What is an online ‘preliminary version’ of a publication in the meaning of Article 9.9 of the Code?—One more step on the trail of the Asian elephant

Abstract

Gentry et al. (2014) challenged our statement (Dubois et al., 2014) that the lectotype designation of Elephas maximus by Cappellini et al. was not nomenclaturally available from the first online publication in 2013 of a 'preliminary version' of their work but only from the publication in 2014 of a 'final version' of it.The question at stake here is the meaning of the term "preliminary version' in Articles 9.9 and 21.8.3 of the Code.This question is discussed in detail here and we conclude that any version of a work published online and which differs, even slightly (by even a single-letter or a single modified element of layout), in content and/or layout from the final version of the same work subsequently published online, is to be considered a 'preliminary version' of this work.A preliminary version is accessible online only during a limited period, before being definitively replaced by the final version, which then remains unchanged.Such preliminary versions are not available for nomenclatural purposes.In Appendix 1, we also reply to some other comments of Gentry et al. (2014)on the paper by Dubois et al. (2014).Cappellini et al. wrote a paper discussing the status of the syntypes of the nominal species Elephas maximus Linnaeus, 1758 (Mammalia) and designating a lectotype among them.Dubois et al. (2014) commented on this work, and Gentry et al. (2014)published a rebuttal to their paper.As their comments clearly include misunderstandings but were published in this Bulletin, we feel compelled to revisit several of the problems raised by these works.However, most of their comments deal with minor points and will be replied to in the Appendix | of the present paper, the focus of which is put on a very important point, i.e. the status of online 'preliminary versions' of publications.An electronic version of the paper by Cappellini et al. had been published online 'ahead of print' by the Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society ('ZJLS' below) on 4 November 2013.The content of this paper had later been included in the issue 170(1) of this journal published both in print and online on 14 January 2014 according to the ZJLS website.Dubois et al. (2014) stated that the electronic version of this paper distributed online ahead of print (Cappellini et al., 2013) did not meet the requirement for nomenclatural availability of the nomenclatural act it contains (the lectotype designation), and that this act became nomenclaturally effective only with the publication of the issue 170(1) of ZJLS (Cappellini et al., 2014).Gentry et al. (2014)claimed that this was wrong and that the lectotype designation was available from the original online publication, the latter having been duly registered in Zoobank, as required by Article 8.5.3 of the current Code.We disagree with this statement, for the reasons given below.Our interpretation relies on a strict application of Articles 8.1, 9.9 and 21.8.3 of the Code.Article 8.1 states that, to be regarded as published in the frame of zoological nomenclature, a work 'must be issued for the purpose of providing a public and permanent scientific record, and that 'it must have been produced in an edition containing simultaneously obtainable copies by a method that assures (...) widely accessible electronic copies with fixed content and layout.'The format PDF/A is given as an example of 'a file format that allows content and layout to be preserved unchanged.'It is quite clear that, according to this Article, a work not intended to provide a permanent scientific record, or prone to be modified subsequent to its first publication, is not available in zoological nomenclature.The formula 'with fixed content and layout' must be interpreted strictly, which means that any subsequent change in the content (even of a single letter) or in the format (place or aspect of any printed element in the page) disqualifies the original document as a publication available in zoological nomenclature.Article 9.9 states that 'preliminary versions of works accessible electronically in advance of publication' do not constitute published work within the meaning of the Code.This is repeated differently in Article 21.8.3: "Some works are accessible online in preliminary versions before the publication date of the final version.Such advance electronic access does not advance the date of publication of a work, as preliminary versions are not published'.However, the Glossary of the Code fails to provide a definition of 'preliminary version'.Dubois et al. (2013) gave detailed information on

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 7 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.