sensu stricto/sensu lato (1 Viewer)

[Jacana]

Can anyone confirm that i'm using these terms correctly?

Basically I'm writing up a uni project on Alpine Newts which, along with several other species, was recently split out of the genus Triturus. Whilst the former Triturus is ployphyletic it is a handy term to use and there is no convenient remaining term to describe the former members of the genus.

So "Triturus sensu lato" would refer to Triturus before the split and "Triturus sensu stricto" would refer to the remaining members of the genus... I think!

and in a sentence: "Equal catchability is a fundamental assumption in quantifying newt populations and this has been shown to be the case for Triturus sensu lato (Arntzen 2002)"

I know this isn't bird related, but it may be of use to some future student who has to deal with this :smoke:

 

[Ben Wielstra]

I don't think many people would mind if you use it (it still happens) and would certainly understand what you mean, but I would say it just isn't pretty. Perhaps just use "newts"? You can't really go wrong there. And of course you have to use Ichthyosaura as often as possible.

 

[Capreolus]

Sensu lato and senso stricto are used when taxonomists differ in their opinion as to what should be included and what should be excluded in a taxon.

When a taxonomist splits up a large taxon, he/she uses sensu lato to refer to all of the formerly accepted members of that taxon, and sensu stricto to refer to only those members of that taxon that he/she believes should be included in that taxon. Other taxonomists may disagree with his/her conclusions.

Although you indicate that there are no alternative names for the taxa that have been split from the core Triturus, by using Triturus sensu lato you indicate to the reader that the taxonomy is in flux and that the former taxonomy may be revised, pending future consensus of the authorities involved. Triturus sensu stricto indicates to the reader that the taxa that you include in the genus are the ones you, and perhaps others, believe rightly belong in that genus.

Rick

 

[Mysticete]

the first post provides a pretty good description.

Sensu latu is (s.l.) is used when referring to a genus that is widely recognized, but not currently considered monophyletic.

Sensu strictus (s.s.) is used when referring to the genus in a narrow monophyletic sense

 

[cuckooroller]

the first post provides a pretty good description.

Sensu latu is (s.l.) is used when referring to a genus that is widely recognized, but not currently considered monophyletic.

Sensu strictus (s.s.) is used when referring to the genus in a narrow monophyletic sense

I am not sure I have seen these forms with the adjectival desinance having a "u", or "us".

Sensu is the ablative case of the noun sensus. It requires the adjectival that follows (or it can also precede) to have the corresponding desinance, in these cases with an "o", cf. lato, stricto.

 

[cuckooroller]

Jacana,

"Equal catchability is a fundamental assumption in quantifying newt populations and this has been shown to be the case for Triturus sensu lato (Arntzen 2002)"

Here a bit of contextualization is necessary. As written the phrase seems to me to intend not "Triturus sensu lato (Arntzen 2002)", but rather Triturus sensu (Arntzen 2002)", and if so the interpretation is another, that is, you are bringing to the attention of the reader that you are speaking, in this case, of genus Triturus as defined by Arntzen, 2002.

sensu, when used alone and referring to a following citation means "according to" the author of the work cited. It is sometimes rendered also with (sic) preceding the names of the authorities being considered. Another form for "according to" is prout.

 

[Capreolus]

Sensu lato and sensu stricto can also be used when a taxon is enlarged to include taxa previously separated.

On another thread, the generic limits of Gallirallus are discussed. Kirchman (2012) advocates enlarging Gallirallus to include Nesoclopeus, Cabalus, Habroptila, Aramidopsis, and Eulabeornis, all of which have traditionally been separated. So in this case, the smaller, traditional Gallirallus would be Gallirallus sensu stricto and the larger, revised Gallirallus would be Gallirallus sensu lato.

Until a revised taxonomy is widely accepted, it seems to me the terms are used subjectively, to indicate the author's opinion. Am I mistaken?

Rick

 

[cuckooroller]

Indeed, the wiki (of which I am not a great fan), in this case, has a rather exhaustive explication in re sensu, many aspects of which I was not aware of including the comparative and superlative forms.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sensu

 

[Jacana]

Thank you everyone, most enlightening!