[Nhcoll-l] Curating specimens with uncertain type status?

[Shoobs, Nate]

Doug,
Thanks for your prompt reply. This is one of the conclusions I reached, that the name is not available because a single type was not fixed at the time of publication. But others that I’ve spoken to are of the opinion that: 1. the type was designated and is simply lost in the type series, warranting a neotype designation. Or 2. that the designation of the lot constituted a syntype designation.
I think the former is plausible, but the latter cannot be because post-1999, syntypes must be fixed “explicitly” (meaning if the word syntypes wasn’t used, they ain’t syntypes.)
-Nate

--

[The Ohio State University]
Nathaniel F. Shoobs
Curator of Mollusks
College of Arts & Sciences Dept. of Evolution, Ecology, and Organismal Biology
Museum of Biological Diversity, 1315 Kinnear Rd, Columbus, OH 43212
614-688-1342 (Office)
mbd.osu.edu<http://mbd.osu.edu>

From: Nhcoll-l <nhcoll-l-bounces at mailman.yale.edu> on behalf of Douglas Yanega <dyanega at gmail.com>
Date: Wednesday, August 2, 2023 at 11:55 AM
To: nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu <nhcoll-l at mailman.yale.edu>
Subject: Re: [Nhcoll-l] Curating specimens with uncertain type status?
On 8/2/23 8: 39 AM, Shoobs, Nate wrote: The author, in the description, says something like this: “Holotype: OSUM 1234, 10 specimens. Paratype: OSUM 4567, 1 specimen. ”. Speaking as an ICZN Commissioner, this right here is the core issue. After

On 8/2/23 8:39 AM, Shoobs, Nate wrote:

  1.  The author, in the description, says something like this: “Holotype: OSUM 1234, 10 specimens. Paratype: OSUM 4567, 1 specimen.”.

Speaking as an ICZN Commissioner, this right here is the core issue.

After 1999, a holotype designation must be of an individual specimen. The statement above does not designate a single specimen, it designates a "lot" containing multiple specimens. Prior to 2000, this would have devolved to a "by default" situation and the specimens in that lot would have been considered syntypes.

I personally don't think the name of this new taxon is available at all, as it has no validly-designated type specimen, because your ample evidence (that what happened here is the accidental switching of the words "holotype" and "paratypes" in the final published version) is not allowable for names after 1999. The problem is unusual enough that I will pass it by the other Commissioners to see what they think, but I doubt it is salvageable.

Peace,

--

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)

             https://faculty.ucr.edu/~heraty/yanega.html<https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/faculty.ucr.edu/*heraty/yanega.html__;fg!!KGKeukY!24OS2KKItAL8-D4G5G4OkM1nb8H3nt1Z_j2_h-FpF32QKnXx0myduxT_IV-ATq97C60VToF0GnyGMr0$>

  "There are some enterprises in which a careful disorderliness

        is the true method" - Herman Melville, Moby Dick, Chap. 82
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.yale.edu/pipermail/nhcoll-l/attachments/20230802/dc30a3e0/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 3608 bytes
Desc: image001.png
URL: <http://mailman.yale.edu/pipermail/nhcoll-l/attachments/20230802/dc30a3e0/attachment.png>