Taxacom: Species described based on a single collection

[Scott Monks]

John wrote: "I figure better to name such specimens now and let the future
work out synonymies if they exist."

     I agree completely!  These days, when species are being lost so fast,
we need to docuent  everything we can.  If specimens turn out just to be
aberant members of a known species, they are still important as
contributions to the knowledge about that species.
     Years ago, my professor answered a similar question of mine with,
"Don't bother with it!  If the species is extinct, it has no systematic
value".  I don't know if he really believed that or was just trying to get
me to defend a point of view--we professors often do that!  However, he was
strongly against cladistic/phylogenetic studies, so I am sure that he
didn't consider the usefulness of an extinct species in understanding of
phylogenetic relationships to be important (or possible!).

     Yes, we need to document everything we can before it disappears, and
maybe that will even provide a basis for more protection.  (i.e., follow
the DAMA protocol).

Regards,
Scott Monks

On Mon, Feb 20, 2023 at 9:43 AM John Grehan via Taxacom <
taxacom at lists.ku.edu> wrote:

> Interesting question. With respect to "how many known only from the type",
> one would require knowledge of revisions where a species may have
> originally been described from a single type, but subsequently known for a
> multitude of specimens. Of course, naming a new species from a single
> specimen can often be tricky if the differences are limited. I am guilty of
> that myself, but in most cases it is likely I would be dead before
> sufficient duplicate material was available, if ever (or they become
> extinct). I figure better to name such specimens now and let the future
> work out synonymies if they exist.
>
> John Grehan
>
> On Sun, Feb 19, 2023 at 3:53 PM Laurent Gautier via Taxacom <
> taxacom at lists.ku.edu> wrote:
>
> > Dear all,
> >
> > We often hear or read: "A huge amount of Amazon plant species are known
> > only from the type" or "Most XIXth century species descriptions are based
> > on a single specimen". But has anybody gone any further in metrics?
> >
> > I am looking for statistics (published or not) on the percentage of
> > species descriptions based on a single specimen (or collection), and
> > possibly its variation across time or geographical area considered.
> >
> > Does that ring a bell to anybody? My main focus is on flowering plants,
> > but all living organisms welcome!
> >
> > Thanks in advance,
> >
> > Laurent Gautier
> > Conservatoire et Jardin botaniques, Geneva, Switzerland
> > _______________________________________________
> > Taxacom Mailing List
> >
> > 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
> > The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> >
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org%2F&data%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Cb95478bb38084fd5422e08db14fa0a29%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638126836380968800%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Y0R7PANPhXBA%2FbUQsIjkXxLDPl1APQC4973RCLxdyg4%3D&reserved=0
> >
> > Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity and admiring alliteration for
> > about 36 years, 1987-2023
> >
>
>
> --
>
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Cb95478bb38084fd5422e08db14fa0a29%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638126836380968800%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=wewZ5SKNRiwh8zqG9jEXiM6eu5fiDlexVP1BOxu87mc%3D&reserved=0
> (use the 'visit archived web site'
> link, then the 'Ghost Moth Research page' link.
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
>
> 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
> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org%2F&data%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Cb95478bb38084fd5422e08db14fa0a29%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638126836380968800%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Y0R7PANPhXBA%2FbUQsIjkXxLDPl1APQC4973RCLxdyg4%3D&reserved=0
>
> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity and admiring alliteration for
> about 36 years, 1987-2023
>


-- 
-- 
_____________________________________________________

Correo/ Mail

Dr. Scott Monks
Universidad Aut?noma del Estado de Hidalgo (UAEH)
Centro de Investigaciones Biol?gicas (CIB)
Apdo. Postal 1-10
Pachuca, C.P. 42001
Hidalgo, M?xico.


Mensajer?a/ Courier

Universidad Aut?noma del Estado de Hidalgo (UAEH)
Centro de Investigaciones Biol?gicas (CIB)
Ciudad Universitaria, Carretera Pachuca-Tulancingo Km. 4.5 S/n
Pachuca  C.P. 42184
Hidalgo, M?xico

[Tel 01(771)717-2000 Ext. 6658, 6640]
[Fax 01(771)717-2112]

pagina / web page
https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.uaeh.edu.mx%2Finvestigacion%2Fbiologia%2Finvestigadores%2Fmonks_sheets.htm&data%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Cb95478bb38084fd5422e08db14fa0a29%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638126836380968800%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=LBGL2U0459ehmrPgVxa%2BEHbmFVG%2BcUE%2BZk24tKw9Mzg%3D&reserved=0

correo electr?nico / email
<smonks at uaeh.edu.mx> y <scottmonks at hotmail.com>
<monks.scott at gmail.com>
_____________________________________________________