[Taxacom] New monkey from Brazil

Laurent Raty l.raty at skynet.be
Wed May 17 18:13:35 CDT 2006


> There is a big diference between "available" and "valid."   Determination
> of availability is objective; the validity of a name is subjective.
> An earlier message took the position that the name was not available as
> it was based on a photograph and I posted a reply stating that I think
> the name is available.

The type designation is valid, but this is not enough to make the name

The ICZN explicitely requires a statement of intent that the type specimen
will be deposited in a collection, and that the collection be designated
when the description is published. Sorry, but this has not been done,
hence the name is not available per Article 16.4. To me this seems a
perfectly straighforward and objective application of the Code.
How do you go around this?

Had some hairs, or skin, or blood been retained, this would have provided
more solid evidence about the validity of the taxon (better science,
indeed). This might also have made a valid type specimen, that might have
been deposited somewhere. Here, only photographs were retained and,
because Article 73.1.4 *prevents* that a photograph be considered a type
specimen, this is not enough.
(Invoquing 73.1.4 to justify this practice is more than odd, IMHO...)

Laurent -

More information about the Taxacom mailing list