Talk:dendrobatidis

RFV discussion: October 2019–February 2021
The term looks like a noun in the genitive and not like an adjective, and the note hints that this term doesn't exist in Latin. --Marontyan (talk) 18:44, 7 October 2019 (UTC)


 * Not even the term acrobates exists in Latin, except in Neo-Latin as Acrobates, a genus name, like Dendrobates. It is anybody’s guess how acrobates would have been declined, had the Ancient Romans known the word and not declined to decline it, but acrobatidis is most unlikely, as there is no d in the stem; analogously, dendrobatidis does not look like a Latin case form of dendrobates. The Ancient Greek genitive of the etymon of was ἀκροβάτου (akrobátou), but Latin loans from Greek did not in general copy the Greek declension paradigm (e.g.  — ἀθλητοῦ (athlētoû) was borrowed as  — ). To me “Dendrobatidis” sounds like a Modern Greek family name, like  or .  --Lambiam 18:36, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
 * The -id- in dendrobatidis is presumably related to the Greek patronymic suffix that is the source of the taxonomic termination -idae. However, I don't know why or how the -is got there. If if is a genitive singular form, as Marontyan speculated, it would be consistent with a third-declension d-stem dendrobatis, but the ending -is -idis (Greek -ις -ιδος) seems to be used specifically for feminine patronymics.--Urszag (talk) 18:55, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Well, one of the authors uploaded the article where the name Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis was first used to academia.edu ("Batrachochytrium dendrobatidis gen. et sp. nov., a chytrid pathogenic to amphibians"), but it doesn't have any helpful explanation of the formation. It simply says that dendrobatidis is "from 'Dendrobates'".--Urszag (talk) 19:08, 8 October 2019 (UTC)
 * The genitive of the name of a host organism is commonly used for the specific epithet for a small organism that lives on or in the host for at least some part of its life cycle. I guess that the 'idis' ending might be based of treating the '-bates' ending as if it were '-batis': βατίς ("skate"), βατίδος. In any event, mistake or not, we would need just one more taxonomic name to pass RfV. DCDuring (talk) 03:06, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * I found a third species with the epithet. Result, one fungus species, two chromists. DCDuring (talk) 03:27, 9 October 2019 (UTC)
 * No, as a Latin term it does not need 3 species names, but 1 Latin usage, see WT:CFI, Talk:albifrons. --Marontyan (talk) 07:09, 10 October 2019 (UTC)


 * RFV-failed as Latin in the absence of Latin cites, relabelled Translingual, which is cited. - -sche (discuss) 21:05, 8 February 2021 (UTC)