[Taxacom] Nuttall's species at PH, holotypes vs. lectotypes?

Paul van Rijckevorsel dipteryx at freeler.nl
Sat Jun 28 09:26:56 CDT 2008

Actually the Code looks quite clear to me. As laid down in Art. 9.1, a
holotype is an absolute (from a formal perspective): "As long as a holotype
is extant, it fixes the application of the name concerned". As long as a
holotype exists nothing else matters and any lectotypification published is
irrelevant, being merely a waste of paper.

The material question is, of course, if the specimen you are looking at is
indeed the holotype? In the absence of internal evidence (in the protologue)
this may be a difficult question, rather depending on what historical
evidence you have. But if the specimen you are looking at was collected by
the author, and annotated by the author, and it is established as very
likely that there are neither duplicates of this specimen nor that the
author had access to other gatherings of the same species, then it looks
safe to assume that this specimen is the holotype.

>From a formal perspective it is irrelevant to publish a note, as the
holotype remains the holotype, no matter if anything further is published on
it or not. From a practical perspective it may help to put the evidence and
reasoning in print, so as to prevent a later researcher from going through
the same process.


BTW: Rec. 9A.4 only applies if the protologue cites only a single
gathering, and as I understand it, this is not the case here.

From: "Alina Freire-Fierro" <freirefierro at acnatsci.org>
Cc: "Alicia Landale" <alicia.landale at gmail.com>
Sent: Friday, June 27, 2008 11:02 PM

> Dear all,

>From what I understand from Art. 9, Note 1; and Art. 9A.4. of the Code
> --http://www.ibot.sav.sk/icbn/main.htm-- (see at end of message) there is
> no need to designate a lectotype if we are completely sure that the
> specimen in question is the holotype?

> We have one specimen of Polygala that was clearly annotated as a new
> species by Nuttall, and that, according to Ewan's introduction to
> Nuttall's 1811 Gen. N. Amer. Pl. 2, it was collected by Nuttall in
> Missouri in 1811.  Also,  in the protologue, Nuttall only mentions
> "Missouri" as the locality. So, since it is very likely that there are no
> Nuttall duplicates of his early collections in other herbaria, shall we
> safely assume that this specimen is the holotype?

> And if it is the holotype, can we only put a "Holotype" label in the
> specimen and publish a note about it? Do you know any examples of this
> procedure? (From what I know, lectotypification is the common practice).

> I will appreciate your input.

> Many thanks and best wishes,

> Alina.

> Art.  9.1.  A holotype of a name of a species or infraspecific taxon is
> the one specimen or illustration (but see  Art. 37.4) used by the author,
> or designated by the author as the nomenclatural type. As long as a
> holotype is extant, it fixes the application of the name concerned (but 
> see Art. 9.13; see also  Art. 10).

> Note 1.  Any designation made by the original author, if definitely
> expressed at the time of the original publication of the name of the
> taxon,  is final (but see Art. 9.9 and 9.13). If the author used only one
> element, that one must be accepted as the holotype.

>Rec. 9A.4. When a single gathering is cited in the protologue, but a
>particular institution housing it is not designated, it should be assumed
>that the specimen housed in the institution where the author is known to
>have worked is the holotype, unless there is evidence that further material
>of the same gathering was used.

> ******
> Alina Freire-Fierro
> Collection Manager
> PH Herbarium, Botany Department
> Academy of Natural Sciences
> Philadelphia, PA 19103-1151
> U.S.A.
> *
> freirefierro at ansp.org
> Tel: 1-215-299-1157; Fax: 1-215-299-1028
> http://www.ansp.org/research/biodiv/botany/index.php
> http://www.mbgpress.info/index.php?task=id&id=90148
> http://espanol.groups.yahoo.com/group/Anunciosbotanicos/
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom mailing list
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom

More information about the Taxacom mailing list