property of a "taxon concept", then they are different.  But if
taxon concept effectively equals circumscription, then these two
name-combinations are different labels for the *same* taxon concept.

Rich

P.S. As far as we know, the ultimate circumscription is a subatomic
particle, with layers of atoms, molecules, organelles, cells, and organs
below the specimen-level circumsctiption... :-)

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Wilden [mailto:mark at mwilden.com]
> Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2010 10:10 AM
> To: Richard Pyle
> Cc: Peter DeVries; tdwg-content at lists.tdwg.org
> Subject: Re: [tdwg-content] Name is species concept thinking
> 
> On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 1:00 PM, Richard Pyle 
> <deepreef at bishopmuseum.org> wrote:
> >
> > I guess a key question that I'd like to get feedback  from
> others on
> >is whether "Parent Taxon" and "circumscribed organisms" are
> > *both* intrinsic properties of "taxon concept", or if
> "taxon concept" 
> >is  effectively equivalent to "circumscription", relegating "parent 
> >taxon" as a  property of Classification, separate from
> "Taxon Concept".
> 
> But "Parent Taxon" is a circumscription itself. Its children are 
> circumscriptions of circumscriptions. A specimen is the ultimate 
> circumscription.
> 
> ///ark
>