日本人の研究者による哺乳類の学名と模式標本のリスト

概要

論文の詳細を見る
日本人の研究者による哺乳類の学名の記載とその学名を付与した模式標本の保管状況を把握することは, 哺乳類学の基礎である分類学を確立するためには欠くことができない. しかし, 日本の哺乳類研究者がいままでに記載発表した哺乳類の新種・新亜種などの学名と模式標本のリストは今泉(1962)を除いてなく, それも未完である. 日本におけるこのような状況を改善するために, 2000年までの日本人哺乳類研究者が記載した学名と出典文献のリストを作成した. このリストには"nom. nud."などの無資格名も含んだ. 結果として, 適格名206のうち, 模式標本が現在も保管されている学名は64(31.1%), 模式標本が消失した学名は57(27.7%), および模式標本の所在が未調査("N.V.")の学名は85(41.3%)となった. 以上の結果から, 我々は動物学標本と文献を永久に保管できる国立の自然史博物館の設立を強く希望する.Given that the type specimen for a scientific name provides the objective standard of reference in taxonomic studies, the preservation of the type specimen remains the most fundamental method for proving of discovering facts thereafter. Since the Meiji Era in Japan, however, no attempt has been made to establish a Japanese National Museum of Natural History in order to maintain the type and other specimens and taxonomic literature (se Kaneko, 1998). A few institutions have published lists of the type specimens concerned (Kuroda, 1966; Endo, 1997, 1997, 1998, 2000), but no list of all scientific names and type specimens of mammals described by Japanese reserchers in available, except for Imaizumi (1962), who published a list on the three orders of Insectivora, Chiroptera, and Primates up till 1950. In order to improve this situation in Japan, the authors have compiled a list of scientific names and the type specimens of mammals published by Japanese reserchers until 2000. We have referred to all the original literature except for one cas(*). New scientific names published arearranged in the order of the date of publication in the following mammalian orders: Insectivora, Chiroptera, Primates, Lagomorpha, Rodentia, Carnivora, adn Artiodactyla. A name which is unavailable is noted as "nom. nud.", this being one which does not satisfy Articles 10-20 in "International Code of Zoolocial Nomenclature (4th ed.)" published in 2000. "N.V." indicates that the current condition of the preservation of the specimens is unknown. As a result of this investigation, Japanese mammalogists have described 206 scientific names as new species or subspecies, as well as 60 unavilable names (Table 1). Sixty-four type specimens (31.1%) have been preserved in various institutions. Fify-seven type specimens (27.7%) have been lost or destroyed. There are 85 type specimens (41.3%) the whereabouts of which remain unclear. This situation is clearly inadequate for zoological studies, suggesting a need for the establishment of a new Japanese ...
日本哺乳類学会の論文
2002-06-30

日本人の研究者による哺乳類の学名と模式標本のリスト

スポンサーリンク

概要

著者

関連論文

スポンサーリンク