unpublished names - narrowing the scope

Paul van Rijckevorsel dipteryx at FREELER.NL
Thu Oct 23 20:01:28 CDT 2003

Guido Mathieu wrote:
>There has been a suggestion to give the kind of unpublished names
>I'm talking about here, the status of 'nomen nudum'.

From: Doug Yanega <dyanega at POP.UCR.EDU>
Technically, unless these names were published, they cannot be nomina

+ + +
Technically, they could be.

In the ICBN "nomen nudum" is not defined.
There is a definition of "nomen nudum" in Regnum Vegetabile Vol. 56, but
this has no formal standing. This leaves the field open for a definition of

Also technically, in the ICBN "published" can have several meanings
- published effectively (appearing in print in a publication available to
the public, with a Committee in place to explore the borders of this)
- published validly (meeting the requirements set for publication of a name)
- In addition there is a "published" that is as yet disregarded, ie on CD,
on the internet, etc.

Obviously it would not be a good idea to define the botanical  "nomen nudum"
in a way not conforming to present usage, or in a way different from the way
it is used in zoology.

Somewhat surprisingly, it proves that the ICBN does not define "synonym"

Paul van Rijckevorsel
Utrecht, NL

More information about the Taxacom mailing list