From tamaratot90 at gmail.com Tue Feb 1 11:35:28 2022 From: tamaratot90 at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?VGFtYXJhIFTDs3Ro?=) Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2022 12:35:28 +0100 Subject: [Syrphidae] Interesting question Message-ID: Dear All, Very interesting question: Can a new species be described without knowing any data about the specimen? Sorry and thanks a lot. Best regards, Tamara -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From j.van.steenis at xmsnet.nl Tue Feb 1 12:22:09 2022 From: j.van.steenis at xmsnet.nl (Jeroen van Steenis) Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2022 13:22:09 +0100 Subject: [Syrphidae] Re: Interesting question In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Dear Tamara If you do not know anything, it might be a virus, a fungus or even a mammal. So in this case it is not possible to describe this "life form". If you only have DNA from a malaise trap sample or a water sample you might narrow it down. For now only DNA is not allowed for a species description. I already commented on a post on Researchgate on the DNA matter if we should allow descriptions only based on DNA. It is not the DNA which makes the specimens, it is the expression of its DNA making up all the parts of the specimens and thus of its characters. If you mean there is no information on where, when and by who it is collected I do not know if this makes it impossible to publish. I would advise not to but instead try to see if others could help in finding where this specimen might have been collected and see to find additional material. Best wishes, Jeroen Op di 1 feb. 2022 om 12:35 schreef Tamara T?th : > Dear All, > > Very interesting question: > Can a new species be described without knowing any data about the specimen? > > Sorry and thanks a lot. > > Best regards, > Tamara > > This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee > and may contain confidential information. If you have received this > message in error, please contact the sender and delete the email and > attachment. > > Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not > necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham. Email > communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored > where permitted by law. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Syrphidae mailing list > Syrphidae at lists.nottingham.ac.uk > http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/syrphidae > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From Francis.Gilbert at nottingham.ac.uk Tue Feb 1 20:02:04 2022 From: Francis.Gilbert at nottingham.ac.uk (Francis Gilbert) Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2022 20:02:04 +0000 Subject: [Syrphidae] FW: Interesting question In-Reply-To: References:

Message-ID: forwarded From: Douglas Yanega Sent: 01 February 2022 19:28 To: syrphidae at lists.nottingham.ac.uk Subject: Re: [Syrphidae] Interesting question On 2/1/22 3:35 AM, Tamara T?th wrote: Dear All, Very interesting question: Can a new species be described without knowing any data about the specimen? In the most limited sense of interpreting your question, I can say this much, as I am an ICZN Commissioner: The two most crucial Articles in the Code are Articles 13 and 16, in particular the following two bits: --- 13.1. Requirements To be available, every new name published after 1930 must satisfy the provisions of Article 11 and must 13.1.1. be accompanied by a description or definition that states in words characters that are purported to differentiate the taxon, or 13.1.2. be accompanied by a bibliographic reference to such a published statement, even if the statement is contained in a work published before 1758, or in one that is not consistently binominal, or in one that has been suppressed by the Commission (unless the Commission has ruled that the work is to be treated as not having been published [Art. 8.7]), or 13.1.3. be proposed expressly as a new replacement name (nomen novum) for an available name, whether required by any provision of the Code or not.16.4. Species-group names: fixation of name-bearing types to be explicit --- 16.4. Species-group names: fixation of name-bearing types to be explicit Every new specific and subspecific name published after 1999, except a new replacement name (a nomen novum), for which the name-bearing type of the nominal taxon it denotes is fixed automatically [Art. 72.7], must be accompanied in the original publication 16.4.1. by the explicit fixation of a holotype, or syntypes, for the nominal taxon [Arts. 72.2, 72.3, 73.1.1, 73.2 and Recs. 73A and 73C], and, 16.4.2. where the holotype or syntypes are extant specimens, by a statement of intent that they will be (or are) deposited in a collection and a statement indicating the name and location of that collection (see Recommendation 16C). --- In a strictly literal sense, then, you cannot comply with these Code provisions if you literally cannot provide any data about the specimen. It's hard to imagine how you can designate an individual specimen as a holotype (as Art. 16 requires) without being able to at least describe what it looks like, and compare it to other taxa (as Art. 13 requires). Note that you can comply with these articles using things like compression fossils (which are not actual specimens of organisms; they're mineralized deposits occupying the space where a specimen of an organism used to be) or photographs (note the clause in 16.4.2 about "where the holotype or syntypes are extant specimens" - it is possible for a holotype to NOT be an extant specimen). People gripe, but it's simple enough: consider if a photograph of a holotype is taken, and immediately after the paper is published, the type is lost/destroyed - such a name is still available. That is functionally no different from when a photograph of a holotype is taken and the specimen is lost/destroyed BEFORE the paper is published. This can also apply to specimens designated as a type but destroyed in the process of DNA sequencing. The sequencing can occur before the paper is published, but it doesn't affect availability. The Code allows a name to be available when the designated type is no longer extant, and does not discriminate between whether the type was lost before or after the paper designating it was published. But note that the paper must still designate a specimen, and include some sort of description+diagnosis. That being said, you can't designate a DNA sequence AS a type (you have to designate the specimen from which the DNA was taken), nor can you designate a photograph AS a type (you have to designate the specimen whose photo was taken). One would hope that any sensible peer review process would preclude someone attempting to describe a new taxon represented by nothing but a DNA sequence (e.g., a sequence that appears in some metabarcoded soil sample), but even if someone managed to get such a name past peer review, and even if they gave a convincing argument that their description was Code-compliant, consider the parallel to an 18th-century nomen dubium with no known specimens. The possibility exists, at least, that some day someone will find an actual specimen whose DNA sequence definitively matches, and can therefore be used as a neotype. That's actually MORE LIKELY to happen than to find specimens definitively attributable to old nomina dubia, so allowing nomina dubia to be available and not allowing DNA-based names would be a bit of a double standard. I will also note that I've heard people propose that the Code, in the future, should require a DNA sequence for a name to be available, but that rather blithely overlooks that you can't get DNA sequences from fossils. I rather suspect the paleontological community would have some complaints about any such requirement. Peace, -- Doug Yanega Dept. of Entomology Entomology Research Museum Univ. of California, Riverside, CA 92521-0314 skype: dyanega phone: (951) 827-4315 (disclaimer: opinions are mine, not UCR's) https://faculty.ucr.edu/~heraty/yanega.html "There are some enterprises in which a careful disorderliness is the true method" - Herman Melville, Moby Dick, Chap. 82 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From aguado.aranda at gmail.com Thu Feb 3 09:07:08 2022 From: aguado.aranda at gmail.com (Pablo Aguado) Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2022 10:07:08 +0100 Subject: [Syrphidae] Paper request Message-ID: Dear colleagues, Does anyone have this paper? Hippa H. & St?hls G. (2005) Morphological characters of adult Syrphidae: Descriptions and phylogenetic utility. *Acta Zoologica Fennica*, 215: 1-72. Many thanks in advance! Best regards, Pablo Aguado Aranda ___________________________________________________ *PhD Student* *Research Institute CIBIO * *(Centro Iberoamericano de la Biodiversidad)* *Science Park. University of Alicante* *Ctra. San Vicente del Raspeig s/n* * 03690 - San Vicente del Raspeig (Alicante)* *Spain* -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tamaratot90 at gmail.com Thu Feb 3 09:17:31 2022 From: tamaratot90 at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?B?VGFtYXJhIFTDs3Ro?=) Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2022 10:17:31 +0100 Subject: [Syrphidae] Re: Paper request In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: Here it is. https://drive.google.com/drive/my-drive On Thu, 3 Feb 2022 at 10:07, Pablo Aguado wrote: > Dear colleagues, > > Does anyone have this paper? > > Hippa H. & St?hls G. (2005) Morphological characters of adult Syrphidae: > Descriptions and phylogenetic utility. *Acta Zoologica Fennica*, 215: > 1-72. > > Many thanks in advance! > > Best regards, > > Pablo Aguado Aranda > ___________________________________________________ > *PhD Student* > > *Research Institute CIBIO * > *(Centro Iberoamericano de la Biodiversidad)* > > *Science Park. University of Alicante* > *Ctra. San Vicente del Raspeig s/n* > > * 03690 - San Vicente del Raspeig (Alicante)* > *Spain* > > > This message and any attachment are intended solely for the addressee > and may contain confidential information. If you have received this > message in error, please contact the sender and delete the email and > attachment. > > Any views or opinions expressed by the author of this email do not > necessarily reflect the views of the University of Nottingham. Email > communications with the University of Nottingham may be monitored > where permitted by law. > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Syrphidae mailing list > Syrphidae at lists.nottingham.ac.uk > http://lists.nottingham.ac.uk/mailman/listinfo/syrphidae > -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: