[Taxacom] monotypic or monobasic

[Paul van Rijckevorsel]

The correct term should be "unispecific".

The term "monotypic" sounds nomenclatural, and
indeed has been defined as a nomenclatural term
in the ICNafp. By contrast, "unispecific" represents
a taxonomic concept

Sometimes "monospecific" can be found, but this
is ugly, as it is a hybrid combining a Greek and a
Latin word element.

Paul

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Stephen Thorpe" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>
To: "taxacom" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>; "John Grehan" 
<calabar.john at gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 14, 2017 7:44 AM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] monotypic or monobasic


>I expect that these terms don't have very precise definitions and that 
>there may be a fair amount of variation in exact usage. My feeling is that 
>"monobasic" isn't used much any more. It presumably means "with a single 
>basis", i.e. "based on a single species". Monotypic presumably means "based 
>on a single type", though "type" should, I think, be interpreted in the 
>general sense, not as types in the nomenclatural sense (i.e. type species 
>or type specimens), which is a possible source of confusion. So, a genus 
>with just one species regarded as valid would be monotypic, even if the 
>single species had synonyms (and therefore more than one type specimen 
>included). All nominal genera obviously have only one type species, whether 
>or not the genus is monotypic! Monotypy is the act of basing a new genus on 
>a single species. I have never seen or heard the term "monobasy"! I also 
>don't think that these terms apply to species, i.e. basing a new species on 
>a single specimen doesn't make the species mono-anything!
> Stephen
>
> --------------------------------------------
> On Thu, 14/12/17, John Grehan <calabar.john at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Subject: [Taxacom] monotypic or monobasic
> To: "taxacom" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> Received: Thursday, 14 December, 2017, 6:07 PM
>
> Dear colleagues,
>
> I have seen the terms 'monotypic' and
> 'monobasic' applied to genera with a
> single species. I am curious to know if
> there is a technically correct
> choice for the use of these terms for
> such genera. If anyone may be able to
> enlighten me as to the rules, if any,
> governing how these terms are
> properly used I would be most
> grateful.
>
> John Grehan
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu,
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be
> searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions
> to taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the
> Web, visit: http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> You can reach the person managing the
> list at: taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>
> Nurturing Nuance while Assaulting
> Ambiguity for 30 Some Years, 1987-2017.
>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu,
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: 
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the Web, visit: 
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> You can reach the person managing the list at: 
> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>
> Nurturing Nuance while Assaulting Ambiguity for 30 Some Years, 1987-2017.
>
>
> ---
> Deze e-mail is gecontroleerd op virussen door AVG.
> http://www.avg.com
>