[Taxacom] holotype designation

Francisco Welter-Schultes fwelter at gwdg.de
Sat Apr 13 19:12:59 CDT 2019 

Dear Sergio,
it is not always a logical course of action. If the usage of the name is 
clear and based on common acceptance, it is not necessary to select a 
lectotype.

Linnaeus (1758) established many names with type locality "Europe", no 
syntypes survived. If such a species only lives in Italy and nowhere 
else in Europe, and closely related species live in Austria and Spain, 
it is not necessary to select a name-bearing type if the name has always 
been used for the Italian species, based on common acceptance.

If in your case the usage is clear, for example because the description 
was unambiguous, no lectotype selection is necessary.
If the description also covered the characters of the syntypes which 
following more recent research belong to a different species, then the 
description did not disambiguate the two species and a lectotype 
selection makes sense.
You could either select one of the two females, or you could select a 
figured specimen which does not exist any more (Art. 74.4).

Once you select a lectotype, this act will stand. If you discover more 
original type specimens after a lectotype selection, this has no 
influence (Art. 74.1.1).

Cheers
Francisco

Am 14.04.2019 um 01:42 schrieb Sergio Henriques:
> Thank you Francisco:
> 
> Very valuable information and advice.
> 
> On a similar example also with syntypes belonging to different species,
> from the same period.
> 
> If most of the material can not be found in its original repository and is
> reasonably assumed lost. Given that only two females syntypes are currently
> preserved in the original repository (stored together and from the same
> region), is it correct to state that designating one of them as the
> lectotype is the logical course of action?
> 
> Once that even if the material from the remaining locations ever reappears
> or if topotype material is collected, this will have no bearing on the
> designated lectotype (article 74.1.1.).
> 
> All the best
> Sergio
> 
> On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 12:03 AM Francisco Welter-Schultes <fwelter at gwdg.de>
> wrote:
> 
>> Dear Sergio,
>> Not really early for me...
>> In this case all specimens are to be considered equal syntypes.
>>
>> No region has priority.
>>
>> Any author can select a lectotype and by this act determine the future
>> usage of the name, to be used for one of the 3 involved species. The
>> other 2 species would get new names. It is highly recommended to contact
>> other researchers in the same field and ask them on what they think
>> about the scheduled lectotype selection.
>>
>> Cheers
>> Francisco
>>
>>
>> Am 14.04.2019 um 00:43 schrieb Sergio Henriques:
>>> Dear Francisco:
>>>
>>>    This would be the mid 1800. So really early work.
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>> Sergio
>>>
>>> On Sat, Apr 13, 2019 at 11:39 PM Francisco Welter-Schultes <
>> fwelter at gwdg.de>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dear Sergio,
>>>> this depends on the date of publication. Which epoch would you have in
>>>> mind?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers
>>>> Francisco
>>>>
>>>> -----
>>>> Francisco Welter-Schultes
>>>>
>>>> Am 14.04.2019 um 00:13 schrieb Sergio Henriques:
>>>>> Hi again, following up from this interesting discussion:
>>>>>
>>>>> If a holotype is not fixed in the original designation and there are
>>>>> several specimens mentioned (eg. *Genus species* n.sp;  habitat:
>> Southern
>>>>> Italy, Dalmatia, Crimea and Serbia).
>>>>> Are all specimens considered equal syntypes?
>>>>>
>>>>> I say equal, because I am particularly interested in what happens if
>> the
>>>>> specimens represents three species, one previously described and two
>>>>> distinct undescribed species.
>>>>> Which region/specimen would have priority in bearing the name and why?
>>>>>
>>>>> All the best
>>>>> Sergio Henriques
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 9:06 PM John Grehan <calabar.john at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks again to everyone for the continued feedback. It seems that
>> there
>>>>>> are contingencies for even the seemingly most simple questions, but
>>>> glad to
>>>>>> have some clarity.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> John Grehan
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 4:56 PM Rosenberg,Gary <
>>>> rosenberg.ansp at drexel.edu>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> John,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I consider the example from Tindale (1958) to be a holotype by
>>>> monotypy.
>>>>>>> We can’t tell that Tindale meant “holotype” by “type, a male, unique”
>>>>>>> without reference to other species described in that work. If we
>>>>>> broadened
>>>>>>> the meaning of “equivalent expression” to include such cases (where
>> it
>>>> is
>>>>>>> known that there was only a single type specimen), then there is no
>>>>>>> situation where Article 73.1.2 would apply.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Gary
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> *From:* John Grehan <calabar.john at gmail.com>
>>>>>>> *Sent:* Thursday, March 28, 2019 12:45 PM
>>>>>>> *To:* Rosenberg,Gary <rosenberg.ansp at drexel.edu>
>>>>>>> *Cc:* Francisco Welter-Schultes <fwelter at gwdg.de>; taxacom <
>>>>>>> taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Taxacom] holotype designation
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Gary, your inference about Tindale is correct - although 1958 in this
>>>>>> case
>>>>>>> and the context is the same as you gave. For example for E. salvazi
>> the
>>>>>>> full quote(and placed in a separate paragraph) is "Loc. Laos: Thado,
>> 6
>>>>>>> June, 1915, R. Vitalis de Salvaza (type a male, unique, in Cornell
>>>>>>> University Collection, lot 841)." So am I correct to understand that
>>>> this
>>>>>>> is "by original designation" rather than "by monotypy"?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> John Grehan
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Thu, Mar 28, 2019 at 11:59 AM Rosenberg,Gary <
>>>>>> rosenberg.ansp at drexel.edu>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hi John,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The governing text of the Code is in Article 73.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 73.1.1. If an author when establishing a new nominal species-group
>>>> taxon
>>>>>>> states in the original publication that one specimen, and only one,
>> is
>>>>>> the
>>>>>>> holotype, or "the type", or uses some equivalent expression, that
>>>>>> specimen
>>>>>>> is the holotype fixed by original designation.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> 73.1.2. If the nominal species-group taxon is based on a single
>>>> specimen,
>>>>>>> either so stated or implied in the original publication, that
>> specimen
>>>> is
>>>>>>> the holotype fixed by monotypy (see Recommendation 73F)....
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>    From the information provided, the specimen is the holotype, but
>> one
>>>>>> can't
>>>>>>> judge if it is holotype by monotypy or holotype by original
>>>> designation,
>>>>>>> because we don't know the context. The author might have had an
>>>>>>> introductory section explaining his conventions. Elsewhere in the
>>>>>> treatment
>>>>>>> he might have referred to the specimen as "the type" or mentioned
>>>>>>> paratypes, cotypes or an allotype, which would make it clear that
>>>> "type'
>>>>>>> meant holotype in that particular case. (Referring in the original
>>>>>>> publication to "type and allotype" for a taxon fulfills the
>> requirement
>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> "equivalent expression" to holotype in Article 73.1.1.)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> If none of those avenues let us conclude that the specimen is the
>>>>>> holotype
>>>>>>> by original designation, we are left to parse the phrase you quoted.
>> We
>>>>>>> don't know what followed "unique". The implication is that the author
>>>>>> meant
>>>>>>> "type, a male, unique specimen" but perhaps the text actually said
>>>>>>> something like "type, a male, unique in having red spots".  It seems
>>>> that
>>>>>>> your example comes from Tindale (1941). In the description of
>>>> *Endoclita
>>>>>>> albosignata*, he said “type, a male, unique l. 18942, in S. Aust.
>>>> Museum”
>>>>>>> and in the description of *E. chrysoptera* he said “type, a male,
>>>> unique,
>>>>>>> reared August 3, 1923 from * Machilus edulis* by J. C. M. Gardner; in
>>>>>>> British Musem”. The introduction to his paper does not states
>>>> conventions
>>>>>>> about type terminology. In descriptions of other species he refers to
>>>>>>> “type”, “allotype” and “paratype” (e.g., *Endoclita gmelina*).
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> These clearly meet the requirements for holotype by monotypy. The
>>>>>> question
>>>>>>> is whether the knowledge that Tindale referred to “type” and
>> “allotype”
>>>>>> for
>>>>>>> other species described in the same paper means that all his uses of
>>>>>> “type”
>>>>>>> in the paper indicate holotype by original designation. I would say
>> no:
>>>>>> as
>>>>>>> soon as we start using evidence across taxa in a paper, we are making
>>>>>>> inferences. I’ve done a lot of work on type status of material
>> treated
>>>> by
>>>>>>> Henry Pilsbry and he was sometimes not consistent with his
>> terminology
>>>>>>> across species within a paper.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Gary Rosenberg
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, Drexel University
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> From: Taxacom <taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> On Behalf Of John
>>>>>>> Grehan
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, March 27, 2019 7:16 PM
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> To: Francisco Welter-Schultes <fwelter at gwdg.de>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Cc: taxacom <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] holotype designation
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Caution: This message came from outside of Drexel. Do not click links
>>>> or
>>>>>>> attachments unless you expected this email.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> thanks to everyone for the quick feedback. This is indeed a case
>> where
>>>> a
>>>>>>> single specimen was being described for the species - therefore
>>>> 'unique'.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> So I gather that this is pretty good evidence that there is no
>> evidence
>>>>>>> for any further specimens being involved and that the unique specimen
>>>> can
>>>>>>> be referred to as a holotype.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> John Grehan
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, Mar 27, 2019 at 7:09 PM Francisco Welter-Schultes <
>>>>>> fwelter at gwdg.de
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Relevant are Art. 74.5 and 74.6. For the type series, see Art.
>> 72.4.1.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Just saying "type" alone is not necessarily enough for meeting the
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> conditions to qualify for a holotype designation. If there is
>> external
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> evidence that the author had more specimens at his or her disposal,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> this type would be a syntype.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I did not really understand the meaning of "unique" in this context.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Maybe a little more information could help.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Francisco
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -----
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Francisco Welter-Schultes
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Am 27.03.2019 um 23:46 schrieb John Grehan:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I could probably figure this out from the rules of nomenclature,
>> but
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> perhaps someone will know off the cuff as I would like to be sure
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> and
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> have
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> the info quickly. If someone in 1958 states "type, a male,
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> unique...…" is that sufficient for the specimen to be referred to
>> as
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> a holotype since it is clear that the type is represented by a
>> single
>>>>>>> specimen?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Thanks. John Grehan
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to:
>> taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>> https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailm
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> an.nhm.ku.edu
>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fan.nhm.ku.edu&data=02%7C01%7Crosenberg.ansp%40drexel.edu%7C34f5621945d14fd7b3d008d6b39cc32c%7C3664e6fa47bd45a696708c4f080f8ca6%7C0%7C0%7C636893883214766583&sdata=250JXGHiWsLl8jU%2FjVqMsclmQ3roXCe6ZO%2Bs%2BsxpW5s%3D&reserved=0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> %2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ftaxacom&data=02%7C0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1%7Crosenberg.ansp%40drexel.edu
>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2F40drexel.edu&data=02%7C01%7Crosenberg.ansp%40drexel.edu%7C34f5621945d14fd7b3d008d6b39cc32c%7C3664e6fa47bd45a696708c4f080f8ca6%7C0%7C0%7C636893883214776570&sdata=3FkeckchXOWvHhRqY2XV3l41VTVF8ZNq7WxU%2B3fYGeU%3D&reserved=0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> %7Cdcdd58a433944ac1f16508d6b30a3225%7C3
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>> 664e6fa47bd45a696708c4f080f8ca6%7C0%7C1%7C636893253705175965&sdata
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> =naiH862ZRIcc0yerR%2F09tFzlY%2B94K8stsxIjX8DMl2g%3D&reserved=0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> You can reach the person managing the list at:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>> https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftaxac
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> om.markmail.org
>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fom.markmail.org&data=02%7C01%7Crosenberg.ansp%40drexel.edu%7C34f5621945d14fd7b3d008d6b39cc32c%7C3664e6fa47bd45a696708c4f080f8ca6%7C0%7C0%7C636893883214776570&sdata=5h8OB%2By1Pqa8ZIc7tWeTmEY9p2Qi6MU6w380SWiD%2FWY%3D&reserved=0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> &data=02%7C01%7Crosenberg.ansp%40drexel.edu
>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2F40drexel.edu&data=02%7C01%7Crosenberg.ansp%40drexel.edu%7C34f5621945d14fd7b3d008d6b39cc32c%7C3664e6fa47bd45a696708c4f080f8ca6%7C0%7C0%7C636893883214786580&sdata=Ne8%2Bd2Xm5gRTUlwfRrK%2Bpm2yyD91GwrJT68oOeGlsv0%3D&reserved=0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> %7Cdcdd5
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>> 8a433944ac1f16508d6b30a3225%7C3664e6fa47bd45a696708c4f080f8ca6%7C0%7C1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>> %7C636893253705175965&sdata=C%2BPvLynguveoRcOMiUExD6L8KDepARHX1PH%
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2F2QT%2BL1Q%3D&reserved=0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for 32 some years,
>>>>>>> 1987-2019.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to:
>> taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>> https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailm
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> an.nhm.ku.edu
>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fan.nhm.ku.edu&data=02%7C01%7Crosenberg.ansp%40drexel.edu%7C34f5621945d14fd7b3d008d6b39cc32c%7C3664e6fa47bd45a696708c4f080f8ca6%7C0%7C0%7C636893883214786580&sdata=3MZRQ8HsnAI%2B54aiGtJzGFjYuCQ0F4KXziW0JUk2Pv0%3D&reserved=0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> %2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ftaxacom&data=02%7C0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 1%7Crosenberg.ansp%40drexel.edu
>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2F40drexel.edu&data=02%7C01%7Crosenberg.ansp%40drexel.edu%7C34f5621945d14fd7b3d008d6b39cc32c%7C3664e6fa47bd45a696708c4f080f8ca6%7C0%7C0%7C636893883214796585&sdata=M3hBhaoQk4wRJuMDITSi5lJjEdVmdmsaBukVqc%2FKgso%3D&reserved=0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> %7Cdcdd58a433944ac1f16508d6b30a3225%7C3
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>> 664e6fa47bd45a696708c4f080f8ca6%7C0%7C1%7C636893253705175965&sdata
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> =naiH862ZRIcc0yerR%2F09tFzlY%2B94K8stsxIjX8DMl2g%3D&reserved=0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You can reach the person managing the list at:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>> https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftaxac
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> om.markmail.org
>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fom.markmail.org&data=02%7C01%7Crosenberg.ansp%40drexel.edu%7C34f5621945d14fd7b3d008d6b39cc32c%7C3664e6fa47bd45a696708c4f080f8ca6%7C0%7C0%7C636893883214806612&sdata=Fb1Dyu3GbrKVgRAQgof1NHP%2BPp9Nt8JlU26Vwjnc71U%3D&reserved=0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> &data=02%7C01%7Crosenberg.ansp%40drexel.edu
>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2F40drexel.edu&data=02%7C01%7Crosenberg.ansp%40drexel.edu%7C34f5621945d14fd7b3d008d6b39cc32c%7C3664e6fa47bd45a696708c4f080f8ca6%7C0%7C0%7C636893883214806612&sdata=Cbdu1PjzIjcCX%2BkVnqv5ZOjb6LsAcM3ZBosnVmnO3HM%3D&reserved=0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> %7Cdcdd5
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>> 8a433944ac1f16508d6b30a3225%7C3664e6fa47bd45a696708c4f080f8ca6%7C0%7C1
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>> %7C636893253705175965&sdata=C%2BPvLynguveoRcOMiUExD6L8KDepARHX1PH%
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 2F2QT%2BL1Q%3D&reserved=0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for 32 some years,
>>>>>> 1987-2019.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>>> For
>>>>>>> list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.nhm.ku.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ftaxacom&data=02%7C01%7Crosenberg.ansp%40drexel.edu%7Cdcdd58a433944ac1f16508d6b30a3225%7C3664e6fa47bd45a696708c4f080f8ca6%7C0%7C1%7C636893253705175965&sdata=naiH862ZRIcc0yerR%2F09tFzlY%2B94K8stsxIjX8DMl2g%3D&reserved=0
>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fmailman.nhm.ku.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Ftaxacom&data=02%7C01%7Crosenberg.ansp%40drexel.edu%7C34f5621945d14fd7b3d008d6b39cc32c%7C3664e6fa47bd45a696708c4f080f8ca6%7C0%7C0%7C636893883214816604&sdata=STRdSz7qGKpi%2FrmhoVBSoBApZNku9d1wm3z4rYVWYJ8%3D&reserved=0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You can reach the person managing the list at:
>>>>>>> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu The Taxacom email archive back to
>>>> 1992
>>>>>>> can be searched at:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org&data=02%7C01%7Crosenberg.ansp%40drexel.edu%7Cdcdd58a433944ac1f16508d6b30a3225%7C3664e6fa47bd45a696708c4f080f8ca6%7C0%7C1%7C636893253705175965&sdata=C%2BPvLynguveoRcOMiUExD6L8KDepARHX1PH%2F2QT%2BL1Q%3D&reserved=0
>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>
>>>>
>> https://nam01.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org&data=02%7C01%7Crosenberg.ansp%40drexel.edu%7C34f5621945d14fd7b3d008d6b39cc32c%7C3664e6fa47bd45a696708c4f080f8ca6%7C0%7C0%7C636893883214826608&sdata=EQicFoIIcPX7a1zdPYnB1jFO%2FzDBXAZ4FRlWIdCFJWE%3D&reserved=0
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for 32 some years,
>>>> 1987-2019.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>>>>> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, 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
>>>>>> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
>>>>>> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for 32 some years,
>>>> 1987-2019.
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>>>>
>>>>> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>>>> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, 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
>>>>> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
>>>> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>>>>>
>>>>> Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for 32 some years,
>> 1987-2019.
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>>>
>>>> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>>> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, 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
>>>> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
>>>> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>>>>
>>>> Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for 32 some years,
>> 1987-2019.
>>>>
>>>
>>
>

More information about the Taxacom mailing list