[Taxacom] Questions about availability of a species name

Neal Evenhuis neale at bishopmuseum.org
Wed Aug 22 19:04:11 CDT 2018


Aw pfft.

You do not need to remind me to not send you any party balloons, Stephen …

:-(


From: Stephen Thorpe <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz<mailto:stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>>
Reply-To: Stephen Thorpe <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz<mailto:stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>>
Date: Wednesday, August 22, 2018 at 1:49 PM
To: Alfred Newton <anewton at fieldmuseum.org<mailto:anewton at fieldmuseum.org>>, Neal Evenhuis <neale at bishopmuseum.org<mailto:neale at bishopmuseum.org>>
Cc: taxacom <TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU<mailto:TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU>>
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Questions about availability of a species name

Nah! That is clearly not the intention of 10.1.1.

10.1.1. If publication of the data relating to a new nominal taxon or a nomenclatural act is interrupted and continued at a later date, the name or
act becomes available only when the requirements of the relevant Articles have been met

I agree that 10.1.1. is somewhat vague (but no more so than much of the Code!) "Interrupted publication" is a term to be understood in a publishing sense. At any rate, what kills it in this case is that the Ranjith et al. (2015) paper doesn't tag the name as new. Just adding a depository to a name that was tagged as new in another paper (Li et al., 2009) clearly doesn't count, or else you could validate a nomen nudum (tagged as new in some old paper, but without description or illustration or indication) without tagging it as new, just by adding a description and type depository (and biblio reference to the old paper which did tag it as new)! But the whole point of the recently introduced Code requirement of mandatory tagging as new is to highlight new names in the publication in which they become available!

Stephen


--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 23/8/18, Neal Evenhuis <neale at bishopmuseum.org<mailto:neale at bishopmuseum.org>> wrote:

Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Questions about availability of a species name
To: "Al Newton" <anewton at fieldmuseum.org<mailto:anewton at fieldmuseum.org>>
Cc: "taxacom" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>>, "parahym" <parahym at nhm.ac.uk<mailto:parahym at nhm.ac.uk>>
Received: Thursday, 23 August, 2018, 11:36 AM
Ooooooh!
I like your thinking! You might have something
there! I think the validity of that would depend on the
definition of “interrupt”, which primarily means
breaking the continuity of something. One would have to
interpret the “continuity” as being the "completion
of all qualifying conditions", such as those in Art.
16.
-Neal
Neal L.
Evenhuis, PhD.
Senior Entomologist
Bernice Pauahi Bishop
Museum
1525 Bernice Street, Honolulu, HI
96817-2704
Office: (808) 848-4138
Fax: (808) 847-8252
BishopMuseum.org<www.bishopmuseum.org>
From: Alfred
Newton <anewton at fieldmuseum.org<mailto:anewton at fieldmuseum.org><mailto:anewton at fieldmuseum.org>>
Date: Wednesday, August 22, 2018 at 1:11 PM
To: Neal Evenhuis <neale at bishopmuseum.org<mailto:neale at bishopmuseum.org><mailto:neale at bishopmuseum.org>>
Cc: "Yanega, Doug" <dyanega at ucr.edu<mailto:dyanega at ucr.edu><mailto:dyanega at ucr.edu>>,
taxacom <TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU<mailto:TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU><mailto:TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU>>,
parahym <parahym at nhm.ac.uk<mailto:parahym at nhm.ac.uk><mailto:parahym at nhm.ac.uk>>
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Questions about
availability of a species name
Hi Neal,
"Work" does not appear in Art. 10,
except in the Recommendation 10A, and "publication of
the data" could be interpreted as referring to
successive publications.
I
think this article is too vague and ambiguous, and
definitely needs to be clarified in a new edition of the
Code.  Likewise, how to fix a problem like a missing piece
of required data in the original description should be
spelled out somewhere.  As I said, people have been
publishing notes adding missing data like type depository
without necessarily meeting all the original requirements of
a new description, in the belief that providing the missing
data is enough to fix the problem.
Al.
Alfred F.
Newton, Curator Emeritus
Integrative
Research Center (Insect Division)
Field
Museum of Natural History
1400 South Lake
Shore Drive
Chicago, IL 60605 USA
Telephone (direct):  312-665-7738; Fax
(Zoology):  312-665-7754
FMNH personal web
page:  <http://fieldmuseum.org/users/alfred-newton>
Austral Staphyliniformia databases: <<http://www.fieldmuseum.org/peet_staph/>http://archive.fieldmuseum.org/peet_staph/>
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 5:59
PM, Neal Evenhuis <neale at bishopmuseum.org<mailto:neale at bishopmuseum.org><mailto:neale at bishopmuseum.org>>
wrote:
Al,
10.1.1 refers to the “work” [= the
“publication of the data”]. The work was not
interrupted. Only the qualifying conditions were
“incomplete”. 10.1.1 does not come into play here.
-Neal
Neal L. Evenhuis, PhD.
Senior Entomologist
Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum
1525 Bernice Street, Honolulu, HI 96817-2704
Office: (808) 848-4138
Fax:
(808) 847-8252
BishopMuseum.org<www.bishopmuseum.org<http://www.bishopmuseum.org>>
From: Taxacom
<taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu><mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu><mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>>>
on behalf of Alfred Newton <anewton at fieldmuseum.org<mailto:anewton at fieldmuseum.org><mailto:anewton at fieldmuseum.org><mailto:anewton at fieldmuseum.org<mailto:anewton at fieldmuseum.org>>>
Date: Wednesday, August 22, 2018 at 12:55 PM
To: "Yanega, Doug" <dyanega at ucr.edu<mailto:dyanega at ucr.edu><mailto:dyanega at ucr.edu><mailto:dyanega at ucr.edu<mailto:dyanega at ucr.edu>>>
Cc: taxacom <TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU<mailto:TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU><mailto:TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU><mailto:TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU<mailto:TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU>>>,
parahym <parahym at nhm.ac.uk<mailto:parahym at nhm.ac.uk><mailto:parahym at nhm.ac.uk><mailto:parahym at nhm.ac.uk<mailto:parahym at nhm.ac.uk>>>
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Questions about
availability of a species name
Hi Doug,
What
about the effect of Art. 10.1.1 on this situation?
10.1.1. If publication of the
data relating to a new nominal taxon or a
nomenclatural act is interrupted and continued
at a later date, the name or
act becomes
available only when the requirements of the relevant
Articles
have been met.
If indication of type
depository was the only missing piece of information
in the original description (Li et al. 2009),
and
Ranjith et al. (2015) supplied that
information along with a reference to
the
original description (which had all the other elements),
then it would
seem that the name would
become available from Ranjith et al. (with them as
authors).  This is how I and some others have
used that article (at least
implicitly) for
this exact situation, which unfortunately is all too
common.
Why does this not
work?
Al.
Alfred F. Newton, Curator Emeritus
Integrative Research Center (Insect
Division)
Field Museum of Natural History
1400 South Lake Shore Drive
Chicago, IL 60605 USA
Telephone
(direct):  312-665-7738; Fax (Zoology):  312-665-7754
FMNH personal web page:  <http://fieldmuseum.org/users/alfred-newton>
Austral Staphyliniformia databases: <
<http://www.fieldmuseum.org/peet_staph/>
http://archive.fieldmuseum.org/peet_staph/>
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 4:56
PM, Doug Yanega <dyanega at ucr.edu<mailto:dyanega at ucr.edu><mailto:dyanega at ucr.edu><mailto:dyanega at ucr.edu<mailto:dyanega at ucr.edu>>>
wrote:
On 8/22/18 2:24 PM,
Fernandez, Jose wrote:
Hi
all,
I would greatly
appreciate some help/comments on the following topic. I
have added a "Right?" to the  end of
my paragraphs to mark my questions
(and NOT
because I think that I am necessarily right!). Hopefully you
can
clarify me the situation.
Microplitis vitellipedis Li,
Tan & Song was described in 2009 from China
The original paper did not state the holotype
depository. Thus, the species
name is
unavailable under the current ICZN. Right?
Then in 2015 a taxonomic
review of the Oriental species of Microplitis
refers to that species. It states that the
holotype is deposited in the
Hunan
Agricultural University, China. That happens to be the
institution
which the authors of the
original description were affiliated with (at
least at the time of the 2009 publication). The
2015 paper, from Indian
researchers, states
that "the type specimen of this species could not be
examined" and that they based their
species description, illustration and
place
in the key to Oriental Microplitis species on specimens from
India
that they actually examined. I am not
sure if the 2015 authors contacted
the
Chinese colleagues to verify that the type was indeed
deposited in the
Hunan Agricultural
University, China. But that may be beyond the point,
because what matters is that, if the type
depository was explicitly (and
clearly)
stated in the 2015 paper, then that would comply with the
ICZN
requirements and thus would make the
name Microplitis vitellipedis Li, Tan
&
Song available. Right?
Assuming that the two previous paragraphs are
correct, then my last
question is, how to
refer to that species? I mean the species name and
authors would remain the same, but the actual
date assigned to that name
should be 2015
(the moment when the species name fulfilled all criteria
to
be considered an available name, sensu
ICZN) and not 2009. Right? Should it
be then
Microplitis vitellipedis Li, Tan & Song 2015? Is there
something
there that I may be missing? Or
some assumptions that are wrong? Or better
ways to interpret the situation?
[If someone is interested in
checking the cited references, I will be
happy to send pdf copies off list (just send me
an email for that). In any
case the two
references are: a) Original Description Reference: Li,
Xi-ying; Tan, Ji-cai and Song, Dong-bao. 2009.
A new species of Microplitis
Foerster
(Hymenoptera: Braconidae: Microgastrinae) of China.
Entomotaxonomia. 31(3):225-229; b) subsequent
and so far only reference
known to me:
Ranjith, A.P.; Rajesh, K.M. and Nasser, M.. 2015.
Taxonomic
studies on Oriental Microplitis
Foerster (Hymenoptera: Braconidae,
Microgastrinae) with description of two new
species from South India.
Zootaxa.
3963(3):369-415].
From the
information given, the name is still unavailable (a nomen
nudum).
The relevant
section of the Code is as follows, highlights added:
---
Article
16. Names published after 1999.
16.1. All names: intention of authors to
establish new nominal taxa to be
explicit.
Every new name published after 1999, including new
replacement
names (nomina nova), *must be
explicitly indicated as intentionally new*.
{snip}
16.4. Species-group names: fixation of
name-bearing types to be explicit.
Every new
specific and subspecific name published after 1999, except a
new
replacement name (a nomen novum), for
which the name-bearing type of the
nominal
taxon it denotes is fixed automatically [Art. 72.7], *must
be
accompanied in the original
publication**
*
16.4.1. by
the explicit fixation of a holotype, or syntypes, for the
nominal taxon [Arts. 72.2, 72.3, 73.1.1, 73.2
and Recs. 73A and 73C], and,
16.4.2. 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*
---
Li et al. failed to comply
with Art. 16.4 (16.4.2), and
Ranjith et al.
failed to comply with Art. 16.1
Had Ranjith et al. stated the species was new,
they would have been given
authorship, and
not Li et al.
Under
*outdated* editions of the Code, citing a prior-published
description associated with a previously
unavailable name would - under
some
circumstances - make that name available (often
inadvertently), but
the 2000 Code edition
added Article 16 to prevent this from ever happening
again. *You can no longer accidentally make a
previously published name
available just by
citing it*; you are either the author of a new name
yourself, or you are not. In this case, no one
is, and the name is still a
nomen nudum.
There are still apparently
lots of taxonomists familiar with the old Code
editions, and not the most recent edition, who
have never read Article 16;
it's a very
long list of papers over the past 18 years that violate
16.1
and/or 16.4, and they continue to be
published, even in peer-reviewed
journals.
Sincerely,
--
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)
              http://cache.ucr.edu/~heraty/yanega.html
   "There are some enterprises in which a
careful disorderliness
         is the
true method" - Herman Melville, Moby Dick, Chap. 82
_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
Send
Taxacom mailing list submissions to: Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu><mailto:Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu><mailto:Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto: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
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the Web,
visit:
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
You can reach the person managing the list
at:
taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu><mailto:taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu><mailto:taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>>
Nurturing Nuance while
Assaulting Ambiguity for 31 Some Years, 1987-2018.
_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
Send
Taxacom mailing list submissions to: Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu><mailto:Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu><mailto:Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto: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
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the Web, visit:
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
You can reach the person managing the list at:
taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu><mailto:taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu><mailto:taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>>
Nurturing Nuance while
Assaulting Ambiguity for 31 Some Years, 1987-2018.
________________________________
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.
_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
Send
Taxacom mailing list submissions to: Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto: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
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the Web, visit:
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
You can reach the person managing the list at:
taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Nurturing Nuance while
Assaulting Ambiguity for 31 Some Years, 1987-2018.



________________________________
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