Weirdness of ICBN

[warren frank lamboy]

Regarding the later publication of infraspecific names based on not validly
published species names (sorry, I do not have Ertter's original example), I
think that article 43 of the 1983 code (I do not have a copy of the newest
ICBN, but I expect that the article is still in it, even if it has a
different article number), settles the matter.  Art 43.1 states:

"A name of a taxon below the rank of genus is not validly published unless
the name of the genus or species to which it is assigned is validly
published at the same time or was validly published previously."

Thus, since the species was not validly published, the infraspecific
entities are not validly published either.  There is therefore no
possibility that an infraspecific name can be validly published but the
species upon which is based is not.  I hope this helps (and that my
interpretation is correct!).

Warren Frank Lamboy
Dept. of Horticultural Sciences and
   USDA-ARS Plant Genetic Resources Unit
Cornell University