Premium
(198) Proposal to add a new Example to Article 9.5
Author(s) -
Singh Rajeev Kumar
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
taxon
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.819
H-Index - 81
eISSN - 1996-8175
pISSN - 0040-0262
DOI - 10.12705/652.38
Subject(s) - tamil , citation , library science , computer science , philosophy , linguistics
The species Solanum purpureilineatum was described by Sabnis & Bhatt. (in Bull. Bot. Surv. India 12: 258. 1972), but those authors designated two specimens as types: “India: Gujarat State: Baroda District, Baroda, L. V. Palace compound, 2.10.60, Sabnis 2762, 2763 (Herbarium, The M. S. University of Baroda, Holotype)”. The specimens are extant at BARO and both are hand-annotated in pen as “Holotype” by Sabnis. They are evidently part of single gathering, made by same collector at one place and time (see Art. 8.2 and 8.3 footnote). Art. 9.5 rules that “A syntype is any specimen cited in the protologue when there is no holotype, or any one of two or more specimens simultaneously designated in the protologue as types (see also Art. 40 Note 1). Reference to an entire gathering, or a part thereof, is considered citation of the included specimens.” Therefore, Sabnis 2762 and Sabnis 2763 are syntypes (and a lectotype designation is allowed under Art. 9.2 and 9.11). However, it may be somewhat confusing that they were simultaneously designated as “holotype” of S. purpureilineatum, as a name can have only one holotype (Art. 9.1). In this case “holotype” is treated as an error to be corrected under Art. 9.9 to “syntypes”. Moreover, the name was validly published because the requirements of Art. 40 were met; in particular, Art. 40.2, which permits a type to be indicated “by reference to an entire gathering, or a part thereof, even if it consists of two or more specimens as defined in Art. 8”.