type vs holotype

[Chris J. Durden]

  The type locality is the locality at which the primary type of a taxon
was collected. This may be vague, or may be determined subsequently on the
basis of historic or forensic data. 
  A type locality may be objectively restricted later by selecting an
holotype from a series of syntypes ("types" or "cotypes"), or surviving
paratypes  identified as used in preparation of the original description.
  A type locality may be selected subjectively or arbitrarily by
designating a Neotype based on a subjective rediscription of the taxon.
This act is permitted if it can be demonstrated that all the types from the
original description were destroyed by fire, flood, earthquake or lost
through negligence or theft. That is why it is important not to put all
your eggs in one basket - distribute your paratypes among several museums
as insurance that your work will not be revised out of existance by some
rival. 
  Acceptance of a neotype by the taxonomic community is subjective and
subject to differences of interpretation of the first description of the
taxon. It is unlikely that the taxonomic community would accept a neotype
designated by a taxonomist who had just destroyed the type (perhaps because
it did not conform to his concept of the species, or worse was not in his
collection).
  Unfortunately many taxonomic revisers have, for the sake of neatness,
designated neotypes which have changed taxon concept and type locality. In
the majority of these cases a little historic sleuthing would have turned
up valid types and retained the original meaning of the taxon. An example
of a case of subjective confusion created by this kind of neatness is to be
found in a classic revision of the argynnine butterflies of North America,
out of an institution that should have known better.
.......Chris Durden

At 03:29  21/12/99 -0800, you wrote:
>My last posting of the millenium :) Question: Has the code of zoological
>nomenclature always required that holotypes be designated for type
>localities to exist ? Or do old names based on simple descriptions of
>"types" simply not have 'official' type localities until somebody designates
>a lectotype or neotype ???
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Norbert Kondla  P.Biol., RPBio.
>Forest Ecosystem Specialist, Ministry of Environment
>845 Columbia Avenue, Castlegar, British Columbia V1N 1H3
>Phone 250-365-8610
>Mailto:Norbert.Kondla at gems3.gov.bc.ca
>http://www.env.gov.bc.ca
>
>