Color form vs subspecies

BillieJean

Arachnopeon
Joined
Jul 10, 2010
Messages
23
Searching through the forum, I found the consensus that these terms are fairly distinct. I'm curious why these terms aren't analogous to the scientific and common name (i.e. the G. rosea RCF is a colorform and a distinct subspecies of G. rosea, just, the subspecies name has not been defined yet). Is it because there isn't enough morphological difference between color forms to warrant a scientific subclassifications? According to TKG, the only subclassifications of species is subspecies, so if we find it necessary to define a color form, IMHO it should be scientifically classified as a subspecies as well.
 

matthias

Arachnobaron
Old Timer
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
393
because subspecies is annoying to type and say. RCF is catchier and easier.

It happens in a lot of areas, race, breed...
 

GoTerps

Arachnoking
Old Timer
Joined
Sep 18, 2003
Messages
2,115
Subspecies are not recognized in spiders.

CLICK ME
KRAUS, O. 2000. Why no subspecies in spiders? European Arachnology 2000: 303-314. Proceedings of the 19th European Colloquium of Arachnology, Århus 17-22 July 2000.

You'll see an oddball subspecies still listed in The World Spider Catalog, but these will generally be very old descriptions.

Eric
 

JimM

Arachnoangel
Old Timer
Joined
Nov 6, 2003
Messages
873
Subspecies are often bogus, highly artificial designations across most genera
anyway. Most of the time the animal in question ends up clumped back with the rest of it's congeners, or makes full species status.

The resulting classification not necessarily any more valid than what the person
doing the work started with.
 
Top