isotype - International Code of Botanical Nomenclature

An epitype is a specimen or illustration selected to serve as an interpretative type when the holotype, lectotype, or previously designated neotype, ... InternationalCodeofBotanicalNomenclature (SaintLouisCode),Electronicversion CHAPTERII.STATUS,TYPIFICATION,ANDPRIORITYOFNAMES SECTION2.TYPIFICATION Article9 9.1.Aholotypeofanameofaspeciesorinfraspecifictaxonistheonespecimenorillustration(butsee Art.37.4)usedbytheauthor,ordesignatedbytheauthorasthenomenclaturaltype.Aslongasaholotypeisextant,itfixestheapplicationofthenameconcerned(butseeArt.9.13;seealso Art.10). Note1.Anydesignationmadebytheoriginalauthor,ifdefinitelyexpressedatthetimeoftheoriginalpublicationofthenameofthetaxon,isfinal(butseeArt.9.9and9.13).Iftheauthorusedonlyoneelement,thatonemustbeacceptedastheholotype.Ifanewnameisbasedonapreviouslypublisheddescriptionordiagnosisofthetaxon,thesameconsiderationsapplytomaterialincludedbytheearlierauthor(see Art.7.7and7.8). 9.2.Alectotypeisaspecimenorillustrationdesignatedfromtheoriginalmaterialasthenomenclaturaltype,inconformitywithArt.9.9and9.10,ifnoholotypewasindicatedatthetimeofpublication,orifitismissing,orifitisfoundtobelongtomorethanonetaxon(seealsoArt.9.13). Note2.ForthepurposesofthisCode,theoriginalmaterialcomprises: (a)thosespecimensandillustrations(bothunpublishedandpublishedeitherpriortoortogetherwiththeprotologue)uponwhichitcanbeshownthatthedescriptionordiagnosisvalidatingthenamewasbased; (b)theholotypeandthosespecimenswhich,evenifnotseenbytheauthorofthedescriptionordiagnosisvalidatingthename,wereindicatedastypes(syntypesorparatypes)ofthenameatitsvalidpublication;and (c)theisotypesorisosyntypesofthenameirrespectiveofwhethersuchspecimenswereseenbyeithertheauthorofthevalidatingdescriptionordiagnosis,ortheauthorofthename. 9.3.Anisotypeisanyduplicateoftheholotype;itisalwaysaspecimen. 9.4.Asyntypeisanyspecimencitedintheprotologuewhennoholotypewasdesignated,oranyoneoftwoormorespecimenssimultaneouslydesignatedastypes. 9.5.Aparatypeisaspecimencitedintheprotologuethatisneithertheholotypenoranisotype,noroneofthesyntypesiftwoormorespecimensweresimultaneouslydesignatedastypes. Ex.1.TheholotypeofthenameRheediakappleriEyma,whichappliestoapolygamousspecies,isamalespecimencollectedbyKappler(593ainU).TheauthordesignatedahermaphroditicspecimencollectedbytheForestryServiceofSurinamasaparatype(B.W.1618inU). Note3.Inmostcasesinwhichnoholotypewasdesignatedtherewillalsobenoparatypes,sinceallthecitedspecimenswillbesyntypes.However,whenanauthordesignatedtwoormorespecimensastypes(Art.9.4),anyremainingcitedspecimensareparatypesandnotsyntypes. 9.6.Aneotypeisaspecimenorillustrationselectedtoserveasnomenclaturaltypeaslongasallofthematerialonwhichthenameofthetaxonwasbasedismissing(seealsoArt.9.15). 9.7.Anepitypeisaspecimenorillustrationselectedtoserveasaninterpretativetypewhentheholotype,lectotype,orpreviouslydesignatedneotype,oralloriginalmaterialassociatedwithavalidlypublishedname,isdemonstrablyambiguousandcannotbecriticallyidentifiedforpurposesofthepreciseapplicationofthenameofataxon.Whenanepitypeisdesignated,theholotype,lectotype,orneotypethattheepitypesupportsmustbeexplicitlycited(seeArt.9.18). Ex.2.TheholotypeofVitellariaparadoxaC.F.Gaertn.(1807)isaseedofunknownprovenance(P),clearlybelongingtothespeciescurrentlyknownas Butyrospermumparadoxum(C.F.Gaertn.)Hepper.However,thetwosubspeciesrecognizedwithinthatspeciescanonlybedistinguishedbycharactersoffoliageorinflorescence.Hall&Hurdle(inTaxon44:410.1995)designatedanepitypewithfoliage, MungoPark(BM).Itbelongstothewesternsubspecies,nowtobeknownas B.paradoxumsubsp.paradoxum. 9.8.TheuseofatermdefinedintheCode(Art.9.1-9.7)asdenotingatype,inasenseotherthanthatinwhichitissodefined,istreatedasanerrortobecorrected(forexample,theuseofthetermlectotypetodenotewhatisinfactaneotype). Ex.3.BorssumWaalkes(inBlumea14:198.1966)citedHerb.LinnaeusNo.866.7(LINN)astheholotypeof SidaretusaL.(1763).ThetermisincorrectlyusedbecauseillustrationsinPlukenet(Phytographia:t.9,f.2.1691)andRumphius(Herb.Amboin.6:t.19.1750)werecitedbyLinnaeusintheprotologueof S.retusa.Sinceallthreeelementsareoriginalmaterial(Art.9Note2),BorssumWaalkes'suseofholotypeisanerrortobecorrectedtolectotype. Ex.4.IndescribingtheJurassicdinoflagellatespecies Nannoceratopsistriceras,Drugg(1978)designatedaholotype(slidepreparation)andoneisotype(SEMpreparation)fromthesamelocality,age,andzone.Healsocitedtwootherspecimenswhicharefromadifferentlocality,stage,andzoneas"isotypes".Drugg'sseconduseofthetermisotypeisanerrorandistobecorrectedto"paratype". 9.9.Ifnoholotypewasindicatedbytheauthorofanameofaspeciesorinfraspecifictaxon,orwhentheholotypehasbeenlostordestroyed,orwhenthematerialdesignatedastypeisfoundtobelongtomorethanonetaxon,alectotypeor,ifpermissible(Art.9.6),aneotypeasasubstituteforitmaybedesignated (Art.7.10and7.11). 9.10.Inlectotypedesignation,anisotypemustbechosenifsuchexists,orotherwiseasyntypeifsuchexists.Ifnoisotype,syntypeorisosyntype(duplicateofsyntype)isextant,thelectotypemustbechosenfromamongtheparatypesifsuchexist.Ifnocitedspecimensexist,thelectotypemustbechosenfromamongtheuncitedspecimensandcitedanduncitedillustrationswhichcomprisetheremainingoriginalmaterial,ifsuchexist. 9.11.Ifnooriginalmaterialisextant,aneotypemaybeselected.Alectotypealwaystakesprecedenceoveraneotype,exceptasprovidedbyArt.9.15. 9.12.Whenatypespecimen(herbariumsheetorequivalentpreparation)containspartsbelongingtomorethanonetaxon(seeArt.9.9),thenamemustremainattachedtothatpartwhichcorrespondsmostnearlywiththeoriginaldescriptionordiagnosis. Ex.5.ThetypeofthenameTillandsiabryoidesGriseb.exBaker(1878)is Lorentz128(BM);thisspecimen,however,provedtobemixed.Smith(inProc.Amer.Acad.Arts70:192.1935)actedinaccordancewithArt.9.12indesignatingonepartofLorentz'sspecimenasthelectotype. 9.13.Theholotype(orlectotype)ofanameofaspeciesorinfraspecifictaxonoffossilplants (Art.8.5)isthespecimen(oroneofthespecimens)onwhichthevalidatingillustrations (Art.38)arebased.When,priorto1January2001(see Art.38.2),intheprotologueofanameofanewtaxonoffossilplantsoftherankofspeciesorbelow,atypespecimenisindicated (Art.37.1)butnotidentifiedamongthevalidatingillustrations,alectotypemustbedesignatedfromamongthespecimensillustratedintheprotologue.Thischoiceissupersededifitcanbedemonstratedthattheoriginaltypespecimencorrespondstoanothervalidatingillustration. 9.14.Adesignationofalectotypeorneotypethatlaterisfoundtorefertoasinglegatheringbutmorethanonespecimenmustneverthelessbeaccepted(subjecttoArt.9.17),butmaybefurthernarrowedtoasingleoneofthesespecimensbywayofasubsequentlectotypificationorneotypification. Ex.6.ErigeronplantagineusGreene(1898)wasdescribedfrommaterialcollectedbyR.M.AustininCalifornia.Cronquist(inBrittonia6:173.1947)wrote"Type: Austins.n.,ModocCounty,California(ND)",therebydesignatingtheAustinmaterialinNDasthe[first-step]lectotype.Strother&Ferlatte(inMadroño35:85.1988),notingthatthereweretwospecimensofthisgatheringatND,designatedoneofthem(ND-GNo.057228)asthe[second-step]lectotype.Insubsequentreferences,bothlectotypificationstepsmaybecitedinsequence. 9.15.Whenaholotypeorapreviouslydesignatedlectotypehasbeenlostordestroyedanditcanbeshownthatalltheotheroriginalmaterialdifferstaxonomicallyfromthedestroyedtype,aneotypemaybeselectedtopreservetheusageestablishedbytheprevioustypification(seealsoArt.9.16). 9.16.AneotypeselectedunderArt.9.15maybesupersededifitcanbeshowntodiffertaxonomicallyfromtheholotypeorlectotypethatitreplaced. 9.17.Theauthorwhofirstdesignatesalectotypeoraneotypemustbefollowed,butthatchoiceissupersededif (a)theholotypeor,inthecaseofaneotype,anyoftheoriginalmaterialisrediscovered;thechoicemayalsobesupersededifonecanshowthat (b)itisinseriousconflictwiththeprotologueandanotherelementisavailablethatisnotinconflictwiththeprotologue,orthat (c)itiscontrarytoArt.9.12. 9.18.Theauthorwhofirstdesignatesanepitypemustbefollowed;adifferentepitypemaybedesignatedonlyiftheoriginalepitypeislostordestroyed.AlectotypeorneotypesupportedbyanepitypemaybesupersededinaccordancewithArt.9.17or,inthecaseofaneotype,Art.9.16.IfitcanbeshownthatanepitypeandthetypeitsupportsdiffertaxonomicallyandthatneitherArt.9.16nor9.17applies,thenamemaybeproposedforconservationwithaconservedtype (Art.14.9;seealsoArt. 57). Note4.Anepitypesupportsonlythetypetowhichitislinkedbythetypifyingauthor.Ifthesupportedtypeissuperseded,theepitypehasnostandingwithrespecttothereplacementtype. 9.19.Designationofanepitypeisnoteffectedunlesstheherbariumorinstitutioninwhichtheepitypeisconservedisspecifiedor,iftheepitypeisapublishedillustration,afullanddirectbibliographicreferencetoitisprovided. 9.20.Onorafter1January1990,lectotypificationorneotypificationofanameofaspeciesorinfraspecifictaxonbyaspecimenorunpublishedillustrationisnoteffectedunlesstheherbariumorinstitutioninwhichthetypeisconservedisspecified. 9.21.Onorafter1January2001,lectotypificationorneotypificationofanameofaspeciesorinfraspecifictaxonisnoteffectedunlessindicatedbyuseoftheterm"lectotypus"or"neotypus",itsabbreviation,oritsequivalentinamodernlanguage(butseeArt.9.8). Recommendation9A 9A.1.Typificationofnamesforwhichnoholotypewasdesignatedshouldonlybecarriedoutwithanunderstandingoftheauthor'smethodofworking;inparticularitshouldberealizedthatsomeofthematerialusedbytheauthorindescribingthetaxonmaynotbeintheauthor'sownherbariumormaynotevenhavesurvived,andconversely,thatnotallthematerialsurvivingintheauthor'sherbariumwasnecessarilyusedindescribingthetaxon. 9A.2.Designationofalectotypeshouldbeundertakenonlyinthelightofanunderstandingofthegroupconcerned.Inchoosingalectotype,allaspectsoftheprotologueshouldbeconsideredasabasicguide.Mechanicalmethods,suchastheautomaticselectionofthefirstelementcitedorofaspecimencollectedbythepersonafterwhomaspeciesisnamed,shouldbeavoidedasunscientificandproductiveofpossiblefutureconfusionandfurtherchanges. 9A.3.Inchoosingalectotype,anyindicationofintentbytheauthorofanameshouldbegivenpreferenceunlesssuchindicationiscontrarytotheprotologue.Suchindicationsaremanuscriptnotes,annotationsonherbariumsheets,recognizablefigures,andepithetssuchas typicus,genuinus,etc. 9A.4.Whenasinglecollectioniscitedintheprotologue,butaparticularinstitutionhousingthisisnotdesignated,itshouldbeassumedthatthespecimenhousedintheinstitutionwheretheauthorisknowntohaveworkedistheholotype,unlessthereisevidencethatfurthermaterialofthesamecollectionwasused. 9A.5.Whentwoormoreheterogeneouselementswereincludedinorcitedwiththeoriginaldescriptionordiagnosis,thelectotypeshouldbesoselectedastopreservecurrentusage.Inparticular,ifanotherauthorhasalreadysegregatedoneormoreelementsasothertaxa,theresidueorpartofitshouldbedesignatedasthelectotypeprovidedthatthiselementisnotinconflictwiththeoriginaldescriptionordiagnosis(seeArt.9.17). Recommendation9B 9B.1.Inselectinganeotype,particularcareandcriticalknowledgeshouldbeexercisedbecausethereviewerusuallyhasnoguideexceptpersonaljudgementastowhatbestfitstheprotologue;ifthisselectionprovestobefaultyitwillinevitablyresultinfurther change.    Title| Subjectindex|Indextoscientificnames |Contact|RegnumVegetabile (c)byInternationalAssociationforPlantTaxonomy.ThispagelastupdatedFeb.12,2001.