significance of name-bearing types

Giulio Cuccodoro giulio.cuccodoro at MHN.VILLE-GE.CH
Wed Oct 2 11:19:02 CDT 2002


>In a way, types seem to be given more significance than they deserve. They
>are useful but not essential to the practice of taxonomy and may not even be
>typical of the population from which they were taken. To me, the original
>printed description is more important since it is the basis of the
>nomenclature. A Type has no significance without the original published
>description but the description remains valid even if the Type is lost. I
>thought that we were (supposed to be) moving away from the old Typological
>taxonomy.
>
>Lynn Raw

Don't confuse taxonomy (definition of taxa) with nomenclature (how taxa
must be named). Name-bearing types are so precious because they are the
material link between taxonomy and nomenclature.
Giulio




More information about the Taxacom mailing list