Question

[Rinlive]

I have a question :

Why do not you use the scientific names for species?
Personally I do not like to use common names.
I think they are not accurate.
(Especially that common names vary depending on the country)

In France, we almost only use scientific names, they are much more convenient to clearly identify a species.

I ask this because I am lost on this forum, I never know that is what you mean.

Sorry for my English, I'm French ...

[Minkness]

Most venomous keepers use scientific names so they know what kind of antivenom they need I think. I hate using the scientific names because for me they are long, hard to say, and some look very simmilar. That's just me though lol.

[Roman]

Rinlive, I support your suggestion, actually I made a similar suggestion some years back.

But as Minkness just wrote, a lot of users here are not familiar with the scientific names, at least not with a lot of species, don’t like to use them or don’t see the need to do so. One argument is that using scientific names might confuse or even discourage beginners of joining the forum.

In my experience with other forums here in Germany where scientific names are in general usage this might be the case sometimes, but most of the time new users become used to it very quickly.

In my opinion it would be much easier for not native speakers to know what we are talking about, but it would also make searching for threads about a specific snake so much easier. I try to use the scientific name at least once at every post I write for exactly this reason.


Roman

[Sylphie]

Rinlive, I'm mostly using common names because everyone is using them... I mean, if I would refer to my trio of Russian Rats as E. schrenckii a lot of people would be like "ehh, I don't know what it is, and im too lazy to check". Even if someone don't know what exactly it is the "rat snake" part is clearing it a bit. The same goes for boas and pythons for me, I'm not too good in their scientific names as I'm rather colubridae fan, but I know the majority of common names, so I don't need to google every time to see about what species is the conversation.

[Rinlive]

In France, beginners will quickly get used to the scientific names, and do not fear.
Frankly, I do not find the common names practice.
The advantage of scientific names is that they are universal, no need for translation.

But I understand that some find it along.

When I see written "rat snake" I am completely lost.
What "snake rat" you speak etc. ?

Same for the boa "red tail", it does not mean anything to a European.

Roman thank you to understand me!

[misskirbyd]

My knowledge of snakes is smaller than some others, and whats available to keep in Aus can be quite limited, so I often have to 'translate' what other users say when its colloquial/abbreviations to common terms, let alone scientific!

On this forum I have referred to my snake in both the common and scientific in the same post since they are more unusual internationally, but in an Australian forum I wouldn't really need to bother. I do like when people use both forms, as its an easy way for me to educate myself

[bigsnakegirl785]

I do not use scientific names because I don't know all the names, and I'd have to Google each and every name I came across, even if it was 2 seconds ago. Many of them run together and I can't tell the difference visually, and I can't pronounce them in my head.

The only snakes I do use scientific names with regularly are boa constrictors, and if I do know the scientific names I'll include them along with the common names.

A problem a lot of newbies experience is that they view the "use only scientific names" as elitist, and it would push a lot of newbies (at least Americans) away because it doesn't seem accessible to them. I've seen a lot of people complain about that before.

Although I do think using scientific names can be helpful (and a lot of users do), I do not see the use in using scientific names only.

[dave himself]

I hate using the scientific names because for me they are long, hard to say, and some look very simmilar. That's just me though lol.[/QUOTE]

This ^^^^^^^^^^^^

[chairman]

I keep about a dozen species and know the scientific names for all of them. But half of the species have had a name change in the time that I've kept them and I think one species has had two name changes. The common names have remained consistent, hence my preference for them.

The scientific names will have more value once DNA analysis becomes fast and cheap enough for the majority of species to get properly sorted.

[SSSSnakes]

Originally Posted by dave himself

I hate using the scientific names because for me they are long, hard to say, and some look very simmilar. That's just me though lol.

This ^^^^^^^^^^^^ [/QUOTE]

I AGREE 100% ALSO WHEN THEY ONLY USE THE FIRST LETTERS OF THE FIRST AND SECOND WORD OF THE NAME IT MAKES IT HARDER FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND. LIKE C. ATROX. ISN'T EASIER TO SAY WESTERN DIAMONDBACK RATTLESNAKE?

Originally Posted by chairman

I keep about a dozen species and know the scientific names for all of them. But half of the species have had a name change in the time that I've kept them and I think one species has had two name changes. The common names have remained consistent, hence my preference for them.

AGREE, ALSO WITH MORPHS THE SCIENTIFIC NAMES STAY THE SAME. THIS MEANS A BALL/ROYAL PYTHON IS, PYTHON REGIUS AND A SPIDER BALL STILL PYTHON REGIUS. IT DOES NOT DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THE DIFFERENT MORPHS. I USE THE SCIENTIFIC AND COMMON NAMES WHEN LABELING MY VENOMOUS SNAKES.

[prairiepanda]

This is the only place I use common names, and that's just because most of the users here use common names. I prefer scientific names for the sake of precision, but in the case of snakes, especially in a mostly american-dominated forum, I don't mind as much because there usually isn't much overlap with common names for snakes, and there aren't any species in the pet trade that I can think of which don't have common names.

I'm more concerned about using scientific names with things like spiders, because a lot of issues arise with using common names. For example, some species do not have any common name, like Pelegrina aeneola which cannot be distinguished from any other jumping spider without the use of the scientific name. There are also common names which describe multiple species, such as "zebra leg tarantula" which could refer to Grammastola pulchripes. Eupalaestrus campestratus, Ephebopus murinus, or several other species, which have very different care requirements and temperaments and should never be mixed up by beginners in the hobby.

But snakes? There's no question of what a ball python is. It's annoying when people say things like "rat snake" or "boa" and do not specify what kind, but when it is specified it is usually an accurate description. Russian rat snake only ever refers to Elaphe schrenckii and Texas rat snake only ever refers to Elaphe obsoleta lindheimeri. It's not as muddy an issue as it is with other animals.

[Wingbeats]

It's my experience in the USA that most Americans find scientific names hard to pronounce or remember.

I say "forest hawk" and people nod, I say "Accipiter" and people go "what is that??"

Same goes for reptiles....I memorize Latin names quickly, but I'm used to using and reading them as a biologist. My friends often lament their confusion at me when I talk about colubrids, buteos, or passerines....I keep having to clarify with common names.

Not every reptile keeper is a biologist.

[reptiledude987]

Personally I think Im one of the few north americans who does like to use latin names of snakes ( especially venomous). However I think on this site for the sake of keeping it simple for less expierenced keepers or those who simply arent exposed to the scientific names its just more user friendly. At first I hated them but I have a friend who took zoology in university and always uses them and over time theyve grown on me. In some of my threads I will include both.

[Roman]

Originally Posted by bigsnakegirl785

A problem a lot of newbies experience is that they view the "use only scientific names" as elitist, and it would push a lot of newbies (at least Americans) away because it doesn't seem accessible to them. I've seen a lot of people complain about that before.

I don’t think Rinlive suggested to use *only* the scientific names, that would go too far in my opinion. What I would like to suggest is to use the scientific name also, so if you post about a ball python just add the scientific name *Python regius* just once.

Originally Posted by prairiepanda

This is the only place I use common names, and that's just because most of the users here use common names. I prefer scientific names for the sake of precision, but in the case of snakes, especially in a mostly american-dominated forum, I don't mind as much because there usually isn't much overlap with common names for snakes, and there aren't any species in the pet trade that I can think of which don't have common names.

[...]

But snakes? There's no question of what a ball python is. It's annoying when people say things like "rat snake" or "boa" and do not specify what kind, but when it is specified it is usually an accurate description. Russian rat snake only ever refers to Elaphe schrenckii and Texas rat snake only ever refers to Elaphe obsoleta lindheimeri. It's not as muddy an issue as it is with other animals.

If you stay with your local snakes it might be an accurate description. It’s the same here in Germany, if I say “Ringelnatter” anybody who knows a little about reptiles immediately knows what I mean, I don’t have to say “Natrix natrix” (in English it is called Grass snake). But if you go internationally, this accuracy isn’t any more. If you talk about water snakes you mean the genus Nerodia like the northern water snake (Nerodia sipedon). If we in Europe speak about water snakes we mean the genus Natrix like the Grass snake (Natrix natrix).

If you talk about garter snakes you mean your harmless snakes of the genus Thamnophis, somebody from South Africa would talk about the venomous garter snakes of the genus Elapsoidea, a genus of elapid snakes.

Your example of the Russian rat snake is a nice one. Please enter “Elaphe schrenkii” into the English version of Wikipedia – you will get to an article about the “Manchurian Black Water Snake”, where it says Quote:” It is also known as the Amur rat snake, Siberian rat snake or more commonly the Russian rat snake.” The price list of a British dealer lists them as Amur rat snakes.

Sorry for picking on you, especially as you do use the scientific names, it is just not as clear cut as it seems.

Originally Posted by SSSSnakes

I AGREE 100% ALSO WHEN THEY ONLY USE THE FIRST LETTERS OF THE FIRST AND SECOND WORD OF THE NAME IT MAKES IT HARDER FOR PEOPLE TO UNDERSTAND. LIKE C. ATROX. ISN'T EASIER TO SAY WESTERN DIAMONDBACK RATTLESNAKE?

AGREE, ALSO WITH MORPHS THE SCIENTIFIC NAMES STAY THE SAME. THIS MEANS A BALL/ROYAL PYTHON IS, PYTHON REGIUS AND A SPIDER BALL STILL PYTHON REGIUS. IT DOES NOT DISTINGUISH BETWEEN THE DIFFERENT MORPHS. I USE THE SCIENTIFIC AND COMMON NAMES WHEN LABELING MY VENOMOUS SNAKES.

Hi Jerry – I think we had this discussion before

I agree, immediately using “C. atrox” instead of “Crotalus atrox” is bad style, you should always use the full version first, then you might use the short form as well. But this goes for the use of common names as well. If they would use “WESTERN DIAMONDBACK RATTLESNAKE” I wouldn’t have a problem with it. But how often DO many members use the full common name? And how often do a lot of members only use “corn”, “boa”, “ATB”, “BCC”, “BCI”, “blood”, “Retic”, etc. …??

Oh I know the list of the most common abbreviations, but every so often I stumble about something I am sure I had already seen before but can’t remember anymore (like BHP black headed python just a few days ago).

Just a random example of a thread were the full common name is never mentioned at all (you can see it and the scientific name in the pictures Chuck provided, but this is imbedded into the pictures, it is not part of the text of the thread, so the search function of the forum software won’t find it. )


--> http://www.ssnakess.com/forums/gener...lood-type.html

So let’s say you will be searching for some information about blood pythons in a year from now – which search criterions would you use? Would you really just search for “blood”? This might get you a lot of other threads not related to blood pythons at all. On the other hand, if you search for “blood python” this thread won’t show.

Sure, scientific names are sometimes subject to change – that’s what science is all about. OK, it might be bothersome to relearn some names because the genus has changed or there is a split and two subspecies get raised to species status – but there is always some change anywhere where you have to relearn something. Windows changed it’s desktop repeatedly, Word looks completely different in the newer versions as all the former versions. Your new car might have no keys anymore but just a start-button…

Isn’t a morph just a normal ball python with a different, unusual coloration? So why not call it just that. “I have a question about my pink triple het anery whatever ball python (Python regius) …?” (sorry I am not interested in morphs, so I have no idea of the artificial names they have). If you search for “Python regius pink triple het” in the advanced search where you can enter several keywords it might find you this question but not the thread about the “pink triple het corn snake”.



So once again – I am not suggesting to use only the scientific names, absolutely not. I am suggesting to use the common name and add the scientific name once in the thread to make finding it easier.

I am not really interested in corn snakes or ball pythons, so what I really like about this forum is the diversity of other threads, that you might also find some information about unusual snakes as well. But in order to do so I use the search function on a regular basis to search for the information I am currently interested in. Using only abbreviations or parts of common names doesn’t make finding this piece of information any easier.

Roman

[Sylphie]

Roman, when you put it like this it definitely makes sense. I will try to put scientific names in my threads more often after reading this