Bells hingeback

[EJ]

I don't subscribe to subspecies. I would consider spekii and belliana. I have a problem with caracteristics that start off... 'usually but not always'. I know you've heard this before... if you can't look at an animal and obviously distinguish a difference... it's the same animal. DNA gives an added hint to confirm the difference but I don't think it should be used as an exclusive characteristic.

I like Bill Branches following of Kinixys. Have you got the book 'Tortoises, Terrapins and Turtles of Africa'? It would seem that the African taxonomists don't go for the subspecies much either.

Originally Posted by Geomyda

Sorry Ed,
my last post should of course have said "How many sub species of Kinixys belliana do you consider to be valid"?

[Geomyda]

Originally Posted by SeeShell

Could anyone give me some info on incubating bell's hingeback eggs? Specifically incubation temp, humidity and duration.
Thanks

According to an article by Jim Quirke, in one of the last printed Tortoise trust newsletters, the incubation time for K belliana was 119 days. Incubator set at 30-31 degrees centigrade, and relative humidity 70%. Other eggs hatched from the same clutch at 125 days.

[EJ]

Doesn't that fall in the range I stated? I'll disregard the source... not the author.

Originally Posted by Geomyda

According to an article by Jim Quirke, in one of the last printed Tortoise trust newsletters, the incubation time for K belliana was 119 days. Incubator set at 30-31 degrees centigrade, and relative humidity 70%. Other eggs hatched from the same clutch at 125 days.

[Geomyda]

Originally Posted by EJ

Doesn't that fall in the range I stated? I'll disregard the source... not the author.

Yes, I thought it suitable to post this reference, as it reinforced your brilliance.
However, I still find your attitude to Taxonomy to be a touch on the weird side, but hey ho, what ever "floats your boat".

[EJ]

You haven't spoken with may taxonomists... there is us and them... the splitters and the clumpers. I don't know if it's still around but I know I mentioned it... Taxacom... they had a forum early on and I lost track. It was a forum for taxonomists that had a whos who of taxonomists as its members. It was over 10 years ago.

Ever heard of a Woofenpoof. By now I'm sure it is an urban legend. I got to talk to one of the authors through that forum... it is an experience I'll never forget. It is a published taxonomical discription of a bird from mongolia. You'd love the history. I'm sure most of it is on line but it gives some insight of the early taxonomists.

I got hold of the paper in an old bookshop and did not become interested in the paper until I asked about on that forum. I gave it to someone and I'm trying to get it back... for the last 10 years.

My next snafu... I asked what is a species... that series went over 6 months.

Originally Posted by Geomyda

Yes, I thought it suitable to post this reference, as it reinforced your brilliance.
However, I still find your attitude to Taxonomy to be a touch on the weird side, but hey ho, what ever "floats your boat".

[Geomyda]

Originally Posted by EJ

You haven't spoken with may taxonomists... there is us and them... the splitters and the clumpers. I don't know if it's still around but I know I mentioned it... Taxacom... they had a forum early on and I lost track. It was a forum for taxonomists that had a whos who of taxonomists as its members. It was over 10 years ago.

Ever heard of a Woofenpoof. By now I'm sure it is an urban legend. I got to talk to one of the authors through that forum... it is an experience I'll never forget. It is a published taxonomical discription of a bird from mongolia. You'd love the history. I'm sure most of it is on line but it gives some insight of the early taxonomists.

I got hold of the paper in an old bookshop and did not become interested in the paper until I asked about on that forum. I gave it to someone and I'm trying to get it back... for the last 10 years.

My next snafu... I asked what is a species... that series went over 6 months.

Here in the old Country, we call them "Lumpers and Splitters", However, for your information Taxonomy, is indeed a widely understood subject. Maybe, when you next visit the Uk a trip to the Linnean society in Piccadilly, founded back in 1788, or the Natural History Museum in South Kennsington might widen your horizons?

[EJ]

Many current taxonomists would like to redo the Linnean taxonomy saying that it is out of date and does not always correspond with genetic taxonomy.

Also... England does not have a monopoly on the knowledge of natural history.

The fact that you say taxonomy is widely understood tells me you have not delved very far into the subject.

I actually walked by the building of the Linnean Society but my daughter wouldn't let me go in... I'd just tortured her with a visit of the Natural history museum.

Originally Posted by Geomyda

Here in the old Country, we call them "Lumpers and Splitters", However, for your information Taxonomy, is indeed a widely understood subject. Maybe, when you next visit the Uk a trip to the Linnean society in Piccadilly, founded back in 1788, or the Natural History Museum in South Kennsington might widen your horizons?

[Alistair&Robyn]

Has anyone been to the Grant Zoology museum in London, near Euston? I never made it last time I was there, but it looked very interesting, especially for Taxonomy. Lots of examples and thousands of species.

[EJ]

Never heard of it. I'll look into it. That looks really cool and a must see my next visit. Thanks.

Originally Posted by Alistair&Robyn

Has anyone been to the Grant Zoology museum in London, near Euston? I never made it last time I was there, but it looked very interesting, especially for Taxonomy. Lots of examples and thousands of species.

[Geomyda]

Originally Posted by EJ

Many current taxonomists would like to redo the Linnean taxonomy saying that it is out of date and does not always correspond with genetic taxonomy.

Also... England does not have a monopoly on the knowledge of natural history.

The fact that you say taxonomy is widely understood tells me you have not delved very far into the subject.

I actually walked by the building of the Linnean Society but my daughter wouldn't let me go in... I'd just tortured her with a visit of the Natural history museum.

I'd obviously missed this reply!

Indeed, England certainly does not have a monopoly on the knowledge of natural history. However, your assertion that the subject is not widely understood is rather disingenuous.
Maybe, you are seeking once again to enliven a thread with the rather silly games of "Moanopoly and Squabble" Forum games, or should I say "bored games"?