[Annelida] seta vs chaeta

[Sergio Salazar]

Dear Nechama, Colin, Dieter and Rafa,

Thanks a lot for your comments. I tried to explain the different 
etymological origins for the words but it seems that I failed in doing so. 
Sorry.

Nechama has kindly indicated that there was an agreement during the 1st 
Polychaete Conference about the use of chaeta vs seta (and derivatives). I 
did not know that and such agreement must rule. I will use chaeta (and 
derivatives) from now on. No problem.

Apologies for stealing your time in this issues. Un abrazo,

Sergio


>From: dfiege <Dieter.Fiege at senckenberg.de>
>Reply-To: Dieter.Fiege at senckenberg.de
>To: annelida at magpie.bio.indiana.edu
>Subject: [Annelida] seta vs chaeta
>Date: Fri, 21 Apr 2006 11:37:27 +0200
>
>Dear Sergio,
>
>as you imply in your mail to annelida the term chaeta (and derivatives) as 
>used in 'polychaete language' is derived from the taxon name Polychaeta and 
>thus has become a technical term with a meaning different from that 
>mentioned in standard dictionaries. For this reason I personally prefer 
>chaeta over seta (and derivatives). Moreover, the latter term should in my 
>opinion be avoided in polychaetology since it is used in other taxa 
>languages as well (e.g. by colleagues describing various kinds of 
>arthropods) with a possible different technical meaning. Distinction among 
>various kinds of chaetae in polychaetology - not only long and soft versus 
>short and rigid as we all know - is done by providing a detailed 
>description of shape, size, etc.
>
>Metamerically,
>
>Dieter
>
>--
>Dr. Dieter Fiege
>Curator Marine Invertebrates
>Forschungsinstitut Senckenberg
>Senckenberganlage 25
>D-60325 Frankfurt/Main
>ph: +49-(0)69-7542 265
>Fax: +49-(0)69-746238
>www.senckenberg.de
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>Annelida mailing list
>Post: Annelida at net.bio.net
>Help/archive: http://www.bio.net/biomail/listinfo/annelida
>Resources: http://www.annelida.net