new names for already described taxon

[Jacques Melot]

=A0Le 5/13/98, =E0 10:55 AM +0000, nous recevions de METZING DETLEV :

>In a small botanical journal I found several new names for taxa of
>Cactaceae. In some cases these new species names were used for taxa,
>which were already described as varieties of other species. But the
>author did not make a new combination, eg. he transferred Planta
>mirabilis var. neglecta L. to Planta neglecta (L.) Miller, but he
>choosed a new name (e.g. Planta viridis) although the former variety
>is listed as basionym.
>Is this a correct way in the sense of the ICBN?


   C'est autoris=E9 : en aucun cas un nom n'a priorit=E9 en dehors de son=
 rang
(Art. 11.2).
http://www.bgbm.fu-berlin.de/iapt/nomenclature/code/tokyo-e/Contents.htm
http://wwwcjb.unige.ch/cjb/code/sommaire.html

Jacques Melot, Reykjavik
melot at itn.is


>I know, that a nomen
>novum may be choosed, when a transfer from one species to another
>genus would result in an illegitime name, but may a nomen novum also
>used for the example mentioned above?
>
>
>---------------------------
>Detlev Metzing
>AG Pflanzenoekologie
>FB Biologie
>Carl von Ossietzky-Universitaet
>D - 26111 Oldenburg
>Germany
>
>email metzing at hrz1.uni-oldenburg.de
>Tel. ++49 441 798 3342
>Fax. ++49 4230 1571
>---------------------------