[Taxacom] Questions about availability of a species name
adamcot at cscoms.com
Thu Aug 23 02:24:37 CDT 2018
----- Original Message -----
From: "Stephen Thorpe" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>
To: "Al Newton" <anewton at fieldmuseum.org>; "Neal Evenhuis"
<neale at bishopmuseum.org>
Cc: "taxacom" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Sent: Thursday, August 23, 2018 7:32 AM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Questions about availability of a species name
> Seriously though, there are some issues here with the Code as it stands.
> 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
> Taken too literally, probably most new species descriptions probably fail
> 16.4.2., in that they lack a "statement of intent" and usually just have
> something like (BMNH) at the end of the holotype data. This is not a
> "statement of intent"!
> So, I strongly suggest that 16.4.2. be ignored as a trivial technicality,
> in the hope that it may one day be removed from the Code. Too much
> confusion and pointless "taxo-lawyering" results from denying availability
> to a new name based on 16.4.2. It just isn't worth bothering about. The
> Code should be saving the availability of as many newly proposed names as
> possible, not trying to invalidate them!
I disagree with Stephen's interpretation of 16.4.2 here.
"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
I understand that the first part must be taken in 2 separate sections
1: "intent that they will be"
2: "(or are)"
deposited in a collection and a statement indicating the name and location
of that collection.
So if a specimen has a statement "(BMNH)" in the description this is stating
that the specimen currently IS deposited in BMNH. It is only in the case
that the specimen is not yet deposited in a museum that there must be a
statement of "intent" to deposit. "BMNH" already is a known name and
location of the depository, and thus fulfils the second part.
I agree that it is better to include more than just the acronym for clarity,
but when appended to a holotype's data it is a statement of depository in
More information about the Taxacom