[Taxacom] Questions about availability of a species name
Stephen Thorpe
stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz
Wed Aug 22 19:32:07 CDT 2018
2018
Seriously though, there are some issues here with the Code as it stands.
16.4.2. where the holotype or syntypes are extant specimens, by a statement of intent that they will be (or are) deposited in a collection and a statement indicating the name and location of that collection
Taken too literally, probably most new species descriptions probably fail 16.4.2., in that they lack a "statement of intent" and usually just have something like (BMNH) at the end of the holotype data. This is not a "statement of intent"!
So, I strongly suggest that 16.4.2. be ignored as a trivial technicality, in the hope that it may one day be removed from the Code. Too much confusion and pointless "taxo-lawyering" results from denying availability to a new name based on 16.4.2. It just isn't worth bothering about. The Code should be saving the availability of as many newly proposed names as possible, not trying to invalidate them!
Stephen
--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 23/8/18, Neal Evenhuis <neale at bishopmuseum.org> wrote:
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Questions about availability of a species name
To: "Stephen Thorpe" <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>, "Al Newton" <anewton at fieldmuseum.org>
Cc: "taxacom" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Received: Thursday, 23 August, 2018, 12:04 PM
Aw pfft.
You do not need to remind me to not
send you any party balloons, Stephen …
:-(
From: Stephen Thorpe <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz<mailto:stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>>
Reply-To: Stephen Thorpe <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz<mailto:stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>>
Date: Wednesday, August 22, 2018 at
1:49 PM
To: Alfred Newton <anewton at fieldmuseum.org<mailto:anewton at fieldmuseum.org>>,
Neal Evenhuis <neale at bishopmuseum.org<mailto:neale at bishopmuseum.org>>
Cc: taxacom <TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU<mailto:TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU>>
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Questions about
availability of a species name
Nah! That is clearly not the intention
of 10.1.1.
10.1.1. If publication of the data
relating to a new nominal taxon or a nomenclatural act is
interrupted and continued at a later date, the name or
act becomes available only when the
requirements of the relevant Articles have been met
I agree that 10.1.1. is somewhat vague
(but no more so than much of the Code!) "Interrupted
publication" is a term to be understood in a publishing
sense. At any rate, what kills it in this case is that the
Ranjith et al. (2015) paper doesn't tag the name as new.
Just adding a depository to a name that was tagged as new in
another paper (Li et al., 2009) clearly doesn't count, or
else you could validate a nomen nudum (tagged as new in some
old paper, but without description or illustration or
indication) without tagging it as new, just by adding a
description and type depository (and biblio reference to the
old paper which did tag it as new)! But the whole point of
the recently introduced Code requirement of mandatory
tagging as new is to highlight new names in the publication
in which they become available!
Stephen
--------------------------------------------
On Thu, 23/8/18, Neal Evenhuis <neale at bishopmuseum.org<mailto:neale at bishopmuseum.org>>
wrote:
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Questions about
availability of a species name
To: "Al Newton" <anewton at fieldmuseum.org<mailto:anewton at fieldmuseum.org>>
Cc: "taxacom" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>>,
"parahym" <parahym at nhm.ac.uk<mailto:parahym at nhm.ac.uk>>
Received: Thursday, 23 August, 2018,
11:36 AM
Ooooooh!
I like your thinking! You might have
something
there! I think the validity of that
would depend on the
definition of “interrupt”, which
primarily means
breaking the continuity of something.
One would have to
interpret the “continuity” as being
the "completion
of all qualifying conditions", such as
those in Art.
16.
-Neal
Neal L.
Evenhuis, PhD.
Senior Entomologist
Bernice Pauahi Bishop
Museum
1525 Bernice Street, Honolulu, HI
96817-2704
Office: (808) 848-4138
Fax: (808) 847-8252
BishopMuseum.org<www.bishopmuseum.org>
From: Alfred
Newton <anewton at fieldmuseum.org<mailto:anewton at fieldmuseum.org><mailto:anewton at fieldmuseum.org>>
Date: Wednesday, August 22, 2018 at
1:11 PM
To: Neal Evenhuis <neale at bishopmuseum.org<mailto:neale at bishopmuseum.org><mailto:neale at bishopmuseum.org>>
Cc: "Yanega, Doug" <dyanega at ucr.edu<mailto:dyanega at ucr.edu><mailto:dyanega at ucr.edu>>,
taxacom <TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU<mailto:TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU><mailto:TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU>>,
parahym <parahym at nhm.ac.uk<mailto:parahym at nhm.ac.uk><mailto:parahym at nhm.ac.uk>>
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Questions about
availability of a species name
Hi Neal,
"Work" does not appear in Art. 10,
except in the Recommendation 10A, and
"publication of
the data" could be interpreted as
referring to
successive publications.
I
think this article is too vague and
ambiguous, and
definitely needs to be clarified in a
new edition of the
Code. Likewise, how to fix a
problem like a missing piece
of required data in the original
description should be
spelled out somewhere. As I said,
people have been
publishing notes adding missing data
like type depository
without necessarily meeting all the
original requirements of
a new description, in the belief that
providing the missing
data is enough to fix the problem.
Al.
Alfred F.
Newton, Curator Emeritus
Integrative
Research Center (Insect Division)
Field
Museum of Natural History
1400 South Lake
Shore Drive
Chicago, IL 60605 USA
Telephone (direct): 312-665-7738;
Fax
(Zoology): 312-665-7754
FMNH personal web
page: <http://fieldmuseum.org/users/alfred-newton>
Austral Staphyliniformia databases:
<<http://www.fieldmuseum.org/peet_staph/>http://archive.fieldmuseum.org/peet_staph/>
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 5:59
PM, Neal Evenhuis <neale at bishopmuseum.org<mailto:neale at bishopmuseum.org><mailto:neale at bishopmuseum.org>>
wrote:
Al,
10.1.1 refers to the “work” [= the
“publication of the data”]. The
work was not
interrupted. Only the qualifying
conditions were
“incomplete”. 10.1.1 does not come
into play here.
-Neal
Neal L. Evenhuis, PhD.
Senior Entomologist
Bernice Pauahi Bishop Museum
1525 Bernice Street, Honolulu, HI
96817-2704
Office: (808) 848-4138
Fax:
(808) 847-8252
BishopMuseum.org<www.bishopmuseum.org<http://www.bishopmuseum.org>>
From: Taxacom
<taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu><mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu><mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>>>
on behalf of Alfred Newton <anewton at fieldmuseum.org<mailto:anewton at fieldmuseum.org><mailto:anewton at fieldmuseum.org><mailto:anewton at fieldmuseum.org<mailto:anewton at fieldmuseum.org>>>
Date: Wednesday, August 22, 2018 at
12:55 PM
To: "Yanega, Doug" <dyanega at ucr.edu<mailto:dyanega at ucr.edu><mailto:dyanega at ucr.edu><mailto:dyanega at ucr.edu<mailto:dyanega at ucr.edu>>>
Cc: taxacom <TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU<mailto:TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU><mailto:TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU><mailto:TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU<mailto:TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU>>>,
parahym <parahym at nhm.ac.uk<mailto:parahym at nhm.ac.uk><mailto:parahym at nhm.ac.uk><mailto:parahym at nhm.ac.uk<mailto:parahym at nhm.ac.uk>>>
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Questions about
availability of a species name
Hi Doug,
What
about the effect of Art. 10.1.1 on this
situation?
10.1.1. If publication of the
data relating to a new nominal taxon or
a
nomenclatural act is interrupted and
continued
at a later date, the name or
act becomes
available only when the requirements of
the relevant
Articles
have been met.
If indication of type
depository was the only missing piece
of information
in the original description (Li et al.
2009),
and
Ranjith et al. (2015) supplied that
information along with a reference to
the
original description (which had all the
other elements),
then it would
seem that the name would
become available from Ranjith et al.
(with them as
authors). This is how I and some
others have
used that article (at least
implicitly) for
this exact situation, which
unfortunately is all too
common.
Why does this not
work?
Al.
Alfred F. Newton, Curator Emeritus
Integrative Research Center (Insect
Division)
Field Museum of Natural History
1400 South Lake Shore Drive
Chicago, IL 60605 USA
Telephone
(direct): 312-665-7738; Fax
(Zoology): 312-665-7754
FMNH personal web page: <http://fieldmuseum.org/users/alfred-newton>
Austral Staphyliniformia databases:
<
<http://www.fieldmuseum.org/peet_staph/>
http://archive.fieldmuseum.org/peet_staph/>
On Wed, Aug 22, 2018 at 4:56
PM, Doug Yanega <dyanega at ucr.edu<mailto:dyanega at ucr.edu><mailto:dyanega at ucr.edu><mailto:dyanega at ucr.edu<mailto:dyanega at ucr.edu>>>
wrote:
On 8/22/18 2:24 PM,
Fernandez, Jose wrote:
Hi
all,
I would greatly
appreciate some help/comments on the
following topic. I
have added a "Right?" to the end
of
my paragraphs to mark my questions
(and NOT
because I think that I am necessarily
right!). Hopefully you
can
clarify me the situation.
Microplitis vitellipedis Li,
Tan & Song was described in 2009
from China
The original paper did not state the
holotype
depository. Thus, the species
name is
unavailable under the current ICZN.
Right?
Then in 2015 a taxonomic
review of the Oriental species of
Microplitis
refers to that species. It states that
the
holotype is deposited in the
Hunan
Agricultural University, China. That
happens to be the
institution
which the authors of the
original description were affiliated
with (at
least at the time of the 2009
publication). The
2015 paper, from Indian
researchers, states
that "the type specimen of this species
could not be
examined" and that they based their
species description, illustration and
place
in the key to Oriental Microplitis
species on specimens from
India
that they actually examined. I am not
sure if the 2015 authors contacted
the
Chinese colleagues to verify that the
type was indeed
deposited in the
Hunan Agricultural
University, China. But that may be
beyond the point,
because what matters is that, if the
type
depository was explicitly (and
clearly)
stated in the 2015 paper, then that
would comply with the
ICZN
requirements and thus would make the
name Microplitis vitellipedis Li, Tan
&
Song available. Right?
Assuming that the two previous
paragraphs are
correct, then my last
question is, how to
refer to that species? I mean the
species name and
authors would remain the same, but the
actual
date assigned to that name
should be 2015
(the moment when the species name
fulfilled all criteria
to
be considered an available name, sensu
ICZN) and not 2009. Right? Should it
be then
Microplitis vitellipedis Li, Tan &
Song 2015? Is there
something
there that I may be missing? Or
some assumptions that are wrong? Or
better
ways to interpret the situation?
[If someone is interested in
checking the cited references, I will
be
happy to send pdf copies off list (just
send me
an email for that). In any
case the two
references are: a) Original Description
Reference: Li,
Xi-ying; Tan, Ji-cai and Song,
Dong-bao. 2009.
A new species of Microplitis
Foerster
(Hymenoptera: Braconidae:
Microgastrinae) of China.
Entomotaxonomia. 31(3):225-229; b)
subsequent
and so far only reference
known to me:
Ranjith, A.P.; Rajesh, K.M. and Nasser,
M.. 2015.
Taxonomic
studies on Oriental Microplitis
Foerster (Hymenoptera: Braconidae,
Microgastrinae) with description of two
new
species from South India.
Zootaxa.
3963(3):369-415].
From the
information given, the name is still
unavailable (a nomen
nudum).
The relevant
section of the Code is as follows,
highlights added:
---
Article
16. Names published after 1999.
16.1. All names: intention of authors
to
establish new nominal taxa to be
explicit.
Every new name published after 1999,
including new
replacement
names (nomina nova), *must be
explicitly indicated as intentionally
new*.
{snip}
16.4. Species-group names: fixation of
name-bearing types to be explicit.
Every new
specific and subspecific name published
after 1999, except a
new
replacement name (a nomen novum), for
which the name-bearing type of the
nominal
taxon it denotes is fixed automatically
[Art. 72.7], *must
be
accompanied in the original
publication**
*
16.4.1. by
the explicit fixation of a holotype, or
syntypes, for the
nominal taxon [Arts. 72.2, 72.3,
73.1.1, 73.2
and Recs. 73A and 73C], and,
16.4.2. where the holotype or syntypes
are
extant specimens, by a
statement of intent
that they will be (or are) deposited in
a collection
and *a statement indicating the name
and
location of that collection*
---
Li et al. failed to comply
with Art. 16.4 (16.4.2), and
Ranjith et al.
failed to comply with Art. 16.1
Had Ranjith et al. stated the species
was new,
they would have been given
authorship, and
not Li et al.
Under
*outdated* editions of the Code, citing
a prior-published
description associated with a
previously
unavailable name would - under
some
circumstances - make that name
available (often
inadvertently), but
the 2000 Code edition
added Article 16 to prevent this from
ever happening
again. *You can no longer accidentally
make a
previously published name
available just by
citing it*; you are either the author
of a new name
yourself, or you are not. In this case,
no one
is, and the name is still a
nomen nudum.
There are still apparently
lots of taxonomists familiar with the
old Code
editions, and not the most recent
edition, who
have never read Article 16;
it's a very
long list of papers over the past 18
years that violate
16.1
and/or 16.4, and they continue to be
published, even in peer-reviewed
journals.
Sincerely,
--
Doug Yanega Dept.
of
Entomology
Entomology Research Museum
Univ. of California, Riverside, CA
92521-0314
skype: dyanega
phone: (951) 827-4315
(disclaimer: opinions are mine, not
UCR's)
http://cache.ucr.edu/~heraty/yanega.html
"There are some enterprises in
which a
careful disorderliness
is the
true method" - Herman Melville, Moby
Dick, Chap. 82
_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
Send
Taxacom mailing list submissions to: Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu><mailto:Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu><mailto:Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>>
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may
be
searched at:
http://taxacom.markmail.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the
Web,
visit:
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
You can reach the person managing the
list
at:
taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu><mailto:taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu><mailto:taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>>
Nurturing Nuance while
Assaulting Ambiguity for 31 Some Years,
1987-2018.
_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
Send
Taxacom mailing list submissions to: Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu><mailto:Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu><mailto:Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>>
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may
be
searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the
Web, visit:
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
You can reach the person managing the
list at:
taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu><mailto:taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu><mailto:taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>>
Nurturing Nuance while
Assaulting Ambiguity for 31 Some Years,
1987-2018.
________________________________
This message is only intended for the
addressee
named above. Its contents may be
privileged or otherwise
protected. Any unauthorized use,
disclosure or copying of
this message or its contents is
prohibited. If you have
received this message by mistake,
please notify us
immediately by reply mail or by collect
telephone call. Any
personal opinions expressed in this
message do not
necessarily represent the views of the
Bishop Museum.
_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
Send
Taxacom mailing list submissions to: Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may
be
searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
To subscribe or unsubscribe via the
Web, visit:
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
You can reach the person managing the
list at:
taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu<mailto:taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Nurturing Nuance while
Assaulting Ambiguity for 31 Some Years,
1987-2018.
________________________________
This message is only intended for the
addressee named above. Its contents may be privileged or
otherwise protected. Any unauthorized use, disclosure or
copying of this message or its contents is prohibited. If
you have received this message by mistake, please notify us
immediately by reply mail or by collect telephone call. Any
personal opinions expressed in this message do not
necessarily represent the views of the Bishop Museum.
More information about the Taxacom
mailing list