We’re just past midway into a week dedicated to discussion on Nicholson et al.’s new monograph on anole classification, biogeography, and ecomode evolution. We kicked off on Monday with posts about the history and potential future of anole taxonomy. On Tuesday and Wednesday we had four new posts about the merits of adopting Nicholson et al.’s proposed generic revision. George Gorman and Jonathan Losos argued in favor of retaining the traditional classification that places all anoles in Anolis. Todd Jackman and Craig Guyer, meanwhile, provided arguments in favor of dividing anoles among the eight genera proposed by Nicholson et al. It seems premature to try to summarize the resulting discussion, so I hope readers will take the time to check out the posts and associated comments for themselves.
Remember also that its not too late to contribute to the discussion with posts or comments of your own! We never censor posts or comments on the basis of scientific content, but remind members of our community of the importance of keeping the discussion civil and scientific. We’ve post-poned the scheduled posts on time calibration and ecomode evolution to encourage further discussion of the taxonomic issues.
For readers just joining the discussion, I share some links to prior discussions at Anole Annals pertaining to the Nicholson et al. monograph below the fold.
What’s In A Name?, Part II - Luke Mahler
What’s In A Name?: Scientific Name Use For Anoles, By The Numbers - Luke Mahler
Anolis Electrum: The Amber Anole From Mexico - Jonathan Losos
More On Nicholson et al. 2012: Let’s Look At Their Methodology - Rosario Castañeda
The Case For Splitting Up Anolis - Anole Annals editors
Anolis: Should It Stay Or Should It Go? - Thom Sanger
The Proposal To Split Anolis Into Eight Genera: Time To Discuss - Jonathan Losos
News Flash: New Study Proposes Splitting Anolis Into Eight Genera - Jonathan Losos