M. Wisshak, D. Knaust, Lothar H. Vallon, A. Rindsberg
{"title":"定义和完善技术分类学的原则:马库斯·伯特林(1959-2022)","authors":"M. Wisshak, D. Knaust, Lothar H. Vallon, A. Rindsberg","doi":"10.1080/10420940.2022.2057481","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In the peaceful days before Christmas 2021, fate struck hard on fellow ichnologist Markus Bertling (Figure 1), when he learned of a devastating diagnosis that gave him very little chance to turn the tide. On February 13, 2022, Markus passed away, leaving behind a painful void in his family and the ichnologic community alike. Starting off in 1985 with research on Upper Jurassic coral reef palaeoecology and sedimentology in northern Germany, Markus received his doctoral degree in 1990 and quickly picked upon an interest in the trace fossils he found in Jurassic reef settings and established his f irst new ichnogenus, Arachnostega Bertling, 1992. In the following years, it was the bioerosion trace fossils and the lessons to learn from the bioerosion at Mesozoic coral reef settings that caught his particular interest (e.g., Bertling, 1995, 1997a, 1999a, 1999b, 1999c, 2002; Perry & Bertling, 2000). Since 1998, Markus was curator for palaeontology at the Institute of Palaeontology of the Westphalian Wilhelm’s University in Münster, Germany, and in 2007 he became one of the heads of the University’s Geomuseum. For the past decade, Markus was heavily involved in the complete refurnishing and modernization of the museum and had less valency to follow his scientific passion in ichnology and ichnotaxonomy. Nevertheless, he sustained his interest in this field of science and was involved, for instance, in various case studies on bioerosion traces in osteic and xylic substrates (e.g., Feng et al., 2019; Höpner & Bertling, 2017; Mikuláš et al., 2020) and contributed with this expertise to an extensive review and annotated list of all the known bioerosion ichnotaxa (Wisshak et al., 2019). Aside from Arachnostega gastrochaenae, Markus co-authored the erection of at least three ichnospecies, three ichnogenera and fourteen ichnofamilies (Höpner & Bertling, 2017; Wisshak et al., 2019). Markus was best known to the ichnologic research community as a leading authority when it came to both the nomenclature of trace fossils and ichnotaxonomic principles. His effort helped to implement the rules established in the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature and to advocate their application in all kinds of ichnotaxonomic work. This, in turn, enabled the ichnotaxonomist to apply ichnotaxobases more consistently, to focus on the erection of ichnotaxa by a valid procedure and avoiding the erection of too many monotypic taxa. Whenever there was a problem to solve on how to apply the Code, the trickier the better, it became a reflex for many ichnologists to send an e-mail to Markus, asking for his advice. His in-depth knowledge of the Code put him into the position to lead or contribute to several comments on the draft proposal to emend the Code with respect to trace fossils (Bertling et al., 2003, 2004; Genise et al., 2004). From 2017 onward, Markus himself served as a commissioner on the Internat ional Commission for Zoologica l Nomenclature, striving to foster the status of ichnotaxonomy in zoological nomenclature and contributing to the ongoing revision of the Code. His involvement with the ICZN was much appreciated by the broader taxonomic community and to honour his work, the vertebrate genus Bertlinggekko was named after him. Markus’ engagement in improving the Code testifies to his great talent and profound interest in sound (methodo)logical thinking and theories of scientific cognition – an invaluable trait he brought into the admittedly chaotic situation that was ichnotaxonomy in the 1990s. Markus became central to the ichnotaxonomic community in 1998 when spearheading","PeriodicalId":51057,"journal":{"name":"Ichnos-An International Journal for Plant and Animal Traces","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-05-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Defining and refining principles in ichnotaxonomy: Markus Bertling (1959–2022)\",\"authors\":\"M. Wisshak, D. Knaust, Lothar H. Vallon, A. Rindsberg\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/10420940.2022.2057481\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In the peaceful days before Christmas 2021, fate struck hard on fellow ichnologist Markus Bertling (Figure 1), when he learned of a devastating diagnosis that gave him very little chance to turn the tide. On February 13, 2022, Markus passed away, leaving behind a painful void in his family and the ichnologic community alike. Starting off in 1985 with research on Upper Jurassic coral reef palaeoecology and sedimentology in northern Germany, Markus received his doctoral degree in 1990 and quickly picked upon an interest in the trace fossils he found in Jurassic reef settings and established his f irst new ichnogenus, Arachnostega Bertling, 1992. In the following years, it was the bioerosion trace fossils and the lessons to learn from the bioerosion at Mesozoic coral reef settings that caught his particular interest (e.g., Bertling, 1995, 1997a, 1999a, 1999b, 1999c, 2002; Perry & Bertling, 2000). Since 1998, Markus was curator for palaeontology at the Institute of Palaeontology of the Westphalian Wilhelm’s University in Münster, Germany, and in 2007 he became one of the heads of the University’s Geomuseum. For the past decade, Markus was heavily involved in the complete refurnishing and modernization of the museum and had less valency to follow his scientific passion in ichnology and ichnotaxonomy. Nevertheless, he sustained his interest in this field of science and was involved, for instance, in various case studies on bioerosion traces in osteic and xylic substrates (e.g., Feng et al., 2019; Höpner & Bertling, 2017; Mikuláš et al., 2020) and contributed with this expertise to an extensive review and annotated list of all the known bioerosion ichnotaxa (Wisshak et al., 2019). Aside from Arachnostega gastrochaenae, Markus co-authored the erection of at least three ichnospecies, three ichnogenera and fourteen ichnofamilies (Höpner & Bertling, 2017; Wisshak et al., 2019). Markus was best known to the ichnologic research community as a leading authority when it came to both the nomenclature of trace fossils and ichnotaxonomic principles. His effort helped to implement the rules established in the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature and to advocate their application in all kinds of ichnotaxonomic work. This, in turn, enabled the ichnotaxonomist to apply ichnotaxobases more consistently, to focus on the erection of ichnotaxa by a valid procedure and avoiding the erection of too many monotypic taxa. Whenever there was a problem to solve on how to apply the Code, the trickier the better, it became a reflex for many ichnologists to send an e-mail to Markus, asking for his advice. His in-depth knowledge of the Code put him into the position to lead or contribute to several comments on the draft proposal to emend the Code with respect to trace fossils (Bertling et al., 2003, 2004; Genise et al., 2004). From 2017 onward, Markus himself served as a commissioner on the Internat ional Commission for Zoologica l Nomenclature, striving to foster the status of ichnotaxonomy in zoological nomenclature and contributing to the ongoing revision of the Code. His involvement with the ICZN was much appreciated by the broader taxonomic community and to honour his work, the vertebrate genus Bertlinggekko was named after him. Markus’ engagement in improving the Code testifies to his great talent and profound interest in sound (methodo)logical thinking and theories of scientific cognition – an invaluable trait he brought into the admittedly chaotic situation that was ichnotaxonomy in the 1990s. Markus became central to the ichnotaxonomic community in 1998 when spearheading\",\"PeriodicalId\":51057,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Ichnos-An International Journal for Plant and Animal Traces\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-05-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Ichnos-An International Journal for Plant and Animal Traces\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/10420940.2022.2057481\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PALEONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ichnos-An International Journal for Plant and Animal Traces","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/10420940.2022.2057481","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PALEONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
在2021年圣诞节前的平静日子里,命运沉重地打击了技术专家马库斯·伯特林(图1),他得知了一项毁灭性的诊断,几乎没有机会扭转局势。2022年2月13日,马库斯去世了,给他的家人和科技界留下了痛苦的空白。Markus于1985年开始研究德国北部的上侏罗纪珊瑚礁古生态学和沉积学,于1990年获得博士学位,并很快对他在侏罗纪珊瑚礁环境中发现的痕迹化石产生了兴趣,并于1992年建立了他的第一个新鱼属——Arachnostega Bertling。在随后的几年中,引起他特别兴趣的是生物侵蚀痕迹化石和中生代珊瑚礁环境中生物侵蚀的教训(例如,Bertling, 1995,1997a, 1999a, 1999b, 1999c, 2002;Perry & Bertling, 2000)。自1998年以来,马库斯一直是德国梅恩斯特威斯特伐利亚威廉大学古生物学研究所的古生物学馆长,并于2007年成为该大学地质博物馆的负责人之一。在过去的十年里,马库斯积极参与了博物馆的全面装修和现代化,并没有多少时间去追随他对技术和技术分类学的科学热情。尽管如此,他保持了对这一科学领域的兴趣,并参与了诸如骨和木质基质中生物侵蚀痕迹的各种案例研究(例如,Feng等人,2019;Höpner & Bertling, 2017;Mikuláš等人,2020),并利用这些专业知识对所有已知的生物侵蚀ichnotaxa进行了广泛的审查和注释列表(Wisshak等人,2019)。除了腹chaenae Arachnostega, Markus还参与了至少3个鱼属、3个鱼科和14个鱼科的直立研究(Höpner & Bertling, 2017;Wisshak et al., 2019)。马库斯在技术研究界最为人所知的是,他是痕迹化石命名法和技术分类学原理方面的权威。他的努力有助于实施《国际动物命名法法典》所建立的规则,并倡导将这些规则应用于各种技术分类工作。这反过来又使鱼类分类学家能够更加一致地应用鱼类分类基,通过有效的程序关注鱼类分类群的建立,并避免过多的单型分类群的建立。每当需要解决如何应用《准则》的问题时,越复杂越好,许多技术人员就会本能地给马库斯发电子邮件,征求他的建议。他对《法典》的深入了解使他能够领导或参与对《法典》有关化石修订提案草案的若干评论(Bertling et al., 2003,2004;Genise et al., 2004)。自2017年起,Markus本人担任国际动物命名委员会委员,致力于提升生物分类学在动物命名中的地位,并为正在进行的法典修订做出贡献。他对ICZN的参与受到了更广泛的分类学界的赞赏,为了纪念他的工作,脊椎动物属Bertlinggekko以他的名字命名。Markus致力于改进代码,证明了他在合理(方法)逻辑思维和科学认知理论方面的巨大天赋和浓厚兴趣——这是他在20世纪90年代公认的技术分类学混乱局面中带来的宝贵品质。马库斯在1998年成为技术分类学界的核心人物
Defining and refining principles in ichnotaxonomy: Markus Bertling (1959–2022)
In the peaceful days before Christmas 2021, fate struck hard on fellow ichnologist Markus Bertling (Figure 1), when he learned of a devastating diagnosis that gave him very little chance to turn the tide. On February 13, 2022, Markus passed away, leaving behind a painful void in his family and the ichnologic community alike. Starting off in 1985 with research on Upper Jurassic coral reef palaeoecology and sedimentology in northern Germany, Markus received his doctoral degree in 1990 and quickly picked upon an interest in the trace fossils he found in Jurassic reef settings and established his f irst new ichnogenus, Arachnostega Bertling, 1992. In the following years, it was the bioerosion trace fossils and the lessons to learn from the bioerosion at Mesozoic coral reef settings that caught his particular interest (e.g., Bertling, 1995, 1997a, 1999a, 1999b, 1999c, 2002; Perry & Bertling, 2000). Since 1998, Markus was curator for palaeontology at the Institute of Palaeontology of the Westphalian Wilhelm’s University in Münster, Germany, and in 2007 he became one of the heads of the University’s Geomuseum. For the past decade, Markus was heavily involved in the complete refurnishing and modernization of the museum and had less valency to follow his scientific passion in ichnology and ichnotaxonomy. Nevertheless, he sustained his interest in this field of science and was involved, for instance, in various case studies on bioerosion traces in osteic and xylic substrates (e.g., Feng et al., 2019; Höpner & Bertling, 2017; Mikuláš et al., 2020) and contributed with this expertise to an extensive review and annotated list of all the known bioerosion ichnotaxa (Wisshak et al., 2019). Aside from Arachnostega gastrochaenae, Markus co-authored the erection of at least three ichnospecies, three ichnogenera and fourteen ichnofamilies (Höpner & Bertling, 2017; Wisshak et al., 2019). Markus was best known to the ichnologic research community as a leading authority when it came to both the nomenclature of trace fossils and ichnotaxonomic principles. His effort helped to implement the rules established in the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature and to advocate their application in all kinds of ichnotaxonomic work. This, in turn, enabled the ichnotaxonomist to apply ichnotaxobases more consistently, to focus on the erection of ichnotaxa by a valid procedure and avoiding the erection of too many monotypic taxa. Whenever there was a problem to solve on how to apply the Code, the trickier the better, it became a reflex for many ichnologists to send an e-mail to Markus, asking for his advice. His in-depth knowledge of the Code put him into the position to lead or contribute to several comments on the draft proposal to emend the Code with respect to trace fossils (Bertling et al., 2003, 2004; Genise et al., 2004). From 2017 onward, Markus himself served as a commissioner on the Internat ional Commission for Zoologica l Nomenclature, striving to foster the status of ichnotaxonomy in zoological nomenclature and contributing to the ongoing revision of the Code. His involvement with the ICZN was much appreciated by the broader taxonomic community and to honour his work, the vertebrate genus Bertlinggekko was named after him. Markus’ engagement in improving the Code testifies to his great talent and profound interest in sound (methodo)logical thinking and theories of scientific cognition – an invaluable trait he brought into the admittedly chaotic situation that was ichnotaxonomy in the 1990s. Markus became central to the ichnotaxonomic community in 1998 when spearheading
期刊介绍:
The foremost aim of Ichnos is to promote excellence in ichnologic research. Primary emphases center upon the ethologic and ecologic significance of tracemaking organisms; organism-substrate interrelationships; and the role of biogenic processes in environmental reconstruction, sediment dynamics, sequence or event stratigraphy, biogeochemistry, and sedimentary diagenesis. Each contribution rests upon a firm taxonomic foundation, although papers dealing solely with systematics and nomenclature may have less priority than those dealing with conceptual and interpretive aspects of ichnology. Contributions from biologists and geologists are equally welcome.
The format for Ichnos is designed to accommodate several types of manuscripts, including Research Articles (comprehensive articles dealing with original, fundamental research in ichnology), and Short Communications (short, succinct papers treating certain aspects of the history of ichnology, book reviews, news and notes, or invited comments dealing with current or contentious issues). The large page size and two-column format lend flexibility to the design of tables and illustrations. Thorough but timely reviews and rapid publication of manuscripts are integral parts of the process.