[Taxacom] unrecognizable species, what to do...
dyanega at ucr.edu
Wed Sep 25 11:19:16 CDT 2013
On 9/25/13 5:34 AM, Lawrence Kirkendall wrote:
> I am a new member of Taxacom, so I don't know if this has been discussed recently.
> As I understand it, one cannot normally designate a neotype when types can be found. But what do you do when your species, described in the 19th century, turns out to be a species complex, and because of the poor condition of the syntypes one cannot safely attribute any particular individual to any of the clades you can now recognize as separate species?
Speaking as an ICZN Commissioner, there's no rule that a neotype can't
be designated if types still exist. Your situation is exactly why
Article 75.5 exists; you write an application to the Commission
explaining why the extant type(s) are inadequate, focusing on how
important the name in question happens to be (VERY important, in your
case), and ask that the Commission uses its plenary powers to set aside
the existing type(s) in favor of a neotype (which must fulfill all the
criteria listed under Art. 75.3).
A very important criterion under 75.3 is that a neotype MUST originate
from "as nearly as practicable to the original type locality" - failure
to comply with this means that if anyone later obtains a specimen that
is from a closer site, then they can have your neotype set aside and put
their own in place. If the original type locality was vague, then your
application should give any and all argumentation and evidence that
might narrow down that original locality (e.g., "The collector of the
syntype series never set foot outside of Sweden"), and then you would
select a neotype from a compatible site - at that point, your more
refined locality becomes the NEW type locality (see Art. 76.3). Note
also that if you determine that the only species that occurs at the type
locality is NOT the taxon presently recognized under that name, you can
invoke Art. 75.6 to re-assign the name to the correct taxon, even if
it's from a different locality.
My point is that you have a lot of options available to you, all
designed for stability's sake. The final point is that if you believe
that genetic differentiation is going to be a crucial issue, then make
sure that your neotype has been definitively sequenced.
If you read a few issues of the BZN you'll find many cases invoking Art.
75.5, and you can use one of those as a template. The BZN and Code are
both online at http://iczn.org/
Doug Yanega Dept. of Entomology Entomology Research Museum
Univ. of California, Riverside, CA 92521-0314 skype: dyanega
phone: (951) 827-4315 (disclaimer: opinions are mine, not UCR's)
"There are some enterprises in which a careful disorderliness
is the true method" - Herman Melville, Moby Dick, Chap. 82
More information about the Taxacom