Allotypes

[Thomas Pape]

This allotype thread goes on:

At 18.39 1996-02-27 -0600, Doug Yanega wrote:
>                                              when
>you're examining types solely to make an accurate identification, the
>allotype, by itself, *can* be particularly important.

Yes - by itself, or actually by its being authoritatively identified by the
original author. NOT because it is an allotype.

We have to distinguish between NAMING the species and IDENTIFYING the species.

We need the name-bearing type as a "standard of reference whereby the
*application* of the *name* of a taxon can be determined" (ICZN, Glossary;
my emphasis). Having a single specimen is simply considered convenient
because a single specimen almost always represent a single species.

What nomenclatural acts have to be taken if the allotype suddenly is
discovered NOT to be conspecific with the name-bearing type? Absolutely NONE
(unless the allotype also is the name-bearing type of another nominal
taxon). Our new insight, however, may bring considerable improvements in the
delimitation of the species, understanding of its biology, etc.

Assigning an allotype ANY formal nomenclatural value immediately raises the
question of "lectoallotypes", "neoallotypes", and other constructions that I
definitely NOT think are needed.

>      What I've been driving at is what one does
>when there is NOT an adequate type series when one first describes a
>species but one later finds such material. Rather than try to draw some
>completely arbitrary number of paratypes (as a cutoff for when delayed
>designation is/isn't allowable), a more logical approach would be to give
>the original author the prerogative to designate paratypes at any time IN
>CASE the author finds it necessary.

Again: NAMING is one thing, IDENTIFYING another. Rather than discussing
whether subsequent designations of paratypes is desirable and should be
allowed, why not discuss whether we really need paratypes at all? They are
not name-bearing and in no way essential for NAMING a species-group taxon.
They may be convenient as a pool from which we can draw a neotype, but apart
from this.....?

Thomas Pape


-----------------------------------------------------------------
Thomas Pape
Department of Entomology
Swedish Museum of Natural History       Voice: +46 8666 4094
Box 50007                               Fax:   +46 8666 4099
S - 104 05 Stockholm, SWEDEN            e-mail: en-thomas at nrm.se

Web-address:       http://www.nrm.se/en/pape.htm
-----------------------------------------------------------------