Holotype fragment (botany)

[Paul van Rijckevorsel]

/Englera/ 20 is the proceedings of the Nomenclature Section at St. Louis.

Paraphrasing is dangerous, but the arguments run as they appeared in
the discussion here. There is a risk of confusion, and perhaps of more
practical importance, of nomenclatural instability (the /Code/ is
retroactive and past typifications are affected: thus current names are at
risk). Instances are reported of collectors who mounted more than one
gathering (i.e. made at different times) onto a single herbarium sheet.

It was deemed to be a can of worms too dangerous to open.
Paul

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Jensen" <rjensen at SAINTMARYS.EDU>
To: <TAXACOM at LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU>
Sent: Monday, January 16, 2006 10:09 PM
Subject: Re: Holotype fragment (botany)


> Paul,
>
> Could you provide a clue for those of us without access to Englera?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Dick J
>
> Paul van Rijckevorsel wrote:
>
> > From: "ralf becker" <r.h.becker at READING.AC.UK>
> > > My question or thought was: Why does the code not allow a multiple
> > > collection from the same individual at different times of the year so
one
> > > has a type with all stages (e.g. fruit, flower).
> >
> > ***
> > Well, see Englera 20: 59-61. 2000
> > PvR
>
> --
> Richard J. Jensen              | tel: 574-284-4674
> Department of Biology      | fax: 574-284-4716
> Saint Mary's College         | e-mail: rjensen at saintmarys.edu
> Notre Dame, IN 46556    | http://www.saintmarys.edu/~rjensen
>