TAXACOM Digest - 26 Dec 1995 to 27 Dec 1995

[Joseph H. Kirkbride, Jr.]

There is a kicker in naming an illustration as a lectotype or neotype.
Most people read Art. 9 of the ICBN without looking at Art. 8.  Art. 8.3
states:
  If it is impossible to preserve a specimen as the type of a name of a
  species or infraspecific taxon of non-fossil plants, or if such a name
  is without a type specimen, the type may be an illustration.
I interrupt the above to mean that if the original material includes
specimens (syntypes, paratypes, lectotypes, etc.) and an illustration, the
illustration can NOT be selected as lectotype, a "type" specimen exists.

I have a very unusual case, a Linnean name in the Sp. pl. includes a
specimen citation and references to previous publications with
illustrations.  The specimen is not automatically the holotype because
Linnaeus used the specimen AND several illustrations, Art. 9.1.  The
specimen MUST be the lectotype because it exists ruling out the
illustrations.  When the original material includes both illustration(s)
and specimen(s), only the specimens can be used for lectotypification.

Joseph H. Kirkbride, Jr.
USDA, Agricultural Research Service
Systematic Botany and Mycology Laboratory
Room 304, Building 011A, BARC-West
Beltsville, Maryland 20705-2350 USA
Voice telephone: 301-504-9447
FAX: 301-504-5810
Internet: jkirkbri at asrr.arsusda.gov