[Taxacom] Recommendation 23A
Paul van Rijckevorsel
dipteryx at freeler.nl
Tue Aug 5 03:07:45 CDT 2014
From: "Karl Magnacca" <kmagnacca at wesleyan.edu>
Sent: Monday, August 04, 2014 8:43 PM
> Yes, but Triticum boreale and Triticum borealis would be homonyms.
> Not everyone follows gender correctly.
I suppose that (theoretically) it would even be possible that
Triticum borealis might be correct, as borealis might be a noun, see
If Triticum boreale and Triticum borealis are both correct spellings
(of heterotypic names), they would have to be treated as homonyms.
If in both cases the epithet is an adjective, both names would have
Triticum boreale as the correct spelling and would be homonyms.
> Back to the original post, I believe the recommendation would be
> addressing names like Scaevola gaudichaudii and Scaevola
> gaudichaudiana. There are more egregious examples but that's one
> that comes to mind that people are often confusing.
No, this is dealt with in Rec. 23A.2, while the original poster refers
particularly to Rec. 23A.3(g), which deals with cases like below.
> Also in my
> group, Hylaeus, there is H. rugulosus and H. rugosulus; the former
> was improperly given a new name for homonymy with the latter.
Such cases should be submitted for formal evaluation (Art. 53.5),
and are due to be listed in a new Appendix.
More information about the Taxacom