CHAPTER II

STATUS, TYPIFICATION, AND PRIORITY OF NAMES

SECTION 2

TYPIFICATION

Article 8

8.1. The type (holotype, lectotype, or neotype) of a name of a species or infraspecific taxon is either a single specimen conserved in one herbarium or other collection or institution, or a published or unpublished illustration (but see Art. 8.5; see also Art. 40.4, 40.5, and Art. 40 Ex. 6).

8.2. For the purpose of typification a specimen is a gathering1, or part of a gathering, of a single species or infraspecific taxon, disregarding admixtures (see Art. 9.14). It may consist of a single organism, parts of one or several organisms, or of multiple small organisms. A specimen is usually mounted on a single herbarium sheet or in an equivalent preparation, such as a box, packet, jar, or microscope slide.

[footnote]1 Here and elsewhere in this Code, the term “gathering” is used for a collection presumed to be of a single taxon made by the same collector(s) at the same time from a single locality. The possibility of a mixed gathering is always to be considered, especially when designating a type.

Ex. 1. The holotype of Asparagus kansuensis F. T. Wang & Tang ex S. C. Chen (in Acta Phytotax. Sin. 16(1): 94. 1978), Hao 416 (PE [barcode 00034519]) belongs to a gathering of a dioecious species made at one time at a single locality. It consists of a staminate branch and a pistillate branch, i.e. parts of two individuals, mounted on a single herbarium sheet.

Ex. 2. The diatom species Tursiocola denysii Frankovich & M. J. Sullivan (in Phytotaxa 234: 228. 2015) was described from material collected from neck skin of four loggerhead turtles and the type designated as “Type:—UNITED STATES. Florida: Florida Bay, samples removed from the skin in the dorsal neck area of loggerhead sea turtles Caretta caretta, 24° 55’ 01” N, 80° 48’ 28” W, B.A. Stacy, 24 June 2015 (holotype CAS! 223049, illustrated as Figs 1–4, 6, 12, 15–30, paratypes ANSP! GC59142, BM! 101 808, illustrated as Figs 7–10, 14, BRM! ZU10/31, Figs 5, 11, 13).” Because the specimens were collected on the same date, at the same place, by the same collector they comprise a single gathering, admixtures excepted, and the authors’ citation of “paratypes” is correctable to isotypes under Art. 9.10.

Ex. 3. “Echinocereus sanpedroensis” (Raudonat & Rischer in Echinocereenfreund 8(4): 91–92. 1995) was based on a “holotype” consisting of a complete plant with roots, a detached branch, an entire flower, a flower cut in halves, and two fruits that, according to the label, were taken from the same cultivated individual at different times and preserved, in alcohol, in a single jar. Because this material was collected at more than one time, it belongs to more than one gathering and cannot be accepted as a type. Raudonat & Rischer’s name is not validly published under Art. 40.2.

Note 1. Field numbers, collecting numbers, accession numbers, or specimen identifiers alone do not necessarily denote different gatherings.

Ex. 4. Solidago ×snarskisii Gudžinskas & Žalneravičius (in Phytotaxa 253: 148. 2016) was validly published (Art. 40.2) with a single gathering in BILAS indicated as type, the parts of which were numbered separately in the field, mounted on separate sheets and designated as follows: “Holotype:—LITHUANIA. Trakai district, Aukštadvaris Regional Park, environs of Zabarauskai village, in an abandoned meadow on the edge of forest (54.555191° N; 24.512987° E), 13 September 2014, Z. Gudžinskas & E. Žalneravičius 76801 (generative shoot) and 76802 (vegetative shoot) (BILAS, on two cross-referenced sheets). Isotypes:—Z. Gudžinskas & E. Žalneravičius 76803, 76804 (BILAS).”

8.3. A specimen may be mounted as more than one preparation, as long as the parts are clearly labelled as being part of that same specimen, or bear a single, original label in common. Multiple preparations from a single gathering that are not clearly labelled as being part of a single specimen are duplicates1, irrespective of whether the source was one individual or more than one.

[footnote]1 Here and elsewhere in this Code, the word “duplicate” is given its usual meaning in curatorial practice. A duplicate is part of a single gathering of a single species or infraspecific taxon.

Ex. 5. The holotype specimen of Delissea eleeleensis H. St. John, Christensen 261 (BISH), is mounted as two preparations, a herbarium sheet (BISH No. 519675 [barcode BISH1006410]) bearing the annotation “fl. bottled” and an inflorescence preserved in alcohol in a jar labelled “Cyanea, Christensen 261”. The annotation indicates that the inflorescence is part of the holotype specimen and not a duplicate, nor is it part of the isotype specimen (BISH No. 519676 [barcode BISH1006411]), which is not labelled as including additional material preserved in a separate preparation.

Ex. 6. The holotype specimen of Johannesteijsmannia magnifica J. Dransf., Dransfield 862 (K), consists of a leaf mounted on five herbarium sheets, an inflorescence and infructescence in a box, and liquid-preserved material in a bottle.

Ex. 7. The holotype of Cephaelis acanthacea Standl. ex Steyerm., Cuatrecasas 16572 (F), consists of a single specimen mounted on two herbarium sheets, labelled “sheet 1” and “sheet 2”. Although the two sheets have separate herbarium accession numbers, F No. 1153741 and F No. 1153742, respectively, the cross-labelling indicates that they constitute a single specimen. A third sheet of Cuatrecasas 16572, F No. 1153740, is not cross-labelled and is therefore a duplicate. (The valid publication of this name was discussed by Taylor in Novon 25: 331–332. 2017.)

Ex. 8. The holotype specimen of Eugenia ceibensis Standl., Yuncker & al. 8309, is mounted on a single herbarium sheet in F. A fragment was removed from the specimen subsequent to its designation as holotype and is now conserved in LL. The fragment is mounted on a herbarium sheet along with a photograph of the holotype and is labelled “fragment of type!”. The fragment is no longer part of the holotype specimen because it is not permanently conserved in the same herbarium as the holotype. It is a duplicate, i.e. an isotype.

Ex. 9. In the Geneva herbaria, a single specimen is often prepared on two or more sheets, which are not therefore duplicates. Although the individual sheets are usually not labelled as being part of the same specimen, they are physically kept together in their own specimen folder and bear a single, original label in common.

Ex. 10. Three specimens collected by Martius (Brazil, Maranhão, “in sylvis ad fl. Itapicurú”, May 1819, Martius s.n., M) are syntypes of Erythrina falcata Benth. (in Martius, Fl. Bras. 15(1): 172. 1859). Only one of the sheets (barcode M-0213337) has Martius’s original blue label, whereas the other two (barcodes M-0213336 and M-0213338) have been labelled with the locality to identify them as the same gathering. Because the three specimens do not bear a single, original label in common, and are not cross-labelled, they are treated as duplicates.

8.4. Type specimens of names of taxa must be preserved permanently and may not be living organisms or cultures. Nevertheless, cultures of algae and fungi, if preserved in a metabolically inactive state (e.g. by lyophilization or deep-freezing to remain alive in that inactive state), are acceptable as types (see also Art. 40.8).

Ex. 11. “Dendrobium sibuyanense” (Lubag-Arquiza & al. in Philipp. Agric. Sci. 88: 484–488. 2005) was described with the statement “Type specimen is a living specimen being maintained at the Orchid Nursery, Department of Horticulture, University of the Philippines Los Baños (UPLB). Collectors: Orville C. Baldos & Ramil R. Marasigan, April 5, 2004”. However, this is a living collection and, as such, is not acceptable as a type. Consequently no type was indicated and the name was not validly published (Art. 40.1).

Ex. 12. The strain CBS 7351 is acceptable as the type of the name Candida populi Hagler & al. (in Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol. 39: 98. 1989) because it is permanently preserved in a metabolically inactive state by lyophilization (see also Rec. 8B.2).

8.5. The type, epitypes (Art. 9.9) excepted, of the name of a fossil-taxon at the rank of species or below is always a specimen (see Art. 9.15). One whole specimen is to be considered as the nomenclatural type (see Rec. 8A.3).

Recommendation 8A

8A.1. When a holotype, a lectotype, or a neotype is an illustration, the specimen or specimens upon which that illustration is based should be used to help determine the application of the name (see also Art. 9.15).

8A.2. When an illustration is designated as the type of a name under Art. 40.5, the collection data of the illustrated material should be given (see also Rec. 38D.2).

8A.3. If the type specimen of a name of a fossil-taxon is cut into pieces (sections of fossil wood, pieces of coalball plants, etc.), all parts originally used in establishing the diagnosis should be clearly marked.

8A.4. When a single specimen designated as type is mounted as multiple preparations, this should be stated in the protologue, and the preparations appropriately labelled.

Recommendation 8B

8B.1. Whenever practicable a living culture should be prepared from the holotype material of the name of a newly described taxon of algae or fungi and deposited in at least two institutional culture or genetic resource collections. (Such action does not obviate the requirement for a holotype specimen under Art. 8.4.)

8B.2. In cases where the type of a name is a culture permanently preserved in a metabolically inactive state (see Art. 8.4), any living isolates obtained from it should be referred to as “ex-type” (ex typo), “ex-holotype” (ex holotypo), “ex-isotype” (ex isotypo), etc., in order to make it clear they are derived from the type but are not themselves the nomenclatural type.