After taxonomic revision of a genus X that is distributed in South America, a researcher sinonimizes all the species in a single species X, that has the lost HOLOTYPE, and designates a NEOTYPE of a locality (Peruvian Amazonia) very far from the type locality (coastal river , in southern Brazil) and further studies conclude that the NEOTYPE does not correspond to species X. Does anyone have a similar experience, or do they know cases of Neotype correction?
Thank you
If a Neotype is validly designated than there are two ways how to set aside it. First according the 4th edition of ICZN (with effect from 2000.01.01)
75.4. Priority. The first neotype designation published for a nominal species-group taxon in accordance with the provisions of this Article is valid and no subsequent designation, except one made by the Commission under the plenary power [Art. 78.1], has any validity (also see Article 75.8 for the status of a neotype if a former name-bearing type is rediscovered).
In 1996 the third edition was in effect which states:
Qualifying conditions.—A neotype is validly designated
only when it is published with the following particulars:
( 1 ) a statement of the characters that the author regards as
differentiating from other taxa the nominal species group
taxon for which the neotype is designated, or a
bibliographic reference to such a statement;
(2) data and description sufficient to ensure recognition of
the specimen designated;
(3) the author's reasons for believing the holotype, lectotype,
all syntypes, or previous valid neotype to be lost or
destroyed, and the steps that had been taken to trace it
or them;
(4) evidence that the neotype is consistent with what is
known of the former name-bearing type from the
original description and from other sources; however, a
neotype may be based on a different sex or stage in the
life cycle, if necessary or desirable to secure stability of
nomenclature;
(5) evidence that the neotype came as nearly as practicable
from the original type locality [Art. 72h] and, where
relevant, from the same geological horizon or host
species as the original name-bearing type (see also
Section f of this Article and Recommendation 72H);
(6) a statement that the neotype is, or immediately upon
publication has become, the property of a recognized
scientific or educational institution, cited by name, that
maintains a research collection, with proper facilities for
preserving name-bearing types, and that makes them
accessible for study.
You can argue that the neotype designation does not meet the qualifying criteria but I think it will provoke further debate. So I think the best it to apply to the Commission
.
Thanks for the answer, I wanted to know if someone had a similar experience.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Zoology
- Ichthyology
- Vertebrates
- Fish