Naked Science Forum

Life Sciences => Plant Sciences, Zoology & Evolution => Topic started by: melaniejs on 04/02/2020 14:09:13

Title: Is it useful to have unique names for multiple animals?
Post by: melaniejs on 04/02/2020 14:09:13

Jim asks:

Are the unique names for multiples of animals useful, or are they like flamboyant powdered wigs?

What do you think?

Title: Re: Is it useful to have unique names for multiple animals?
Post by: Bored chemist on 04/02/2020 19:15:42

Quote from: melaniejs on 04/02/2020 14:09:13

Are the unique names for multiples of animals useful

What do you mean?

Title: Re: Is it useful to have unique names for multiple animals?
Post by: evan_au on 04/02/2020 21:18:25

Do you mean the system of have two names (usually derived from Latin) for every species?
- This system was invented by Carl Linnaeus
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Binomial_nomenclature

This system was useful in bringing some order to the chaotic naming of species
- And helping to promote the skills of Taxonomy

Now, with genetic analysis, we are able to probe much deeper into the murky genetic past of organisms, and some of the previous taxonomic classifications are being updated
- And we are finding that local subspecies and inter-species hybrids are quite common, so that the previously sharp species boundaries are becoming more blurry

But I think that giving a short species name is easier than quoting the entire DNA sequence of an individual...
- And it gives biologists a way of recognising contributions in biology and other fields...

See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_organisms_named_after_famous_people

Title: Re: Is it useful to have unique names for multiple animals?
Post by: Halc on 04/02/2020 23:08:20

I think he means 'pod' of whales, 'gaggle' of geese, etc.

Edit: I had spelled geese as 'geeze'.  OK, fixed that, but what you you call a group of geezers?

Title: Re: Is it useful to have unique names for multiple animals?
Post by: Origin on 05/02/2020 00:55:08

Like a murder of crows?  I love that one.

Title: Re: Is it useful to have unique names for multiple animals?
Post by: Bored chemist on 05/02/2020 07:21:43

If it wasn't useful to whoever named them, why would they have bothered?

Title: Re: Is it useful to have unique names for multiple animals?
Post by: evan_au on 05/02/2020 09:52:13

Rather than remember all these irregular collective nouns, you could also just use a generic "group of ..." - only it is much less colorful!

How about a swarm of earthquakes?

See: https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Appendix:Glossary_of_collective_nouns_by_collective_term

Title: Re: Is it useful to have unique names for multiple animals?
Post by: Bored chemist on 05/02/2020 20:14:52

When living in London I came to the conclusion that the collective noun for tourists is "clot".
But I'm still not sure if that's what the OP is on about.

Title: Re: Is it useful to have unique names for multiple animals?
Post by: Monox D. I-Fly on 07/02/2020 03:40:31

Quote from: evan_au on 05/02/2020 09:52:13

Rather than remember all these irregular collective nouns, you could also just use a generic "group of ..." - only it is much less colorful!

Yes, I prefer calling them "multiple...", "some ...", or "a lot of...". Still can't get over my head that a group of fish is called a school.