Perfil taxonómico: Bos frontalis gaurus (C H Smith 1827)

Bos frontalis gaurus: Taxonomía y Nomenclatura
Reino:
Animalia
Rango taxonómico:
Subspecies
Sinónimas:
Bos gaurus
C H Smith 1827
Nombres comunes:
gaur []
Estado taxonómico:
Situación actual:
valid
Indicadores de calidad de datos:
Récord de calificación de credibilidad:
TWG standards met
Bos frontalis gaurus: Taxonomic Hierarchy
Reino : Animalia
animals |
Animal |
animaux |
subreino : Bilateria
Infrareino : Deuterostomia
Filo : Chordata
chordates |
cordado |
cordés |
subfilo : Vertebrata
vertebrates |
vertebrado |
vertébrés |
Infradivisión : Gnathostomata
superclase : Tetrapoda
Clase : Mammalia
mammals |
mamífero |
mammifères |
subclase : Theria
Infraclase : Eutheria
Ordenar : Artiodactyla
cloven-hoofed ungulates |
even-toed ungulates |
porco do mato |
veado |
artiodactyls |
Familia : Bovidae
bovids |
antelopes |
cattle |
goats |
sheep |
Subfamilia : Bovinae
Género : Bos
true cattle |
oxen |
Especies : Bos frontalis
gayal |
gaur |
Gaur |
mithan |
Subespecie : Bos frontalis gaurus
gaur |
Bos frontalis gaurus Niños directos:
Bos frontalis gaurus: 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:
Bos frontalis gaurus
Bos frontalis gaurus: Geographic Information
Geographic Division:
Jurisdiction/Origin:
Bos frontalis gaurus: Comments
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