[Taxacom] New monkey from Brazil

Laurent Raty l.raty at skynet.be
Wed May 17 15:57:18 CDT 2006


> Mendes Pontes et al. (2006) cite the example of Jones et al (2005) and
> Polaszek et al. (2005), which were based on the ICZN Article 73.1.4,
> "which allows the description of new taxa without the need for dead type
> specimens" (quote from the Zootaxa paper). Is it really what Art. 73.1.4
> intended to mean?

73.1.4 says only that the "designation of an illustration of a single
specimen as a holotype is to be treated as designation of the specimen
illustrated; the fact that the specimen no longer exists or cannot be traced
does not of itself invalidate the designation."
In what sense does this 'allow' anything?
As far as I see, the only thing this implies, in the present case, is that
it's the real monkey (rather than the pictures that have been taken) that
must be considered the type.

For a species-group name published after 1999 to be available, it "must be
accompanied in the original publication by the explicit fixation of a
holotype, or syntypes, for the nominal taxon, and, where the holotype or
syntypes are extant specimens, by a statement of intent that they will be
(or are) deposited in a collection and a statement indicating the name and
location of that collection." (ICZN Art. 16.4)

As the type (per 73.1.4) is gone and there is clearly no intent that it will
ever be deposited in a collection, the name is unavailable.


Cheers,
Laurent -


Laurent Raty
l.raty at skynet.be
Brussels, Belgium





More information about the Taxacom mailing list