[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]

Re: Type material: does it have to look pretty?




Dinogeorge@aol.com wrote:

> Type material is a "holotype" only if the original author unambiguously or
> explicitly designated it to be the type, or it is the sole specimen on which
> a species was originally based. Type material that is so designated by a
> subsequent worker, as for example by selection from a type series, is called
> a "lectotype."

What designates "Type material" in the situation where more than one animals'
remains are found at the same location at the same time?
If, say. a new species of Protoceratops was found somewheres in the Gobi in the
typical mass scattering of remains (say 6 or 7 individuals), what makes one
skeleton more likely to become the "type" than any of the others? Completeness
alone?    Quality of preservation over completeness?
And if sexual dimorphism is obviously present, which gets to be type-the boy or
the girl?   Or do you get a lectotype (supposed) male and a lectotype (supposed)
female plus the original "type" specimen?