[Taxacom] monotypic or monobasic

[Lynn Raw]

From what I understand, monobasic is a term used in chemistry while monotypic is a term used in taxonomy and nomenclature. Definitions of both terms are available in good dictionaries or even on the web.

Lynn Raw

Sent from my iPad

> On 14 Dec 2017, at 09:49, Stephen Thorpe <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz> wrote:
> 
> Monotypy is a nomenclatural term (ICZN) in relation to the fixation of a type species of a new genus, but the grammatical variant monotypic has broader meaning. It is perhaps ugly to have variants of the same term with different meanings (one broader than the other)!
> 
> Stephen
> 
> --------------------------------------------
> On Thu, 14/12/17, Paul van Rijckevorsel <dipteryx at freeler.nl> wrote:
> 
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] monotypic or monobasic
> To: "taxacom" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> Received: Thursday, 14 December, 2017, 9:32 PM
> 
> 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
>> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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.