This has been interesting. Botanists require the lectotype to be chosen
from among those specimens used by the author in preparing the
description. If none of these specimens exist, then a neotype is
designated. Surely there is a museum specimen that was used in preparing
the original specimen. Or, did Linnaeus actually employ his own
cranium as he contemplated the species in question?
Bob Hope would have to be a neotype!
Richard J. Jensen | E-MAIL: rjensen at saintmarys.edu
Dept. of Biology | TELEPHONE: 219-284-4674
Saint Mary's College | FAX: 219-284-4716
Notre Dame, IN 46556 |
On Wed, 23 Aug 1995, Petersen, Mary E. {ZMUC} wrote:
Wednesday, 23 August 1995
Dear Taxacomers,
Re the recent comments on the type of _Homo sapiens_:
Assuming the following posting from 25 January 1995 is correct, Steam (1959)
has already designated Linnaeus as Lectotype of _Homo sapiens_.
Mary E. Petersen
Zoological Museum, University of Copenhagen
mepetersen at zmuc.ku.dk
----------------------------------
-------------------
================== Beginning of Forwarded Message =================
From: owner-taxacom
To: Multiple recipients of list TAXACOM
Subject: Re: Type of Homo sapiens
Date: Wednesday, January 25, 1995 2:34PM
Edward Cope (1840-1897) is not the "lectotype" of Homo sapiens Linnaeus,
1758, by subsequent designation by Psihoyos 1994; he was not part of
Linnaeus's (1707-1778) type series. Linnaeus himself was designated the
lectotype by Stearn (1959:4).
Literature Cited
Psihoyos, L. (with Knoebber, J.). 1994. Hunting dinosaurs. Random House,
New York, 267 pp.
Stearn, W. T. 1959. The background of Linnaeus's contributions to the
nomenclature and methods of systematic biology. Systematic Zoology,
8:4-22.
Earle Spamer
Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia
spamer at say.acnatsci.org
================= End of Forwarded Message ===================
2 messages in edu.ku.nhm.mailman.taxacomFW: Type of Homo sapiens
