help interpreting ICBN

Thomas G. Lammers lammers at FMPPR.FMNH.ORG
Mon Apr 7 06:40:40 CDT 1997

At 06:56 AM 04-04-97 -0700, 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.

I vote for B.


Thomas G. Lammers

Classification, Nomenclature, Phylogeny and Biogeography
of the Campanulaceae, s. lat.

Department of Botany
Field Museum of Natural History
Roosevelt Road at Lake Shore Drive
Chicago, Illinois 60605-2496 USA

e-mail:     lammers at
voice mail: 312-922-9410 ext. 317

"I make no pretense of equal time for opposing views.
 For other points of view, read other authors."
                        -- Arthur Cronquist

More information about the Taxacom mailing list