Botanical nomenclatural query

Guy Redeuilh redeuilh at CLUB-INTERNET.FR
Wed Apr 3 01:06:01 CST 2002


----- Original Message -----
From: "Moore, Gerry" <gerrymoore at bbg.org>
To: "'Guy Redeuilh'" <redeuilh at CLUB-INTERNET.FR>; <TAXACOM at USOBI.ORG>
Sent: Tuesday, April 02, 2002 11:03 PM
Subject: RE: Botanical nomenclatural query


>   I believe the ICBN does already cover this case as a nom nov. case. This
> is clearly stated in Article 7.3: "A new name published as an avowed
> substitute (replacement name, nomen novum) for an older name is typified
by
> the type of the older name ..." Yes the example under this article does
> involve the publication of a nom. nov. (Myrica lucida) for an illegitmate
> name (Myrica laevis), but the article clearly does not limit the
publication
> of substitute names only for illegitmate names.

I said myself that the Art 7.3 has a wide wording allowing an interpretation
of our case as "nomen novum". But...
This article concern the problem of typification of a nomen novum only. It
is not by itself a fundamental definition of the nomen novum concept. Such
definition... don't exists in the Code : Art 7.3, 33.2, 33N.2, 58.1 are
APPLICATIONS of the nomen novum concept, they no provide DEFINITION !
I persist : the case is not treated in the Code (as far I know) where all
examples of  avowed substitutions concern illegitimate names ONLY !
In the Code, is seems to exist a clear link between illegitimacy and nomina
nova.
Is this an illusion ?  If it is, if the intended rule is extensive, an
example with a legitimate replaced synonym must be added !

Guy

[...]




More information about the Taxacom mailing list