what becomes of "kleptotypes" if the holotype is de stroyed?
p.kirk at CABI.ORG
Sun Nov 9 10:21:41 CST 2003
types (holotypes, lectotypes or neotypes) have nothing to do with
identification - they cannot be replaced just because they are unusable in
taxonomy. If the designated holotype is lost another cannot be 'found' - it
has to replaced by a lectotype or a neotype. If it is not lost it can only
be supplemented by an epitype (ICBN; not sure about ICZN).
Paul M. Kirk
From: Jason Mate
To: TAXACOM at LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU
Sent: 09/11/03 11:45
Subject: Re: [TAXACOM] what becomes of "kleptotypes" if the holotype is
As long as the material is usable for identification then it is the
holotype (since it was a fragment of the original hootype). Otherwise
holotype is lost and another one needs to be found/ designated. I don't
much confusion in this other than determining if the remaining material
any use or not. Unfortunately this situation happens all too often,
frequently in circumstances similar to the example provided by Ms
so this question is of general interest.
>From: Mary Barkworth <Mary at BIOLOGY.USU.EDU>
>Reply-To: Mary Barkworth <Mary at BIOLOGY.USU.EDU>
>To: Subject: Re: [TAXACOM] what becomes of "kleptotypes" if the
>Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2003 17:26:50 -0700
>Personally I hate to think of a fragment becoming more that a
>but I suppose it may indeed be the holotype. If an insect ate all but
>small fragment of a holotype the bit of specimen that remains would
>still presumably be considered the holotype. The most desirable
>situation would be for it to be possible to locate a more adequate
>specimen, possibly a duplicate of the holotype, in another institution.
>The Code, as I recall has recommendations for selecting neotypes. Would
>designation of a neotype in the circumstances Thomas outlines be
>permitted under the Code?
>For me it is a hypothetical question, at least for now.
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
More information about the Taxacom