[Note: bionet.chlamydomonas removed from newsgroups line at the request of
Elizabeth Harris (chlamy at acpub.duke.edu).]
In article <watson.772300859 at bellatrix.sce.carleton.ca> watson at bellatrix.sce.carleton.ca (Stephen Watson) writes:
>hougen at femto.cs.umn.edu (Dean Hougen) writes:
>>Did anyone point out that the term zebrafish is ambiguous?
>He specified which one: _Danio rerio_. Popular little fresh-water
>aquarium fish. Never knew they were such important lab-critters ;-).
I didn't say that the post was ambiguous. I said the *term* zebrafish is
ambiguous. My concern is that the term is therefore a poor choice for a
I regret that I don't really have better suggestion. The "scientific"
name would be if it were fixed once and for all, but it isn't. (See
the discussion of Brachydanio vs. Danio.)
The term Zebra Danio is less ambiguous than zebrafish, but it is not
widely used in the bio sciences (although it is widely used in the
Zebra Danio also suffers from the problems that all "common names"
do. These include a lack of a governing body to regulate and a lack
of international recognition. (Then again, so does zebrafish.)
"Names make all the difference in the world." - Talking Heads