ICZN 51.3.2

Wolfgang Lorenz Faunaplan at AOL.COM
Wed Jul 4 04:03:16 CDT 2001


Dear Taxacomers,
on 02.07.01, Derek Sikes <ds95002 at uconnvm.uconn.edu> asked:
>> 4. A species first published in a subgenus that is later elevated to full
genus- e.g. original combination: Silpha (Necrophorus) albus  which later
becomes Necrophorus albus - does the author's name get put in parentheses?
Article 51.3.2 seems to indicate that the author's name does not get put in
parentheses.<<

And on 03.07.01, Hendrik Segers <Hendrik.Segers at rug.ac.be> answered:
>Correct, no parentheses here.<

Is it???
If yes, I would have to change several thousands of entries in my world list
of Insecta Coleoptera Carabidae :-((
I re-read Article 51.3. ("Use of Parentheses") and compared it to Art. 51 (c)
of the previous (3rd) Edition of the Code. The contents basically remained
unchanged in the new edition.

The meaning of Article 51.3. is that when a species-group name is combined
with a generic name other than the original one, the names of authors of the
species-group name is to be enclosed in parentheses, and 51.3.2. says that
this applies only to changes in the name of the genus and "is not affected
by" the presence of a subgeneric name.

Thus, e.g. (my examples),
A-us (B-us) albus AUTHOR, when transferred to B-us, should be cited as B-us
albus (AUTHOR),
as well as vice versa:
C-us niger AUTHOR, when transferred to D-us (C-us), should be cited as D-us
(C-us) niger (AUTHOR), ... IMHO.

The words "is not affected by", - don't they mean that the ruling is not
"changed/ set out of effect" by the presence of a subgeneric name, or just to
the contrary, that the ruling is "not in effect"?
Maybe this article was a bit easier to understand in the previous Edition of
the Code (then Art. 51(c) (i))?

Best wishes,
Wolfgang Lorenz




More information about the Taxacom mailing list