The scientific name isn’t too bad, but I really think that Ossiannilssonola tunicarubra should be given “Candy Corn Leafhopper” as a common name. The resemblance is undeniable.
5 Likes
That’s as helpful as arvensis (of the field). I’ve found them these two growing in lawns and corners:
I recently came across Megalonotus sabulicola, with the English common name, " Introduced Dirt-colored Seed Bug". Given my first thought was, “Introduced to where?”, I wouldn’t be upset to see that one renamed.
The Glossary of British Flora states that sabulicola means ‘substantive, a dweller on sand’ and I will admit to liking the sound of ‘Sandy …’ more.
1 Like
I am lucky as Anna’s Hummingbirds are profuse year round in the Calif. Bay Area. The Oholone peoples called them Umunhum, which is just like the sounds their wings make.
2 Likes
Chungus Millipede
edit: i’m sorry i didn’t realize how old this post is
I was not aware of this name change; thank you for pointing it out!
1 Like
I don’t know what I would change it to, but I would like to change dickcissel. I have no idea how to pronouce this and where the heck did this name come from anyway
It’s pronounced dick-sis-el. The name is onomatopoetic.
1 Like
Maybe breaking down the Euphorbia genus down into more genres?
The fact that these three are the same genus:
- Sticks on Fire (Euphorbia tirucalli)
- Poinsettia (Euphorbia pulchrrrima)
- African Milkweed (Euphorbia trigona)
But these three aren’t in the same genus:
Has always stupefied me. It’s almost as if the Euphorbia species are like dog-breeds of the plant world.
@nathantaylor has lots of good information on how these are grouped here, which helps a lot!
1 Like
It’s genetic.
According to a 2002 publication on studies of DNA sequence data,[20][21][22] most of the smaller “satellite genera” around the huge genus Euphorbia nest deep within the latter. Consequently, these taxa, namely the never generally accepted genus Chamaesyce , as well as the smaller genera Cubanthus ,[23] Elaeophorbia , Endadenium , Monadenium , Synadenium , and Pedilanthus were transferred to Euphorbia . The entire subtribe Euphorbiinae now consists solely of the genus Euphorbia .
2 Likes
That makes sense, thanks! I assume if they’re all Euphorbia it’s because much smarter and more informed people than me have for placed them there for very good phylogenic reasons.
It’s still just a little frustrating that seeing one Euphorbia doesn’t help much in getting a sense for all of them since they’re so different and sometimes finding the cyathium (another good @nathantaylor resource) and checking for very-flowy white sap aren’t always viable identifiers depending on time of year.
Still referred to as Gypsy Moth in the UK apparently though.: https://www.ukmoths.org.uk/species/lymantria-dispar/
What about the 'Batman Moth? Has anyone mentioned Coelostathma discopunctana?
I would like to propose Vocavit crucesignat as a rename.
1 Like
Homo idiotus could also work
3 Likes
Lately, I have taken an interest in the serpentine-specialist milkweed, Asclepias solanoana. Now, with a specific epithet like that, you would logically think that it was from Solano County. You’d be wrong. The map of iNaturalist sightings agrees with that of Stephen Lynch’s 1977 article in Madroño – the species is found in the northern most parts of Napa and Sonoma Counties, north to Trinity County. So instead of solanoana, how about sonomana?
Not really a specific species, but I would probably add an “h” to the word “crinoid”.
1 Like
Crinoidh?
3 Likes
Chrinoid, sorry for the confusion.
1 Like
It’s so sad to hear that folks want to get rid of names that reflect the name of the person who took the time to identify the creature. To me, it’s like erasing history. It removes so much of the history and interest and just makes names a bland description that have no interest or ability to evoke our past. Not that the discoverers were perfect or even likeable in some cases, but it does give a sense of how things have evolved through time and how we grew to be more aware of the birds and nature around us. I personally dislike the trend in renaming common names of birds of North America to names that are nothing more than a poor description. It combines with another pet peeve of mine where the common names are not capitalized, leaving me in the situation of wondering: is that reference to a yellow-rumped warbler referring to just an unidentified warbler which happens to have a yellow rump and may be some other species or is that the Yellow-rumped Warbler, i.e. the Myrtle Warbler (which is the variety we see here)? I still call the one I see here a Myrtle Warbler. And i still use a lot of the older bird names unless I am birding with someone who specifically uses the new names. I try to adapt then.
Just my opinion and an unpopular one, but it really does make me very sad. I keep waiting for the Northern Cardinal to be renamed to Red Bird as it is known around here.
And I apologize both for stating this very poorly and for any offense I may have caused. It was not my intention and I dislike disagreeing, particularly with a popular sentiment or argument. But I just wanted folks to be aware that there are other views out there. Even if they are only held by one old grumpy woman.
6 Likes