Premium
Is inclusion of an uncited plate along with text definite expression of typification?
Author(s) -
Smith Gideon F.,
Wyk A. E.
Publication year - 1995
Publication title -
taxon
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.819
H-Index - 81
eISSN - 1996-8175
pISSN - 0040-0262
DOI - 10.2307/1222445
Subject(s) - typification , expression (computer science) , holotype , interpretation (philosophy) , taxon , linguistics , mathematics , philosophy , computer science , nomenclature , paleontology , taxonomy (biology) , geology , botany , biology , programming language
Summary Smith, G. F. & Wyk, A. E. van: Is inclusion of an uncited plate along with text definite expression of typification? – Taxon 44: 217‐220. 1995. – ISSN 0040‐0262. It is shown that the word “included” as used in the Code (Art. 9 Note 1) should not be taken to only mean “cited in the protologue”. Such a restrictive interpretation might lead to the undesirable and destabilizing retypification of names where perfectly unambiguous but uncited plates exist, either unpublished or published prior to or together with the protologue. If such a plate is the only element used by the author of the validating description or diagnosis, it is the holotype, whether cited as such or not. If other elements (specimens) exist upon which the original description was based, the illustration is usually precluded from designation as the lectotype and a specimen is to be preferred, but if no specimen has survived, the illustration is the obligate lectotype.