Taxonomy Profile: Camelus bactrianus ferus (Przewalski 1878)

Camelus bactrianus ferus: Taxonomy and Nomenclature
Kingdom:
Animalia
Taxonomic Rank:
Subspecies
Synonym(s):
Camelus ferus
Przewalski 1878
Common Name(s):
wild Bactrian camel []
Taxonomic Status:
Current Standing:
valid
Data Quality Indicators:
Record Credibility Rating:
TWG standards met
Camelus bactrianus ferus: Taxonomic Hierarchy
Kingdom : Animalia
animals |
Animal |
animaux |
Subkingdom : Bilateria
Infrakingdom : Deuterostomia
Phylum : Chordata
chordates |
cordado |
cordés |
Subphylum : Vertebrata
vertebrates |
vertebrado |
vertébrés |
Infradivision : Gnathostomata
Superclass : Tetrapoda
Class : Mammalia
mammals |
mamífero |
mammifères |
Subclass : Theria
Infraclass : Eutheria
Order : Artiodactyla
cloven-hoofed ungulates |
even-toed ungulates |
porco do mato |
veado |
artiodactyls |
Family : Camelidae
camels |
Genus : Camelus
camels |
Species : Camelus bactrianus
Bactrian camel |
Bactrian Camel |
Subspecies : Camelus bactrianus ferus
wild Bactrian camel |
Camelus bactrianus ferus Direct Children(s):
Camelus bactrianus ferus: References
Expert(s):
Source(s):
Publication(s):
Author(s)/Editor(s):
Wilson, Don E., and DeeAnn M. Reeder, eds.
Publication Date (Listed/Actual):
2005-10-01 / 2005-10-01
Article/Chapter Title:
Journal/Book Name, Vol. No.:
Mammal Species of the World: A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference, 3rd ed., vols. 1 & 2
Page(s):
2142
Publisher:
Johns Hopkins University Press
Publication Place:
Baltimore, Maryland, USA
ISBN/ISSN:
0-8018-8221-4/
Notes:
Reference for:
Camelus bactrianus ferus
Camelus bactrianus ferus: Geographic Information
Geographic Division:
Jurisdiction/Origin:
Camelus bactrianus ferus: Comments
Comment:
Comments: See comments under species
Comment:
ITIS defers to Wilson & Reeder (eds., 2005) on the correct name for a species when the choice is between an older name based on a domestic form and a younger name based on a wild form. ICZN Opinion 2027 (3/2003) sought to resolve this, but by itself the Ruling contained in that Opinion effectively says that it cannot be based on priority. More explicit guidance is found in the "History of Case 3010" section of the Opinion, but ITIS has been advised that only the Ruling section is binding. Thus, there is apparently no basis upon which to select the correct (valid) name