Botanical Nomenclature

Thomas Lammers lammers at VAXA.CIS.UWOSH.EDU
Thu Apr 4 10:24:20 CST 2002

I'm not sure how to interpret "ethics" when dealing with something as
peripheral to human existence as botanical nomenclature.  It seems to
demean the word to apply it to something lkike this.

That said, I think the reason the ICBN leaves some latitude in this matter
is that it is recognized that sometimes there is a good reason to do so,
e.g., to avoid having Delissea parvifolia when there is already a Delissea

At 09:48 PM 4/4/02 +0530, you wrote:
>Do you think it is ethical to (even if  ICBN permits) describe as New
>Species when a taxon (which you relegate to synonymy) has already been
>typified and described (no matter at different rank) and epithet could be
>transferred at specific rank without being rendered as later homonym or
>illegitimate otherwise?

Thomas G. Lammers, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor and Curator of the Herbarium (OSH)
Department of Biology and Microbiology
University of Wisconsin Oshkosh
Oshkosh, Wisconsin 54901-8640 USA

e-mail:       lammers at
phone:      920-424-1002
fax:           920-424-1101

Plant systematics; classification, nomenclature, evolution, and biogeography
of the Campanulaceae s. lat.

"Today's mighty oak is yesterday's nut that stood his ground."
                                                               -- Anonymous

More information about the Taxacom mailing list