[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Holotype Hype - A Response to Dubois & Nemesio
RESPONSE TO DUBOIS & NEMÉSIO (2007)
I find the argument about type specimens in Dubois & Nemésio (2007.
Zootaxa 1409: 1-22) perplexing. There is no ambiguity whatsoever
regarding type specimens in the the [...] (ICZN)
Dubois & Nemésio don't claim there is one. They just observe that this rule
has occasionally not been followed and propose that the rule should be
changed to allow for a few exceptions (though not as many as have already
Besides, in paleontology, a type specimen is _never_ a complete individual
or for that matter a complete skin. If a fossil feather can be the holotype
of a valid taxon*, why can't a recent feather be one? If part of an organism
is diagnostic, I can't see why the whole organism must be entered into a
collection. It obviously helps, but it's not necessary.
* Without exception these are nomina dubia because fossil feathers are not
diagnostic. But when we have DNA in that feather... and a blood sample and
whatnot... not to mention the color pattern of that feather...