Cases where I am aware of major destruction to type collections in
museums are the material that was in San Francisco before the quake
and European museums (mostly German) that got bombed in WWII.
Hurricanes are much easier to predict than earthquakes or bombing
raids.

In exceptional cases, it is possible to replace a type specimen, but
only if the ICZN can be persuaded that it is necessary to avoid
significant confusion.  This usually happens only in the case of older
material where a widely-known species has been interpreted based on an
incorrect figure/description or when an early lectotype designation
has been overlooked.  I don't know for certain if it has happened yet,
but I think there has been some effort to support replacement of a
type if it is a widely-used name that can be shown to require
additional material for definitive identification.  For example, if a
type was a shell but identical shells are known for species with major
anatomical differences.

--
Dr. David Campbell
425 Scientific Collections
University of Alabama
"I think of my happy condition, surrounded by acres of clams"

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[log in to unmask] - a forum for informal discussions on molluscs
To leave this list, click on the following web link:
http://listserv.uga.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=conch-l&A=1
Type your email address and name in the appropriate box and
click leave the list.
----------------------------------------------------------------------