help interpreting ICBN

Gomez Luis Diego ldgomez at NS.OTS.AC.CR
Fri Apr 4 08:08:52 CST 1997


The valid name becomes Planta hypothetica Chavez ex Sanchez 1850
if typical material remains the same and the original concept is not
changed in any substantial way.

On Fri, 4 Apr 1997, JOSEPH E. LAFERRIERE wrote:

> I have  a question  concerning interpretation of the ICBN. It
> states  that  if  an  author  states  that  a  name  is  only
> provisionally accepted, it is not validly published. Consider
> then the following scenario:
>
> In 1850,  Chavez publishes  the name  Planta hypothetica.  He
> includes a  description, but  states that  the name  is  only
> provisionally accepted.  In 1860,  Sanchez uses Chavez's name
> with a  longer description,  crediting it  to Chavez. Sanchez
> accepts the name with no mention of provisionality. Does this
> then validate the name? Should the citation be
>
> A) Planta hypothetica Chavez 1850
> B) Planta hypothetica Chavez ex Sanchez 1860
> C) Planta hypothetica Sanchez 1860
> D) None of the above, as the name remains invalid.
>
> --
> Dr. Joseph E. Laferriere, Herbario, CEAMISH, Universidad
> Autonoma del Estado de Morelos, Cuernavaca, Morelos, Mexico  -- OR --
> c/o Mary Laferriere, 18 Maple Ave #3, Centerdale RI 02911 USA
>




More information about the Taxacom mailing list