>1. Can the specimens in the type lot similar to the Lectotype be
>designated Paralectotypes of that species?

All of the specimens that were paralectotypes of the first species remain
paralectotypes, even if they are misidentified. Their status as
paralectotypes does not prevent them from being types of another species as
well (ICZN Article 72d). Their status as paralectotypes is objective--they
are part of the material studied by the original author. Their status as
misidentified is subjective; it is the opinion of the second revisor. The
opinions of the authors of the first and second species (once it is named)
can be compared by studying their type specimens.

>The other specimens in the type lot will of course have to be given a new
>name.

>Question;
>1. In such a case will the second species be described as a Nomen Novum
>or as a Nov. Spec.

Spec. Nov.  ICZN Recommendation 21E says "The expression "nomen novum"
should be used only to denote a replacement name for a preoccupied name.

>2. If  the specimen selected and figured as a Paralectotype by the first
>reviser is to be selected as the Type of the second species, would it be
>defined as a Lectotype or as a Holotype of this species?

It will be the holotype of the second species and a paralectotype of the
first species.

> This will also effect whether the other specimens of the second species
>will be designated as Paratypes or as Paralectotypes.

Paratypes. Some of them might also be paralectotypes of the first species,
and others might be additional material not study by the author of the
first species.

Gary

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Gary Rosenberg, Ph.D.                     [log in to unmask]
Malacology & Invertebrate Paleontology    gopher://erato.acnatsci.org
Academy of Natural Sciences               http://www.acnatsci.org
1900 Benjamin Franklin Parkway            Phone 215-299-1033
Philadelphia, PA 19103-1195 USA           Fax   215-299-1170