[Taxacom] [iczn-list] provisions to the Code

[Adam Cotton]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Philipp Wagner" <philipp.wagner.zfmk at uni-bonn.de>
To: "Adam Cotton" <adamcot at cscoms.com>; <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Cc: "ICZN List" <iczn-list at afriherp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, April 15, 2014 6:50 PM
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] [iczn-list] provisions to the Code


> Of course it is about extant species.
> But with a secondary observation it is not possible to:
> - explicit FIX the holotype, because you have no idea what individual the 
> holotype is.
> - if you have no idea about the individual, you cannot fullfill 16.4.2. 
> and make a statement about deposit it into a collection
>
> But what value has a name-bearing type if you dont need its characters?
>
>
>


Dr. Wagner,

Please read 16.4.2 again. It is not about extant species, it is about extant 
SPECIMENS, ie ones preserved in a collection somewhere, not live ones 
running, flying or swimming around.

There is nothing in the ICZN Code that states that the holotype must be a 
dead specimen.

Of course it is preferable that a dead specimen or a sample of its tissue 
should be designated as holotype, but failure to provide a specimen or 
sample per se does not invalidate the name.

Adam.