[Taxacom] Use of parentheses

[Bob Mesibov]

The score so far on replies (on and off list) is 3:2 in favour of

Bus xus (Smith, 1900)

where the original name is

Aus (Bus) xus Smith, 1900.

This brings the current total to 3:3 if you include me, since I've been 
reasoning that Bus is a genus-group name, and since the species hasn't left 
Bus, there is no need for parentheses. It's still not clear to me from the 
replies so far that the Code gives unambiguous advice in this case.

As I said when I posted the query, I've seen both Bus xus Smith, 1900 and 
Bus xus (Smith, 1900) used in my specialty group, in one case by the same 
author. What's the situation in other parts of the taxonomic literature?

I should add that early contributors to my group's literature (70-100 years 
ago) tended to be a bit vague on subgeneric names. These were erected and 
defined as subgenera, but then used as genera in keys and later 
publications. It's often very difficult to say who elevated a particular 
subgenus to genus, and when.
---
Dr Robert Mesibov
Honorary Research Associate, Queen Victoria Museum and Art Gallery
and School of Zoology, University of Tasmania
Home contact: PO Box 101, Penguin, Tasmania, Australia 7316
(03) 64371195; 61 3 64371195

Tasmanian Multipedes
http://www.qvmag.tas.gov.au/zoology/multipedes/mulintro.html
Spatial data basics for Tasmania
http://www.geog.utas.edu.au/censis/locations/index.html
---