'' Under the ICN, an additional and clarifying type could be designated an
epitype under article 9.8, where the original material is demonstrably ambiguous or insufficient. A
conserved type (ICN article 14.3) is sometimes used to correct a problem with a name which has been misapplied; this specimen replaces the original holotype. In the absence of a holotype, another type may be selected, out of a range of different kinds of type, depending on the case, a
lectotype or a
neotype. For example, in both the ICN and the ICZN a neotype is a type that was later appointed in the absence of the original holotype. Additionally, under the ICZN the commission is empowered to replace a holotype with a neotype, when the holotype turns out to lack important diagnostic features needed to distinguish the species from its close relatives. For example, the crocodile-like
archosaurian reptile
Parasuchus hislopi Lydekker, 1885 was described based on a
premaxillary
rostrum (part of the snout), but this is no longer sufficient to distinguish
Parasuchus from its close relatives. This made the name
Parasuchus hislopi a
nomen dubium. Indian-American paleontologist
Sankar Chatterjee proposed that a new
type specimen, a complete skeleton, be designated. The
International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature considered the case and agreed to replace the original type specimen with the proposed neotype. The procedures for the designation of a new type specimen when the original is lost come into play for some recent, high-profile
species descriptions in which the specimen designated as the holotype was a living individual that was allowed to remain in the wild (e.g. a new species of capuchin monkey, genus
Cebus, the bee fly species
Marleyimyia xylocopae, or the
Arunachal macaque Macaca munzala). In such a case, there is no actual type specimen available for study, and the possibility exists that—should there be any perceived ambiguity in the identity of the species—subsequent authors can invoke various clauses in the ICZN Code that allow for the designation of a neotype. Article 75.3.7 of the ICZN requires that the designation of a neotype must be accompanied by "a statement that the neotype is, or immediately upon publication has become, the property of a recognized scientific or educational institution, cited by name, that maintains a research collection, with proper facilities for preserving name-bearing types, and that makes them accessible for study", but there is no such requirement for a holotype. ==See also==