epitypes and ranks

[beach at VIOLET.BERKELEY.EDU]

> Gerrit Davidse writes:
>
> It has been fun reading the numerous responses to
> Krishtalka's call to forget about epitypes (ICBN Art. 9.7) and
> ranks, but for those botanists who still have to deal with immediate
> reality, an excellent example of the actual application of
> epitypification is now available.
> Guanghua Zhu. 1994. The lectotypification and epitypification of
> Dracontium gigas (Seemann) Engler (Araceae). Novon 4: 404-407.
>

Gerrit - This seems like a new perspective on the Article 71 thread,
or at least I am not clear on what the process of epitypification in
the new Botanical Code of Nomenclature is meant to accomplish.  I
understand that it specifies the appropriate binomial to use in some
sense, but it is it associated with a formal registration process of
say a single, consensus classification?

Would you or any other botanists familiar with this recent development
in the code be willing to comment on the conceptual/practical issues
this new process solves or creates?

Jim

_______________________________________________________________________

James H. Beach                                beach at violet.berkeley.edu
Museum Informatics Project                    Tel: (510) 642-0246
University of California                      Fax: (510) 643-8856
378 Doe Library
Berkeley, CA 94720-6200


The more you know the more you lump.  --  J.H. Beaman