robinl at NAIT.AB.CA
Tue Jul 8 10:39:56 CDT 1997
I suggest, as John McNeill has done, that you read Article 11.6. The
case below is covered identically (but the names are real!) in Ex. 20
with Heracleum sibiricum L. (1753).
When a subspecies is named, such as Heracleum sibiricum lecokii, the
remainder of the species receives a subspecific name automatically, namely,
Heracleum sibiricum sibiricum. Any and all new subspecific names are
created by deductions from Heracleum sibiricum sibiricum (just as H.s.
If the name Heracleum sibiricum is sunk to a subspecific level under
another species, say under Heracleum sphondylium, then new subspecific
autonym is created, Heracleum sphondylium sphondylium, and H. sibiricum
becomes, automatically, Heracleum sphondylium sibiricum.
See page 17, Article 11.6 for the original discussion. It is quite clear.
On Tue, 8 Jul 1997, Susan Farmer wrote:
> >The discussion on autonymy hierarchy raises a related albeit slightly
> >different point. My question is that if the publication of an infraspecific
> >name automatically causes the creation of an autonym of the same rank and
> >priority, which one has priority? For example, suppose I publish the name
> >Planta hypothetica var. alba in 1997. This automatically causes the
> >creation of the variety Planta hypothetica var. hypothetica. Suppose in
> >1998 someone desides that the entire species should be considered a
> >variety of Planta rubra. Does this become Planta rubra var. hypothetica
> >or Planta rubra var. alba?
> My understanding is that it becomes Planta rubra var. hypothetica because it
> was explicitly named. var. alba came into being "autonymically." My
> understnading that when an autonym is created in this fashion, that
> autonymic names of all intermediate ranks are also created.
> Susan Farmer
> sfarmer at goldsword.com
More information about the Taxacom