plz explain honduran red points

[darth pike]

From what I understand, for a new species or genus to be valid, all that is needed is a published paper with certain points addressed. And viola, new genus. However, to undo a revision not only does another paper need to be published refuting it ... it also must be accepted by the scientific community, usually after many years of debate.

 

[Toby_H]

The way I've understood it... there is no ultimate board, group or committee that approves or disapproves claims of species/genus/etc... so it's simply a matter of scientists read a paper and personally accept it or not...

In other words one guy might read a paper, accept it and in his mind/world it is hard fact... yet another guy might read the same paper, disagree with key points and consider the paper and it's suggested conclusion to be rubbish and this guy would still adhere to previously accepted 'truths'...

 

[darth pike]

Yes, it does depend on the particular scientists point of view ... but by validity I was refering to the rules of nomenclature. Hence why even though Kullander has stated Mikrogeophagus is the correct genus for south american rams, Microgeophagus was validly described 3 years before Mikrogeophagus thus should be the correct one.

Speaking nomenclature-wise, a published paper address the points need is all that is require. Refuting seems much harder and is usually less generally accepted by scientists as a whole. You are deffinately correct in that there is no board or group that determines these things. It would be much easier on us if there is.

After all, some scientists still refuse to acknowledge the breaking up of Cichlasoma but in general it has been accepted by most scientists.