{"title":"Roksandic及其同事对Homo bodoensis的命名并不能解决中更新世人类进化的问题","authors":"Eric Delson, Chris Stringer","doi":"10.1002/evan.21950","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Roksandic et al. (2022) proposed the new species name <i>Homo bodoensis</i> as a replacement name for <i>Homo rhodesiensis</i> Woodward, 1921, because they felt it was poorly and variably defined and was linked to sociopolitical baggage. However, the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature includes regulations on how and when such name changes are allowed, and Roksandic et al.'s arguments meet none of these requirements. It is not permitted to change a name solely because of variable (or erroneous) later use once it has been originally defined correctly, nor can a name be modified because it is offensive to one or more authors or to be politically expedient. We discuss past usage of <i>H. rhodesiensis</i> and the relevant nomenclatural procedures, the proposed evolutionary position of <i>H. bodoensis</i>, and issues raised about decolonizing paleoanthropology. We reject <i>H. bodoensis</i> as a junior synonym, with no value from its inception.</p>","PeriodicalId":47849,"journal":{"name":"Evolutionary Anthropology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2022-06-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"7","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The naming of Homo bodoensis by Roksandic and colleagues does not resolve issues surrounding Middle Pleistocene human evolution\",\"authors\":\"Eric Delson, Chris Stringer\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/evan.21950\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Roksandic et al. (2022) proposed the new species name <i>Homo bodoensis</i> as a replacement name for <i>Homo rhodesiensis</i> Woodward, 1921, because they felt it was poorly and variably defined and was linked to sociopolitical baggage. However, the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature includes regulations on how and when such name changes are allowed, and Roksandic et al.'s arguments meet none of these requirements. It is not permitted to change a name solely because of variable (or erroneous) later use once it has been originally defined correctly, nor can a name be modified because it is offensive to one or more authors or to be politically expedient. We discuss past usage of <i>H. rhodesiensis</i> and the relevant nomenclatural procedures, the proposed evolutionary position of <i>H. bodoensis</i>, and issues raised about decolonizing paleoanthropology. We reject <i>H. bodoensis</i> as a junior synonym, with no value from its inception.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":47849,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Evolutionary Anthropology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-06-27\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"7\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Evolutionary Anthropology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/evan.21950\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANTHROPOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Evolutionary Anthropology","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/evan.21950","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANTHROPOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 7
摘要
Roksandic et al.(2022)提出了新的物种名称Homo bodoensis,以替代Woodward(1921)提出的Homo rhodesiensis,因为他们认为该名称定义不佳且多变,并且与社会政治包袱有关。然而,《国际动物命名法》包括了关于如何以及何时允许这种名称更改的规定,而Roksandic等人的论点不符合这些要求。在最初定义正确后,不允许仅仅因为变量(或错误)的使用而更改名称,也不能因为冒犯一个或多个作者或出于政治上的权宜之计而修改名称。我们讨论了过去对罗得西亚人的使用和相关的命名程序,提出的波多斯人的进化位置,以及非殖民化古人类学提出的问题。我们拒绝H. bodoensis作为初级同义词,从一开始就没有价值。
The naming of Homo bodoensis by Roksandic and colleagues does not resolve issues surrounding Middle Pleistocene human evolution
Roksandic et al. (2022) proposed the new species name Homo bodoensis as a replacement name for Homo rhodesiensis Woodward, 1921, because they felt it was poorly and variably defined and was linked to sociopolitical baggage. However, the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature includes regulations on how and when such name changes are allowed, and Roksandic et al.'s arguments meet none of these requirements. It is not permitted to change a name solely because of variable (or erroneous) later use once it has been originally defined correctly, nor can a name be modified because it is offensive to one or more authors or to be politically expedient. We discuss past usage of H. rhodesiensis and the relevant nomenclatural procedures, the proposed evolutionary position of H. bodoensis, and issues raised about decolonizing paleoanthropology. We reject H. bodoensis as a junior synonym, with no value from its inception.
期刊介绍:
Evolutionary Anthropology is an authoritative review journal that focuses on issues of current interest in biological anthropology, paleoanthropology, archaeology, functional morphology, social biology, and bone biology — including dentition and osteology — as well as human biology, genetics, and ecology. In addition to lively, well-illustrated articles reviewing contemporary research efforts, this journal also publishes general news of relevant developments in the scientific, social, or political arenas. Reviews of noteworthy new books are also included, as are letters to the editor and listings of various conferences. The journal provides a valuable source of current information for classroom teaching and research activities in evolutionary anthropology.