[Taxacom] Plant nomenclature query

[Paul van Rijckevorsel]

Yes, there is only one holotype, and there can be only one
(Art. 9.1).

In practice, the problem is indeed to establish what 
happened with the holotype (maybe it is going to be 
deposited in the future?). If it is really lost, then, of course,
a lectotype needs to be designated.

Paul

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "But Paul" <paulbut at hotmail.com>
To: "Matt Buys" <Matt.Buys at scionresearch.com>
Cc: <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Sent: Friday, April 04, 2014 7:06 AM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Plant nomenclature query


> My interpretation is that It is difficult to exclude other possibilities including misplacement and misfiling. However, after searching in vain with due diligence, it is acceptable to propose designation of one of the isotypes as a lectotype. It will serve as the type until proven otherwise.
> 
> Paul But
> Shiu-Ying Hu Herbarium 
> Chinese University of Hong Kong
> 
> 
> ?q???? iPhone ???e
> 
> "Matt Buys" <Matt.Buys at scionresearch.com> ?? 2014?~4??4?? 9:06 ?g?D?G
> 
>> Hi.
>> 
>> An author has published a new species and cities a holotype deposited in one herbarium, and a host of isotypes deposited in other herbaria.  It turns out the holotype specimen was never deposited.  Only some of the isotypes have been deposited. What to do now?  Would one of the isotypes become the holotype by default, do you have to officially designate one isotype as the "new" holotype, etc.?
>> 
>> Yours
>> 
>> M@