Holotype fragment (botany)

[Cheol-Min Kim]

Richard Jensen wrote,

>Richard Pyle wrote:
>
>>  Technically no, because the Code still allows for historical syntypes
>>  (multiple individuals) for existing names, though new names must be anchored
>>  to a single name-bearing type individual. But more to the point -- in
>>  zoology, there is no such thing as an Isotype.  If an individual organism
>>  designated as a name-bearing type is divided into multiple parts, the sum of
>>  those parts collectively represent the type.
>
>The difference here is that the botanical code makes no reference to
>"individual
>organism."  Rather, the type is a single element or specimen.

---
Nope, you have been misinformed. The zoological code also covers the
type as specimen (but not necessarily individual).

The glossary of the past and current zoological code says that the
holotype (and the lectotype, too) is The Single Specimen (ICZN-2 & 4)
or A Single Specimen (ICZN-3). We have covered this issue at the
ICZN-LIST (iczn-list at afriherp.org) recently (11-13.x.2005).

Anyway, as a part of an animal can be the type by the ICZN, can we
holotypify whole genomic DNA extracts of an animal stored in a
microcentrifuge tube preserved in a *pretty* cool environment? All
the very best, Cheol-Min
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Nature created species; Man created genera.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~