[Taxacom] Paralectotype question

[Stephen Thorpe]

Francisco said "Paralectotyes are automatically those syntypes which were not designated as lectotype (Art. 74.1.3)"

Yes, but in practice, there may be less than conclusive evidence that a particular specimen is a syntype. Even if it is from the same collecting event as all the other syntypes, the collector may have, for example, held one back (just in case of loss in transit) but sent the others to the author for description (if collector and author aren't the same person). At the end of the day, it comes to "so what?" Is it important to have an extra paralectotype for some reason? In most cases probably not, so time would be better spent moving on ...

Stephen

--------------------------------------------
On Fri, 21/4/17, Francisco Welter-Schultes <fwelter at gwdg.de> wrote:

 Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Paralectotype question
 To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
 Received: Friday, 21 April, 2017, 7:21 AM
 
 I agree entirely with Adam.
 During the act of lectotype designation it 
 is not required that the author who designates
 the lectotype saw or even 
 knew all the
 other syntypes. Paralectotyes are automatically those 
 syntypes which were not designated as lectotype
 (Art. 74.1.3).
 
 Francisco