Taxacom: designation of holotype

[Francisco Welter-Schultes]

https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.biodiversitylibrary.org%2Fitem%2F63421%23page%2F480%2Fmode%2F1up&data=05%7C02%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C3313b5b2d4674ee6109408dd51247699%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638755939247583348%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=zItAM3hdU3IzCsa%2FdZj0s1BSp3%2F3v8WTg4QILccUtoc%3D&reserved=0

 From what I read I would not extract unambiguously that the description 
was based on one single specimen. The number of specimens is not stated, 
and the statements on the morphology of "this moth" could either refer 
to a single specimen, or to the taxon. Such a statement would not 
automatically imply that only one specimen was present.

So I would assume syntypes. If only one specimen is known, then this is 
the only known syntype.

The assumption of a holotype in 2018 has no influence. A lectotype 
designation after 1999 needs the term "lectotype", the assumption of a 
holotype does not qualify for a lectotype designation under Art. 74.7.

If only one syntype is preserved, then the taxonomic identity seems to 
be clear and there is no need for a lectotype designation.

If this helps
Francisco

Am 19.02.2025 um 20:08 schrieb John Grehan via Taxacom:
> Sorry - should have considered that. the original publication is
> 
> Rothschild, W. 1894. On a new species of the hepialid genus Oenetus. Annals
> and Magazine of Natural History 13: 440.
> 
> Its on BHL, but happy to send anyone the copy.
> 
> On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 2:03 PM Thomas Pape via Taxacom <
> taxacom at lists.ku.edu> wrote:
> 
>> I strongly encourage discussions of nomenclatural issues, but please
>> provide links to the original works. Michael may very well be correct that
>> art. 73.1.2 settles the issue, but assessing what is implied in the
>> original publication and what the text 'seems to infer' is risky without
>> having access to the original publication in its entirety.
>>
>> /Thomas
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Taxacom <taxacom-bounces at lists.ku.edu> On Behalf Of Michael Schmitt
>> via Taxacom
>> Sent: 19. februar 2025 19:54
>> To: taxacom at lists.ku.edu
>> Subject: Re: Taxacom: designation of holotype
>>
>> 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%7C3313b5b2d4674ee6109408dd51247699%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638755939247607015%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJFbXB0eU1hcGkiOnRydWUsIlYiOiIwLjAuMDAwMCIsIlAiOiJXaW4zMiIsIkFOIjoiTWFpbCIsIldUIjoyfQ%3D%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=H0VLQEVaLXzP35En5H4BzTQAchCtYPMewY9SRd8JgGw%3D&reserved=0
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>
>> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for 38 years, 1987-2025.
>>
>> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at lists.ku.edu For list
>> information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
>> https://lists.ku.edu/listinfo/taxacom
>> You can reach the person managing the list at: taxacom-owner at lists.ku.edu
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>
>> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for 38 years, 1987-2025.
>>
>> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at lists.ku.edu
>> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
>> https://lists.ku.edu/listinfo/taxacom
>> You can reach the person managing the list at: taxacom-owner at lists.ku.edu
>>
>>
>>
>