I know they weren't required in the early 1800s but obviously they are now so just wondering when this started being required and/or who coined holotype. Internet research yielded no good answers.
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
3
-
1$\begingroup$ Presumably botany and zoology receive slightly different answers. I would assume the foundation dates of the bodies that publish the ICN and ICZN are possible answers. As I understand it, use of type specimens was widely practiced and recommended from even before Linaeus; maybe in the 19th century there was a desire to codify the practice. It's not clear if you are asking when codification started or when the practice itself started. $\endgroup$– kimchi loverCommented Mar 8 at 12:21
-
$\begingroup$ either is fine, i'm just trying to get a better understanding of whether i can expect there to be a type specimen based on the year of publication $\endgroup$– imrobertCommented Mar 8 at 17:46
-
1$\begingroup$ According to iapt-taxon.org/historic/index.htm , the first edition of the ICN dates to 1867. See also en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Botanical_Congress , which says this was at the 4th meeting of the IBC, in Paris in 1867. $\endgroup$– kimchi loverCommented Mar 8 at 18:31
Add a comment
|
1 Answer
$\begingroup$
$\endgroup$
As far as botany is concerned, the concept of type specimen and obligation of using one was introduced in the 1935 version of the code (the so-called Cambridge Rules).
For zoology, surprisingly, it is only compulsory to explicitely name a name-bearing specimen since 1999, when the 4th (and current) edition of the ICZN code was published.
The term 'holotype' though (and the concept of typification) is older. The earliest occurrence I can find is in this short communication in the journal Science from 1897: What is a type in Natural History? by Charles Schuchert.
