[Taxacom] are early online publications code-compliant?
lyubo.penev at gmail.com
Tue Apr 14 03:54:34 CDT 2015
I wonder why when discussing the "registration=availability" model, we are
talking about new names only? How the model would work for other kinds of
nomenclatural (and taxonomic?) acts dealing with names, for example how the
model would distinguish between procedures for establishment of, say,
objective and subjective synonymies?
The background of my question is that proposing/publishing/registering of a
new name definitely requires a scientific input in some kind of publication
format, but often even more scientific effort is needed to justify
availability of already existing names.
On a more general perspective, is it even possible to so strictly separate
nomenclature from taxonomy?
On Tue, Apr 14, 2015 at 3:38 AM, Richard Pyle <deepreef at bishopmuseum.org>
> Hi Stephen,
> > For "Registered = Available" to work, either (1) the description would
> need to
> > be given on the registration form itself, or, (2) if a citation to a
> > description is given, then the existence of such would need to be
> verified. The
> > problem with (1) is that taxonomists would gain no vitation credit for
> > new taxa (unless the registrations themselves were somehow included in
> > citation system). The problem with (2) is that it might take too much
> > particularly for publications in obscure places.
> You're basically referring to Art. 13.1, which I referenced on multiple
> occasions in my reply to Neal. Keep in mind the difference between what is
> necessary for Code Compliance, and what people typically include in a
> species description. I generally agree with you on your point #2, so I
> would probably advocate that we focus on Art. 13.1.1 as the only legitimate
> pathway to registration in the "R = A" paradigm. It doesn't require much to
> legitimately provide a description or definition that states in words
> characters that are purported to differentiate the taxon (most Diagnoses
> are sufficient, I should think).
> > PS: We also have the problem (which we have always had) of new species
> > group names being based on fictional type specimens. Such names are
> > presumably unavailable, but their availability cannot be determined from
> > work itself. Therefore, availability will always depend on some external
> > considerations. I'm not sure if fictional types can be distinguished
> from lost
> > types, so things get complicated ...
> Yes! And... there may be (at least) a partial solution to this. At the
> moment the Code technically requires that the new species descriptions
> (after 1999) must be accompanied, "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". (Art. 16.4.2) Thus, the types don't actually have to
> ever *BE* deposited in the indicated collection -- only that a statement of
> intent be included in the original publication. I can imagine a
> registration system governed by the 5th Edition of Code that goes a step
> further than this, and leverages the ever-increasing availability of online
> access to specimen data (and associated persistent globally unique
> identifiers to such) as part of the registration process, enabling a much
> more explicit indication of a type specimen.
> Watch this space....
> Richard L. Pyle, PhD
> Database Coordinator for Natural Sciences | Associate Zoologist in
> Ichthyology | Dive Safety Officer
> Department of Natural Sciences, Bishop Museum, 1525 Bernice St., Honolulu,
> HI 96817
> Ph: (808)848-4115, Fax: (808)847-8252 email: deepreef at bishopmuseum.org
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
> Celebrating 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.
Dr. Lyubomir Penev
13a Geo Milev Street
1111 Sofia, Bulgaria
Publishing services for journals:
Books published by Pensoft:
Services for scientific projects: http://www.pensoft.net/projects
Find us on: Facebook
More information about the Taxacom