Five years ago, after repeatedly seeing publications about the "controversial" deer in which there was no reference to Giura Ilani, I wrote the opinion piece "What deer?", and as a response experts bothered more and less and attacked the scripture. In recent days I entered into a debate in an attempt to defend the name of the gazelle gazelle (Gazela gazela arabica), a name given to it by Giora Ilani who identified and described it, and changed to "Gazela acacia" by 'interested parties' - in my opinion a malicious change and arbitrary, so I repeat and follow the discovery and description of the deer.
Already at the end of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth century, zoologists identified the "southern branch" of the Israeli gazelle - Gazela Gazela, and there were also those who called it Gazela gazela arbica. In 1951, Ellerman talked about "the Arab variety of Gazela Gazela". In the mid-XNUMXs, Giora served as a liaison in Ein-Hatzava and told about hundreds of deer south of Nahal Tzin and in the Yamin Plain. As an observer who was not yet skilled, he did not recognize the species, but saw the striking differences between the southern deer population - the Negev deer (Dorcas) versus the Israeli gazelle from the north (a possibility worthy of examination is the contact between the Israeli deer and the Negev deer, a contact that may have resulted in the formation of a sub- A species that lives in the border areas between the two populations?). Giora recognized the difference and according to him there were hundreds of deer in the area that were shot by soldiers and Bedouins (the commander of the Southern Command at the time was an amateur hunter who later changed his skin and became the director of the Nature Reserves Authority).
At the beginning of the 90s, Giora was in Yotbata and as an employee of the nature protection company he conducted observations from a hill west of the Arava road (XNUMX). In his observations, he recognized the deer he knew from the quarry and realized that it was the subspecies described by zoologists as the "southern deer" (arabica). Therefore he proposed to call it the prairie deer and his proposal was accepted. Over the years, it was assumed that the group at its best was a remnant of the population from the quarry, therefore it was treated as a subspecies of the Israeli deer.
I met Giora when in 1970 he was appointed zoologist of the "Rosht" and as such initiated the deer count when from time to time we would cross the road and watch the prairie deer. Even those who were not experts could recognize them when they would climb the hills to escape, while the Negev deer would run away on the plains. On one occasion Giora captured a young Ofra and brought her to the zoo. After many years (1997) a genetic mapping of the ore remains was conducted and it was decided that it was a species and it was given the name Gazela Acacia. One of the excuses was that the name Gazela gazelle arabica would create confusion with the Arabian gazelle Gazela Arabica which is considered extinct. is that so? will confuse? (The definition of subspecies as species following genetic mapping borders on arbitrariness since if the races of the human species were tested according to the same indicators it would be necessary to separate them into species).
Unfortunately at that time Giura was already after a brain injury and unable to intervene. Perhaps this is why the Hebrew name that Giura gave to the deer was also different. Giora was an expert when it came to the Israeli fauna, an expertise that made him unpopular, not in the academic institutions, not among his colleagues at "Rasht". These too were not liked by those who know more than them, as well as those who replaced him in his position - the PA zoologist who is probably the source of the initiative to change the name...
But "lack of sympathy" is not a valid excuse for doing something wrong! It is possible to accept the definition as a species and the giving of the scientific name, not so with the Hebrew name. It was appropriate and right to keep the name given to him by those who recognized and described his uniqueness. It was appropriate to leave the name Zvi-Arava to him only as a tribute to the man who did so much for the preservation of nature. It would have been appropriate to keep the name given to him by Giora Ilani, Zvi-Arava.
See more on the subject on the science website:
7 תגובות
Long overdue and yet worthy of a blessing
There is an (official) decision to name the deer
CBI - Arab B.E
hallelujah…
Rosenthal,
1. If you claim that the entire science of genetic taxonomy can be dismissed, I have no power to enter into a discussion about it.
2+3. I wrote that a subspecies can only be created from differentiation and I added as I knew so as not to offend. In fact, I'm pretty sure that there is no theory that claims that a subspecies is created by mating between different species. If you know please give an example.
4. The word zen is not properly punctuated so it looks like a typo. In any case, it is appropriate to use the correct nomenclature even when quoting.
-
Regarding the scientific name: you can read here http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/117582065/0
As of today, the scientific community does not accept the differentiation into subspecies and they are all strains of the Chinese deer.
Regarding the Hebrew name, you continue to claim that there is a decision to use another name over the other. Can you explain which body decided that? The fact that one or another monthly decided to call the deer the Shit deer does not mean that everyone must use that name.
I wrote the list because Giora was a close friend
And therefore the subject is close to my heart and any distortion harms his memory and his rights,
Therefore, once again, one by one answers to the scholarly response of "Asaf",
1 - It is not written and there is no claim that humans are separate species,
Except that according to the indices in which animal species are separated into separate species
The same can be done for humans.
2 - I argued according to Giura that it is a subspecies, Gazela gazela arabica does not "exist"
Because what exists is Gazela Arabica, those who don't notice the difference are better off staying dead!
3 - A subspecies can be formed as a result of fertilization between two related species and hence
The proposal on "the seam",
The truth becomes clear when the commenter writes: "As far as I know"!
4 - The reference to the deer as a "breed" is by A. Ellerman and is therefore written in quotation marks,
If the commenter doesn't understand quotation marks - hey!
The list is written in order to remember the one who gave the Hebrew name
What is "not interesting" for the commenter, then Yuel will continue to treat and express himself boldly,
In the summary of the response, the most important thing is written: "I do not know the details of the case",
And I'm not referring to a "case" of close personal acquaintance,
Therefore again:
End of response in reading comprehension!
I had a long debate about whether the commenter "gathered", so I will just repeat that:
Compared to all the knowledgeable, the wise, the experts and the talented who quote
articles and links,
I was in the field and saw how things were happening.
For the rest of the "comments" I only have to repeat that:
End of response in reading comprehension...
י
International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature The entry is signed by Dr., but the article is full of so much nonsense that I can't believe that a learned person wrote it.
1. The biggest nonsense, is the claim that humans are a separate species? Humans are not a separate species because there is no problem of reproductive relationships between any human being and any other human being on the planet. And whoever claims this is probably a racist.
2. In the entry it is written that in 1997 they decided that the deer is a species. So a little web search shows that the scientific name is
Gazella gazella acaciae Mendelssohn, Groves and Shalmon, 1997
In other words, a subspecies was defined, not a species, and indeed it cannot be called Gazela gazelle arabica which already exists.
3. Besides, a subspecies is not created at the seam between different populations. At least as far as I know the only factor known to science that can lead to the creation of subspecies is differentiation.
4. The article mentions varieties of deer??? So this species in cultured plants or animals. In zoology, the term subspecies is used.
-
There are more mistakes but I'll stop here. Just saying that the scientific name was determined according to the first scientific article that described the taxon ie Mendelssohn, Groves and Shalmon and is subject to the rules of an international committee
International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature so there is no political interest here.
As for the Hebrew name, it has no meaning! A Hebrew name does not interest real scientists because it has no scientific validity, it is impossible to use this name in real scientific articles only in popular literature and since it has no validity there is no problem to have several Hebrew names for the same species. Those who want to call Zvi Arava and those who want C. Shitim. The main thing is that the scientific name appears.
I don't know the details of the case, but to me personally it sounds like there is an argument here of some people with too big egos who are dealing with nonsense instead of science.
In 1979 I started working as an inspector of the Negev Mountain and worked quite a lot with Giora Ilani. I was intimately familiar with his struggles and his problematic public relations in the PA. Your description seems true to reality. I remember very well the deer counts in the Arabah and Giora's efforts to establish a breeding nucleus for these deer, an attempt that ultimately failed. The combination of Giura's challenging personality (besides his undisputed expertise) together with the dirty politics in the PA and the academy, created this injustice. At least we remember Giora and his blessed work, and we will keep the credit for him.
Since I was not sure and convinced of the order of things and my justification, I asked my colleague Dr. Avi Arbel for his response,
Below is his reaction/answer:
You are absolutely right about the Hebrew name of the deer and the honor due to Giura,
But Giora was weak in public relations and there was no one to defend his right to the name and it's a shame!
Wonder about Mendelssohn who gave, to the one who gave authority to determine a Hebrew name depriving Giora.
The others probably didn't appreciate him (and probably not me either) I wasn't asked and that's why I chose this name
It turns out that public relations has great value!