(Fwd) ICBN Articles 33.2 & 33.3

[JC Coetzee]

I would really appreciatiate guidance re. my
interpretation of ICBN articles 33.2 and 33.3.

I have already discussed the matter with a number of colleagues here
in South Africa, but so far no one has been able to provide any
meaningful assistance. Maybe someone on TAXACOM could?

Art. 33.2 reads:
"A new combination...........is not validly published unless its
basionym.................is clearly indicated and a full and direct
reference given to its author and place of valid publication with
page or plate reference and date."

And then Note 1 continues:
"..........a page reference .........is a reference to the page or
pages on which the basionym was validly published............but not
to the pagination of the whole publication....... ."

Fine! No problem. And Ex 4 makes everything very clear:
"When proposing "Cylindrocladium infestans", Peerally (in Mycotaxon
40:337. 1991) cited the basionym as "Cylindrocladiella infestans
Boesw., Can. J. Bot. 60: 2288-2294. 1982". As this refers to the
pagination of Boeswinkel's entire paper, not of the protologue of
the intended basionym alone, the combination was not validly
published by Peerally."

OK, that's the rule. But now Art. 33.3 comes along, saying:
"Errors of bibliographic citation and incorrect forms of author
citation ........... do not invalidate publication of a new
combination ......"

Explained by Ex. 6 which reads:
"The combination Trichipteris kalbreyeri was proposed by Tryon (in
Contr. Gray Herb. 200: 45. 1970) with a full and direct reference to
Alsophila kalbreyeri C. Chr. (Index Filic.: 44. 1905). This, however,
was not the place of valid publication of the basionym, which had
previously been published, with the same type, by Baker (Summ. New
Ferns: 9. 1892). Tryon's bibliographic error of citation does not
invalidate this new combination, which is to be cited as T.
kalbreyeri (Baker) R.M. Tryon."  !!!!

Now my problem: Is there not a large degree of contradiction between
Articles 33.3 and 33.2?

All that poor Peerally (Ex 4) did wrong was to slip up on how he
cited page numbers. And his combination is rejected for that.

Tryon (Ex 6) on the other hand, messed up completely, citing the
wrong publication, the wrong author as well as the wrong date,
but he is forgiven and his combination is accepted!!!

That does not seem quite right to me. Or what am I missing
here?

Please help!
Greetings.

JC Coetzee
Dept Biological Sciences
Peninsula Technikon
Bellville
South Africa

coetzeej at scinet.pentech.ac.za