Tom Devitt

Tex-Mex herpetologist

My activity

  • Profile picture of Tom Devitt who took this action.

    Tom Devitt commented on "Syrrhophus Cope 1878":

    @Katja Schulz: I think it makes good sense to build a connector so that AmphibiaWeb could be used as an alternative classification. It's easy enough to work around the Syrrhophus problem; I will just ask Joyce to make the "clade" Syrrhophus a subgenus, and do the same for the rest of Eleutherodactylus. The AmphibiaWeb taxonomy is always going to be the most current taxonomy, as far as I can tell. Thanks.

    12 months ago

  • Profile picture of Tom Devitt who took this action.

    Tom Devitt commented on "Syrrhophus Cope 1878":

    @Katja Schulz: Hi Katja, I met with the AmphibiaWeb folks today and asked about an importable hierarchical classification. Joyce Gross mentioned they have a species list with all of the higher taxonomy (updated nightly) available here: http://amphibiaweb.org/amphib_names.txt Would this work? Tom

    12 months ago

  • Profile picture of Tom Devitt who took this action.

    Tom Devitt commented on "Eleutherodactylus marnockii (Cope, 1878)":

    the animal pictured is E. cystignathoides, not E. marnockii.

    12 months ago

  • Profile picture of Tom Devitt who took this action.

    Tom Devitt commented on "Syrrhophus nebulosus":

    Syrrhophus nebulosus is now Eleutherodactylus (Syrrhophus) pipilans.

    12 months ago

  • Profile picture of Tom Devitt who took this action.

    Tom Devitt commented on "Syrrhophus Cope 1878":

    @Katja Schulz: Hi Katja, I guess I don't know what makes a hierarchy "importable." I have recent literature references, but in terms of an accurate online hierarchy, I don't know of one. Amphibian Species of the World at the AMNH is pretty good, but doesn't break down Eleutherodactylus into subgenera. The Wikipedia info on the Eleutherodactylus page however, does list the subgenera and species. The "Species 2000 & ITIS Catalogue of Life: April 2013" lists all (I think) species in Eleutherodactylus, but doesn't list subfamilies or subgenera.

    12 months ago

  • Profile picture of Tom Devitt who took this action.

    Tom Devitt commented on "Syrrhophus Cope 1878":

    Syrrhophus is currently considered a subgenus of Eleutherodactylus, following Hedges (1989). Furthermore, Eleutherodactylus is in the subfamily Eleutherodactylinae and the family Eleutherodactylidae, following Hedges et al. 2008. The NCBI seems to follow the hierarchical classification, but several Eleutherodactylus (Syrrhophus) species are not listed under the NCBI classification. Does this makes sense? Thanks! Tom

    12 months ago

  • Profile picture of Tom Devitt who took this action.

    Tom Devitt commented on "USNM 115976 dorsal":

    @Katja Schulz: Katja, Jennifer Hammock just sent me a detailed email addressing my questions. I will sort this out. Thanks!

    12 months ago

  • Profile picture of Tom Devitt who took this action.

    Tom Devitt commented on "USNM 115976 dorsal":

    @Katja Schulz: Hi Katja, I guess the problem is with the hierarchical classification. Under at least one of the classifications, it's listed in the subgenus Syrrhophus (NCBI, perhaps others) but it should be in the subgenus Euhyas. Thanks for your help! Here's what I'm trying to accomplish, and the questions I have: I'm trying to curate a group of frogs, genus Eleutherodactylus, subgenus Syrrhophus (family Eleutherodactylidae, subfamily Eleutherodactylinae). Basically, I'm trying to get all 26 species to be classified correctly (the NCBI hierarchical classification is correct, but doesn't contain all the species it should) and associated with the right taxon names. My question is, in adding a new taxon association to a data object (photos), should I add ALL potential associations listed for a given photo? There are multiple redundant ones listed, such as "Syrrhophus" and "Syrrhophus Cope, 1878". I've done this for several photos but it seems to have created a big mess, so I'm not sure this is what I should be doing. Is there any way to get these species into the correct hierarchical classification and associated with the proper taxon names? Thanks for any help you can provide. I'm a bit mystified by how to do this. Thanks, Tom

    12 months ago • edited: 12 months ago

  • Profile picture of Tom Devitt who took this action.

    Tom Devitt commented on "Eleutherodactylus fuscus Lynn and Dent, 1943":

    This species is not in the subgenus Syrrhophus; it is in the subgenus Euhyas.

    12 months ago

  • Profile picture of Tom Devitt who took this action.

    Tom Devitt commented on Tom Devitt's newsfeed:

    @Cyndy Parr: Thanks Cyndy! Yes, I do have questions! I sent this to Jennifer Hammock last night as well, but I'll also ask you since you so kindly offered to help. I'm trying to do some further curating for a group of frogs, genus Eleutherodactylus, subgenus Syrrhophus (family Eleutherodactylidae, subfamily Eleutherodactylinae). Basically, I'm trying to get all 26 species to be classified correctly (the NCBI hierarchical classification is correct, but doesn't contain all the species it should) and associated with the right taxon names. My question is, in adding a new taxon association, should I add ALL potential associations listed for a given photo? There are multiple redundant ones, such as "Syrrhophus" and "Syrrhophus Cope 1878". I've done this for several photos, but I'm not sure this is what I should be doing. Is there any way to get these species into the correct hierarchical classification and associated with the proper taxon names? Also, there is at least one species name that should be changed (E. fuscus should be E. maurus). Should I report the problem to the Media Collection Cleaning Crew? Thanks for any help you can provide. I'm a bit mystified by how to do this. Thanks, Tom Devitt

    12 months ago

  • Profile picture of Tom Devitt who took this action.

    Tom Devitt commented on an older version of File:Trimorphodon.jpg:

    This is not a Trimorphodon, it's a Leptodeira, probably Leptodeira annulata.

    about 1 year ago

  • Profile picture of Tom Devitt who took this action.

    Tom Devitt commented on an older version of File:Trimorphodon biscutatus 1.jpg:

    This is not a Trimorphodon; it's a Leptodeira, probably Leptodeira annulata.

    about 1 year ago

  • Profile picture of Tom Devitt who took this action.

    Tom Devitt commented on an older version of File:Trimorphodon.jpg:

    This is not a Trimorphodon. It's a Leptodeira.

    about 1 year ago

  • Profile picture of Tom Devitt who took this action.

    Tom Devitt commented on "Syrrhophus marnocki Cope 1878":

    This is a misspelling of marnockii. Additionally, the taxonomy used by the Paleobiology Database is outdated.

    about 1 year ago