[Taxacom] manuscript name question

Geoff Read gread at actrix.gen.nz
Fri Oct 9 22:55:29 CDT 2015


Hi,

Although there is clearly a group who believe that the fly photo
description "was unambiguously Code-compliant" under the current code,
this is not correct.

Read again Markus Moser's eletter "Holotypic ink" in Science from 2005 (a
response to a comment and response about the Mangabey monkey picture,
under the doi http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/science.309.5744.2163c

http://www.sciencemag.org/content/309/5744/2163.3/reply#sci_el_2652?sid=deb7fe6e-5527-45a6-b6f7-af1120d2750c

Use of 73.1.4 for new taxa is a distortion of the article's intention
which "... clearly refers to established species of which the types got
lost somehow or are missing"

--
Geoffrey B. Read, Ph.D.
Wellington, NEW ZEALAND
gread at actrix.gen.nz




More information about the Taxacom mailing list