Re: list of genera

John Harshman wrote:

> Gordon D. Pusch wrote:
>
> > John Harshman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> >
> >
> > > Gordon D. Pusch wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Vr.R.Bejsak-Colloredo-Mansfeld) writes:
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Would you be so kind and write to me if you can send to me: "The list
> > > > > of genera of coleoptera of the world" of the group coleoptera
> > > > Go to <http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/Taxonomy/taxonomyhome.html/>,
> > > > enter "coleoptera" into the "Search for" box, and select "Token set"
> > > > from the "As" menu.
> > > That should only give you the groups for which there is sequence in
> > > GenBank.
> >
> >
> > No, it gives you thosee groups which have been entered into the NCBI
> > Taxonomy Database. It is my understandanding that =EVERY= named genus 
> > and species is included in the NCBI Taxonomy Database --- NOT merely 
> > those which have been deposited in GenBank.
> >
> >
> >
> > > And it looks to me as if there are many families with no members
> > > included, much less a list of all genera.
> >
> > Please cite an example of a family that is =NOT= listed in the NCBI 
> > Taxonomy.
>
> You're right, I couldn't find one. I think they may even be complete at 
> the subfamily level. But certainly not to genus and species.


In fact NCBI specifically disclaims completeness. From the Taxonomy 
intro page: "The NCBI taxonomy database contains the names of all 
organisms that are represented in the genetic databases with at least 
one nucleotide or protein sequence." And it looks as if a genus is 
included if and only if there is sequence from at least one species.

While we're at it, can I complain about their taxonomy? Not in insects, 
but the taxonomy they pick for crocodylians is not that used by most 
workers. In fact I don't think it's used by any workers. They put all 
living crocodylians in Crocodylidae.