Taxacom: designation of holotype

[Michael Schmitt]

As far as I see, art. 73.1.2 clarifies this: "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 
vy monotypy"

Best

Michael Schmitt


Am 19.02.2025 um 19:47 schrieb John Grehan via Taxacom:
> I have a question for clarification. A publication in 1894 described a new
> species. It referred to the male, and 'this moth' but did not illustrate or
> specify how many specimens. It seems to infer a single specimen. Later, in
> 2018 a taxonomic revision referred to a holotype male that was examined in
> the repository. If there was only a single specimen represented as being
> that described in the original publication, does this qualify as being
> designated as the holotype, or should it have been designated as a
> lectotype. Hope someone well versed in the Code can clarify, as this
> hair-splitting stuff which gets me lost at times.
>
> Thanks,
>
> John grehan
>
-- 
apl.Prof.i.R. Dr. Michael Schmitt, FLS
Universitaet Greifswald
Allgemeine & Systematische Zoologie
Loitzer Str. 26
D-17489 Greifswald
Germany

Tel.: ++49 (0) 3834-420 4239
E-Mail: michael.schmitt at uni-greifswald.de

https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fzoologie.uni-greifswald.de%2Fen%2Forganization%2Fdepartments%2Fgeneral-and-systematic-zoology%2Fstaff%2Fapl-prof-ir-dr-michael-schmitt%2F&data=05%7C02%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C230cb186e49348b5b77f08dd5116c4b4%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638755880417465448%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=CG1Jsxbs96rrUS8Ei6RYSElza2s%2BB9zPpl16t%2FKlpFw%3D&reserved=0