[Taxacom] Paralectotype question

Stephen Thorpe stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz
Thu Apr 20 18:48:04 CDT 2017


Neal said: "Best to be conservatively cautious when designating lectotypes from the Loew material in MCZ."

Possibly also best to be "conservatively cautious" [Neal conservative???] when labelling specimens as paralectotypes. I'd say "if you don't need it, don't do it!"

Stephen

--------------------------------------------
On Fri, 21/4/17, Neal Evenhuis <neale at bishopmuseum.org> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Paralectotype question
 To: "Stephen Thorpe" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>, "Francisco Welter-Schultes" <fwelter at gwdg.de>, "Robert Louis Zuparko" <rz at berkeley.edu>
 Cc: "taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
 Received: Friday, 21 April, 2017, 11:06 AM
 
 There is this caveat with the
 Loew Diptera collection at MCZ to always
 take into account …
 
 … from Knutson, L., R. E. Orth, T. W. Fisher
 & W. L. Murphy. 1986. Catalog
 of
 Sciomyzidae (Diptera) of America North of Mexico.
 Entomography 4: 1‑53:
 
 "Museum of Comparative Zoology. According
 to C.W. Sabrosky (in litt., 4
 Oct., 1977 to
 L. Knutson), Nathan Banks told him during a visit to the
 Museum of Comparative Zoology in 1935, that the
 Loew "types" were labeled
 by
 Samuel Henshaw and that Henshaw did not necessar­ily get
 the type
 labels on the correct specimens.
 Sabrosky further noted, "Sometimes the
 red type label was put on a specimen not
 mentioned in the original
 description. In
 any case, the Henshaw 'designations' were never
 published
 and have no standing as
 such."
 For many species in the Loew
 collection, there is more than one specimen
 labeled "type." Specimens from the
 collection bear small white labels
 reading
 "Loew Coll." Also, many specimens labeled
 "type" bear a small
 white label
 with the species name followed by an "M" (equals
 Mihi) in
 Loew's handwriting. However,
 for some species, there are specimens labeled
 "Loew Coll." but not labeled with red
 type labels. Also, in some cases the
 specimens not bearing a type label are in
 better condition than specimens
 labeled as
 such, or they are males and the so-called types are
 females.”
 
 Thus, what is
 labeled s not guaranteed as a syntype. Best to be
 conservatively cautious when designating
 lectotypes from the Loew material
 in MCZ.
 
 -Neal
 
 
 
 On Stardate 4/20/17, 11:11
 AM, "Taxacom on behalf of Stephen Thorpe"
 <taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 on behalf of
 stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>
 wrote:
 
 >I am surprised
 that you would consider this issue without having seen
 the
 >OD [Original Description]! Here it
 is:
 >http://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/42217896
 >
 >It doesn't help
 though. Anyway, you need to consider whether the labels
 >are original Loew labels or added
 subsequently by someone else.
 >
 >If it was me, I would just state (assuming
 you have a publication in
 >preparation)
 that the 4th specimen may also be part of the type series
 >and therefore now a paralectotype. I
 don't see the need to make a
 >definite decision based on less than
 conclusive evidence, do you?
 >
 >Stephen
 >
 >--------------------------------------------
 >On Fri, 21/4/17, Robert Louis Zuparko
 <rz at berkeley.edu>
 wrote:
 >
 > Subject:
 Re: [Taxacom] Paralectotype question
 >
 To: "Francisco Welter-Schultes" <fwelter at gwdg.de>
 > Cc: "Stephen Thorpe" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>,
 >taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 > Received: Friday, 21 April, 2017, 8:52
 AM
 >
 > To
 > clarify: The species was described by Loew
 in 1859, but I
 > have not seen the OD. A
 series of (at least) 4 specimens
 > were
 in the MCZ, all sharing the same two labels: one saying
 > "Loew coll." and the other a red
 label reading
 > "TYPE 13228".
 Therefore I think it is safe to say
 >
 they are all part of the same syntype series (granted
 this
 > is an assumption, but I think it
 is a safe one). The 4th
 > specimen was
 later removed. Afterwards, Orth made his
 > lectotype designation of the remaining 3
 specimens.
 > -Bob
 >
 > Robert Zuparko
 > Essig
 Museum of Entomology
 > 1101 Valley Life
 Sciences Building,
 > #4780
 > University of California
 > Berkeley, CA 94720-3112
 > (510) 643-0804
 >_______________________________________________
 >Taxacom Mailing List
 >Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 >http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
 >The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be
 searched at:
 >http://taxacom.markmail.org
 >
 >
 >Nurturing Nuance while Assaulting Ambiguity
 for 30 Years, 1987-2017.
 
 
 This message is only intended
 for the addressee named above.  Its contents may be
 privileged or otherwise protected.  Any unauthorized use,
 disclosure or copying of this message or its contents is
 prohibited.  If you have received this message by mistake,
 please notify us immediately by reply mail or by collect
 telephone call.  Any personal opinions expressed in this
 message do not necessarily represent the views of the Bishop
 Museum.
 


More information about the Taxacom mailing list