valide or invalide name
Veldkamp at NHN.LEIDENUNIV.NL
Wed Jan 25 14:46:44 CST 2006
As Hamiltonia tomentella apparently never was published, there is no
basionym (or replaced name). Winkler actually described a new species, and
the remark 'comb. nov.' may be corrected to 'sp. nov.'
Hope this helped,
At 02:16 PM 1/25/2006, you wrote:
>H. Winkler published (Leptodermis tomentella H. Winkl., comb. nov.) based
>on (Hamiltonia tomentella Franch. in sched. (?)) in 1922, then following a
>sheet of voucher specimen and a paragraph of description.
>As we know, Hamiltonia tomentella is an invalid name, of course. And can I
>therefore regard "Leptodermis tomentella" is invalid too?
>I was also suggested that "Leptodermis tomentella" could be simply thought
>as a new species name published by Winkler without intention because both
>type and diagnosis were provided. Can I just treat it as a new species
>name and neglect its invalid basinym here?
>What should I do?
More information about the Taxacom