The strange case of the Chrysis ignita lectotypes

[EN] Resources, announcements, news and other stuff
[IT] Risorse, segnalazioni, annunci e altre curiosità

The strange case of the Chrysis ignita lectotypes

Postby Euchroeus » 07 Jan 2013 16:26

Sphex ignita Linnaeus, 1758 (currently Chrysis ignita) has a unique record.
As far as I know, it's the only species with 3 lectotypes.

At Burlington House, four specimens are found under the name Sphex ignita.

One is bearing the lectotype labels of Blüthgen and Linsenmaier, while a third lectotype designation was given by Bohart.

Blüthgen (1959: 14) and Linsenmaier (1959a: 156) contemporary designated the lectotype of ignita. According to Day (1979: 65) neither appears to have examined the specimen himself. Both authors designated the lectotype based on the information provided by Yarrow.

Bohart (in Kimsey & Bohart, 1991: 420) designated again an other lectotype. However there are no labels by Bohart under the specimens found in the collection and I do not consider valid this designation.

Pictures of the types and other specimens in the Linnean collection can be found here
http://www.linnean-online.org/view/inse ... gnita.html

Since Yarrow selected the same specimen for the lectotype designation of Blüthgen and Linsenmaier, there's no doubt on which is the lectotype.

However, I don't know who should be considered as the first revisor.
Linsenmaier published the lectotype designation on July 31, 1959.
I don't know when Blüthgen published his designation in 1959, therefore I don't know which one has the priority.

Blüthgen published his article here:
Mitteilungen der Deutschen Entomologischen Gesellschaft, 1959, vol. 18 (6).

Does anyone know when this issue was published?


Many thanks,
Paolo
Paolo Rosa - www.chrysis.net
User avatar
Euchroeus
 
Posts: 1008
Joined: 25 Aug 2010 17:32
Name: Paolo Rosa

Re: The strange case of the Chrysis ignita lectotypes

Postby Villu » 08 Jan 2013 15:25

Hi!

Thanks Paolo for turning attention to this topic, I have also found this lectotype case of ignita confusing.

Actually you forgot the most important lectotype label. The same specimen has also a label: "Lectotype O. W. Richards, 1935" together with Blüthgen's and Linsenmaier's labels. I would consider Richard's designation as the closest thing of proper lectotype designation. Richard put the label and in publication (Richards, O. W. (1935) Notes on the nomenclature of the aculeate Hymenoptera, with special reference to British Genera and Species. Transactions of the Royal Entomological Society, 83: 143-176.) he writes about one particular specimen as type. And apparently he studied the specimen in person.

Nor Linsenmaier or Blüthgen studied the lectotype and I currently don't remember if they wrote anything about lectotype designation in publications either. Bohart designated the lectotype (in Kimsey and Bohart, 1991) and I believe he had the exactly same specimen in mind but he just did not add fourth lectotype label.

Regards,
Villu
Villu
 
Posts: 18
Joined: 15 Mar 2011 10:27
Name: Villu Soon

Re: The strange case of the Chrysis ignita lectotypes

Postby Euchroeus » 08 Jan 2013 15:40

Thank you Villu!

You're right, I forgot to cite it because the designation is not clear in Richards (1935). I don't know when he wrote and pinned the lectotype label.

In fact, Richards (1935: 159) writes: "The type of Sphex ignita Linnaeus, 1758 still exists in the Linnean collection at Burlington House. It agrees with the modern interpretation of the species, but I could not determine its sex".

Richards clearly examined only one specimen considered as "the type" and not "lectotype". And I cannot understand why he was not able to determine the sex.

However the designation is valid according to the ICZN:

Art. 74.6. Fixation of lectotype by inference of "holotype" or "the type" before 2000. When it has been accepted that a nominal species-group taxon was based on a single specimen and the original description neither implies nor requires that there were syntypes, and if it is considered subsequently that the original description was based on more than one specimen, the first author to have published before 2000 the assumption that the species-group taxon was based upon a single type specimen is deemed to have designated that specimen as the lectotype.

Of course Richards was the first author.
Many thanks again

Cheers
Paolo
Paolo Rosa - www.chrysis.net
User avatar
Euchroeus
 
Posts: 1008
Joined: 25 Aug 2010 17:32
Name: Paolo Rosa


Return to Miscellanea

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users

cron