"Official" common names, more useful than scientific names!

[Xian]

I completely agree.

Maybe it's just my obsessive compulsive personality, but I like to label my tanks and cards:

Scientific name
Common Name
"Personal Name"

So that's three names total, for each of my Ts.

I did the very same thing. I have since dropped the 'personal name', But I like seeing both names.

 

[JimM]

Throughout the years, when a layperson asks me about my aquarium, reef tank, monitor lizards, snakes or tarantulas, more often than not I see their eyes glaze over by the time I get to the 2nd or 3rd scientific name. I've learned by now to not even bother, so common names do have their purpose, and for the casual observer they work just fine.

They do not however serve science nor in many cases the hobby, and learning them is certainly not tantamount to learning another language.

 

[Roski]

Throughout the years, when a layperson asks me about my aquarium, reef tank, monitor lizards, snakes or tarantulas, more often than not I see their eyes glaze over by the time I get to the 2nd or 3rd scientific name. I've learned by now to not even bother, so common names do have their purpose, and for the casual observer they work just fine.

This is definitely true of my experiences also. Except replace 2nd or 3rd scientific name with 2nd or 3rd syllable of the first name.

Every time I hear "what kind are they?" I do a mental reset, and automatically begin sounding off the scientific names followed by the common names. It helps people make a connection between the two, so that some of the tediousness is alleviated, or so I like to think. Either that, or I'm just self-conscious of something that I am so accustomed to that must be total gibberish to everyone I know.

Both names are useful under different circumstances, but formally and especially in scientific communication, scientific names are much more clear IMO. The seemingly "musical chairs" system of junior and senior synonyms isn't something that will be overcome by common names, as that may open even more doors for confusion (like it already does now).

 

[JimM]

This is definitely true of my experiences also. Except replace 2nd or 3rd scientific name with 2nd or 3rd syllable of the first name.

Yeah, probably more accurate.

 

[Bill S]

Bill, that is a pretty egotistical view. Common people know little about tarantulas, and not everyone has a science background. Why should anyone expect them to understand a concept that is completely foreign to them?

Not trying to offend you, gambite, but I'm going to suggest that your approach is the insulting one - to assume that "common people" know little about tarantulas or don't have the ability to learn scientific names. "They" don't need to have a deep understanding of science or the processes involved in deriving the names - but how complicated is it to learn "Grammostola rosea"?

Remember, this is a pet keeping forum, not a scientific community. Treating people like idiots just because they dont speak your language is pretty rude, both on the internet and in day-to-day life. And I am not talking about just you, Bill. This attitude is pretty widespread.

As has been pointed out, this is not just a pet-keeping forum. Nor just a scientific forum. It's open to the public at large, and I maintain that the average person really CAN learn new words, and can benefit from some of the scientific concepts discussed here. As you mention, the attitude is widespread - but I don't think it's one of treating people like idiots. Instead, it's one of spreading knowledge among those who are receptive.

People today are subjected to a rapidly changing culture, with new vocabulary for new inventions appearing all the time. The level of learning that is necessary just to keep up with that is far more than what you will have to learn to keep up with scientific names for tarantulas common in the pet trade, yet people do it rather easily.

 

[Stan Schultz]

In doing research for some related schoolwork, I found this interesting article on the common names of tarantulas.

http://www.americanarachnology.org/acn5.pdf ...

It's also been posted on the American Tarantula Society website at http://www.atshq.org/downloads.shtml for many years.

... A very interesting read! I dont know much about the organization behind it though, how "official" and authoritative are these names? I definitely see their point, though. It is very confusing to see Brachypelma smithi referred to as Euthalus smithi, and I am still not sure exactly what the "official" scientific name for the Singapore Blue or Tiger Rump are.

Congratulations! You have just reopened a gaping, bloody wound that has caused flame wars that rival WWII! No, I understand that it's not your fault, and I'm most certainly not blaming you. I'm just warning you to put on your asbestos underwear and aluminum coated suit with the funny, hood thing.

There are people out there who believe so passionately in scientific names that they are almost ready to commit murder over them. (At least it would seem so by the fervor of their exhortations and arguments.) There are others who feel almost as strongly about common names.

A few of us think that there's enough room in our brains and enough justification in reality to allow the use of both naming systems to advantage.

This is particularly important at this time because new evidence based on DNA analysis is beginning to strongly suggest that our understanding of "species," based on morphology alone (the classical approach) and applicable to theraphosid tarantulas, is probably erroneous in a large number of instances. If so, the common name approach may be the most valid show in town until the experts finally get the problem unsnarled.

Lastly, before proceeding, you should understand that neither naming system, scientific or common, is without its faults and shortcomings.

Let the WAR begin!

 

[curiousme]

After a week or so on this forum, i stopped trying to remember common names. i realized that the scientific name was the way to go and the common names were just more complicated. Any pet store can call the T whatever they want, tiger rump, baboon, stripe knee........... there are dozens of Ts that could be, but with the scientific name there is NO confusion.

It takes a bit of time to get the scientific names down, but it is well worth the effort. i am still learning them!

 

[Mad Hatter]

Common people know little about tarantulas, and not everyone has a science background. Why should anyone expect them to understand a concept that is completely foreign to them?

"They" don't need to have a deep understanding of science or the processes involved in deriving the names - but how complicated is it to learn "Grammostola rosea"?

I see what you both are saying, but I think the problem arises because generally people foreign to the hobby don't:

1) understand the importance of the scientific name

...and...

2) most don't actually care that much about tarantulas to want to learn the scientific name - they prefer to take the "easy way" and use the common name.

On the rare occasion that I show my Ts to others (others not in the hobby), I have instinctively referred to them by scientific names, such as G. rosea. However, after they learn the common name, the response is typically "Why didn't you just say that in the first place?"



It's that they don't see the point of learning common names. Most refer to their dogs as... well "dogs," or Pit Bulls, or Black Labs, etc... instead of Canis lupis familiaris. And I have found that most not in the hobby will think it is "silly" to use the scientific name for a T, when Ts generally mean less to most folks than dogs.

...that's just an example.



It's the "why" that is important to explain to people.

If you explain why, then people are more apt to understand the importance of using scientific names in the hobby.

 

[Steve Calceatum]

Personally, I do use a few common names (OBT, GBB, Rosie, PinkToe)....they are pretty unmistakable. However, when I show my friends an E. olivacea pic (usually declaring, "I WANT!!!!"), I have no idea what to tell them when they ask what kind of T it is. So, outside of the aformentioned common names I use, it is alot easier if I stick with the scientific names and redundantly explain why it is that I do not use common ones.

 

[ArachnoYak]

...learning them is certainly not tantamount to learning another language.

Well said Jim. It's not rocket science.

 

[RottweilExpress]

Basically, the article is aimed at "dumbing it down" for the general public. It isn't saying that there's anything more accurate about using approved common names, just hinting that "common folk" are too dumb to be able to grasp scientific names.

I guess the truth of this may lie within the audience you are dealing with.

Yes, but I will never use a common name when dealing with friends, hobbyists or buyers. It's setting the bar too low, to be honest. If you buy an animal from me, you will know what you get, for future referens in the case that you need to ID the animal for sale, mating, vets or what not.

 

[Mack&Cass]

I completely agree.

Maybe it's just my obsessive compulsive personality, but I like to label my tanks and cards:

Scientific name
Common Name
"Personal Name"

So that's three names total, for each of my Ts.

It's true that most non-T-owners are a lot more comfortable with common names because they just don't understand scientific names, at least IME that has been the case. In fact, they are often more comfortable with the "personal name" (the "pet" name) than the common name!

And if you take the time to explain to them why the scientific names are important, they can see the point of it quickly.

People aren't dumb, but not everyone knows as much about Ts as people like us who keep them.

I sure didn't know much when I first joined AB. And after 5 years of keeping Ts, I am still learning new things.

I completely agree with you. It's hard because when people are like "what kind of tarantulas do you have?" it's really tough to answer. I'm absolutely terrible with common names, however I've managed to learn a lot of scientific names since joining this hobby in January. Even with T's I'm not that bad, it's scorpions that I have no idea. I think out of all the scorpion scientific names I know, I only know 3 common names...I think it's because when Mackenzie and I moved in together, he used the scientific names so I really had no choice but to learn them. I prefer scientific names, and that's what we use when we talk to each other. Nobody I know really cares enough to ask me what kind of tarantula I'm making them look at so I don't really run into problems.

We label our tanks just with the scientific name and their 'pet' name, the pet name is what we use most often when talking about our own personal T's. But we use scientific names when talking about the general species or genus or what have you. However, in our records we list the common name as well. We also have a binder I made as a species reference (these are the things I do while working nights) and I put common names in there too. It's interesting how common names are used like mad in some hobbies (ie herps) and not so much in others (T's).

Cass

 

[Moltar]

Anybody who says scientific names are unnecessary are welcome to describe which of the following species are what. IMO this brief excercise illustrates the need for proper scientific naming.

Brazilian White Knee
Brazilian White Leg
Brazilian Red
Brazilian Red and Black
Brazilian Black
Brazilian Black and White
Brazilian Red Rump
Brazilian Pink Rump

Well, the list goes on and on but I think y'all get the idea. It's fine if you're just some new tarantula keeper looking at a webpage or an LPS but as soon as you try to collect a certain genus or start breeding the common names become pretty much useless.

 

[Kirk]

Yes, but I will never use a common name when dealing with friends, hobbyists or buyers. It's setting the bar too low, to be honest. If you buy an animal from me, you will know what you get, for future referens in the case that you need to ID the animal for sale, mating, vets or what not.

Given that you're in Sweden, you can invoke the name of Carl Linnaeus as a good defense!

 

[ArachnoYak]

Given that you're in Sweden, you can invoke the name of Carl Linnaeus as a good defense!

Don't you mean Carl Von Linne? lol

 

[Kirk]

Don't you mean Carl Von Linne? lol

His birth name was Carl Linnaeus. You'll also find the Latinized form as Carolus Linnaeus, in for instance his Systema Naturae. In 1761 he became part of nobility, and thus given the name Carl von Linne. I've visited his homes, and his grave.

 

[JimM]

I've visited his homes, and his grave.

That's some Linnaean dedication right there!

 

[Bill S]

His birth name was Carl Linnaeus. You'll also find the Latinized form as Carolus Linnaeus, in for instance his Systema Naturae. In 1761 he became part of nobility, and thus given the name Carl von Linne. I've visited his homes, and his grave.

I'd read that it was his father who adopted the Latinized form of the name, that it had been von Linne before that.

 

[Kirk]

I'd read that it was his father who adopted the Latinized form of the name, that it had been von Linne before that.

For clarification, see here.

 

[MIC]

I completely agree with someone who suggest to use the scientific name for any animal.

So our next sally to the mountain can be described like this:

I kept away my Canis.familiaris from the terrified Felis.catus while far off, i could hear the Canis.lupus howling. It was also impressive to see, in the wet path, the Ursus.arctos footprints. The only thing, that bothered me, were the pesky Culex.quinquefasciatus swarms.

Come on guys! Everything depends on how widespread and well known an animal is. Even for us, i think, is more common the 'Green Bottle Blue' (GBB) than Chromatopelma.cyaneopubescens.