An author in 1995 indicated the “type” of a name as Hermann s. n. (BM). This designation of the type is correctable to “Lectotype” as per the Article 9.10 of the Code (Turland & al., 2018). However the designated lectotype materials do not belong to a single gathering and represent a mixed assemblage of two species. I would like to know whether in this particular case the designation can be treated as an effective lectotypification (Art. 9.3)?
Please note that Art. 9.17. clearly states that “A designation of a lectotype, neotype, or epitype that later is found to refer to a single gathering but to more than one specimen must nevertheless be accepted (subject to Art. 9.19 and 9.20), but may be further narrowed to a single one of these specimens by way of a subsequent lectotypification, neotypification, or epitypification (see also Art. 9.14).”
Should this at all be regarded as a first-step lectotypification?
I have got an answer at personal level. As the collections were made by the same collector at the same place and at the same time (Art. 8.2.) and he presumed them to be same species, hence Art. 9.17. will apply here and it will be considered to be a single gathering.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Names