hyphenated names

Jacques Melot jacques.melot at ISHOLF.IS
Tue Oct 28 12:36:51 CST 2003

  Le 28-10-03, à 12:23 +0100, nous recevions de Paul van Rijckevorsel :

>Yes, in this case what really matters is not what the ICBN or ICZN claim,
>but what is chosen by the practioners in this particular field. That is,
>until the days when all such matters are brought under the BioCode ... ;-)
>Paul van Rijckevorsel
>Utrecht, NL

    Il est maintenant temps de citer :

Botanical nomenclature is independent of zoological and
bacteriological nomenclature. The Code applies equally to names of
taxonomic groups treated as plants whether or not these groups were
originally so treated (see Pre. 7).

    Tout dépend donc de la classification adoptée : rangez-vous les
Myxomycetes parmi les animaux ou parmi les plantes (s. lato) ?

    Jacques Melot

>----- Original Message -----
>From: Jacques Melot <jacques.melot at ISHOLF.IS>
>Sent: Tuesday, October 28, 2003 11:39 AM
>Subject: Re: hyphenated names
>>    Le 28-10-03, à 1:39 -0800, nous recevions de Adolf Ceska :
>>  >International Code of Botanical Nomenclature - Preambles
>>  >7. The rules and recommendations apply to all organisms traditionally
>treated as plants, whether fossil or non-fossil, e.g., blue-green algae
>(Cyanobacteria; fungi, including chytrids, oomycetes, and SLIME MOULDS;
>photosynthetic protists and taxonomically related non-photosynthetic groups.
>Provisions for the names of hybrids appear in App. I.
>>      Puisque vous semblez vouloir contredire Paul Kirk, le mieux aurait
>été de souligner aussi « traditionally » (d'où « The rules and
>recommendations apply to all organisms TRADITIONALLY
>treated as plants »), puisqu'il écrit :
>>  >  Yes, TRADITIONALLY they are 'plants' but in reality they are 'animals'.
>The last edition of the Dictionary of the Fungi FOLLOWED TRADITION
>but for higher taxa provided both forms of the higher taxon name
>>      Voilà...
>>      Jacques Melot

More information about the Taxacom mailing list