[Taxacom] Paralectotype question
stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz
Thu Apr 20 15:18:57 CDT 2017
Francisco said "Paralectotyes are automatically those syntypes which were not designated as lectotype (Art. 74.1.3)"
Yes, but in practice, there may be less than conclusive evidence that a particular specimen is a syntype. Even if it is from the same collecting event as all the other syntypes, the collector may have, for example, held one back (just in case of loss in transit) but sent the others to the author for description (if collector and author aren't the same person). At the end of the day, it comes to "so what?" Is it important to have an extra paralectotype for some reason? In most cases probably not, so time would be better spent moving on ...
On Fri, 21/4/17, Francisco Welter-Schultes <fwelter at gwdg.de> wrote:
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Paralectotype question
To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Received: Friday, 21 April, 2017, 7:21 AM
I agree entirely with Adam.
During the act of lectotype designation it
is not required that the author who designates
the lectotype saw or even
knew all the
other syntypes. Paralectotyes are automatically those
syntypes which were not designated as lectotype
More information about the Taxacom