[Taxacom] holotype designation

Sat Apr 13 19:44:46 CDT 2019

I also think this is a good and correct procedure.

Cheers
Francisco

Am 14.04.2019 um 02:33 schrieb Sergio Henriques:
> Thank you very much fo the clarification:
> 
> In this case usage is not clear, as the name has not been used for many
> decades as it is currently considered a junior synonym. Even though my
> analysis of the surviving syntypes clearly showed that it was at the time
> justifiably considered an undescribed species.
> 
> The original description is very poor and clearly ambiguous, with the type
> series likely to have encompassed different species. I don't think we will
> ever truly know as almost all syntypes appear to have been lost. But since
> two of them still exists (I will not need to make use of Art. 74.4) I
> really think that the correct step for this species is to designate a
> lectotype from one of the preserved females, as I expect that by doing so
> it will allow me or other researchers to explore the group's diversity
> further, even if the other reported locations prove to contain other
> species.
> 
> All the best
> Sergio
> 
> On Sun, Apr 14, 2019 at 1:13 AM Francisco Welter-Schultes <fwelter at gwdg.de>
> wrote:
> 
>> 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.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
> 