[Taxacom] holotype designation
henriquesbio at gmail.com
Thu Mar 28 11:03:20 CDT 2019
What if an author refers specifically to an illustration of a single specimen when naming a species (illustrated but not named in the original publication), while also including habitat and phenology in their description. Indicating that the author was familiar with the species and could have based the description on further material.
If this potential material indeed exists and is ever found, would it be type material?
On 28/03/2019, 08:19, "Taxacom on behalf of Adam Cotton" <taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu on behalf of adamcot at cscoms.com> wrote:
On 28-03-2019 06:09, Francisco Welter-Schultes wrote:
> Relevant are Art. 74.5 and 74.6. For the type series, see Art. 72.4.1.
> Just saying "type" alone is not necessarily enough for meeting the
> conditions to qualify for a holotype designation. If there is external
> evidence that the author had more specimens at his or her disposal,
> this type would be a syntype.
> I did not really understand the meaning of "unique" in this context.
> Maybe a little more information could help.
Use of the word "unique" is a clear statement that the stated type is
the only specimen known to the author.
Taxacom Mailing List
Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, 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
The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for 32 some years, 1987-2019.
More information about the Taxacom