New Code

[Christopher J. Marshall]

At 07:42 AM 6/29/00 -0400, you wrote:
>* I should say while our new Code would allow be to simply ignore these
>names as they have not be used in the past century, etc., I still would like
>to know what concepts Rondani really had, etc., back then.


Christian,

         Is it true that you could simply ignore those types?  My 
understanding of the new code would allow you to ignore (in fact require 
you to ignore) the names only if they were obscure (not used in 100 years) 
and found to be senior synonyms of a more recent name currently in 
use...meaning you could not apply taxonomic priority.  But what if those 
old types have been placed incorrectly into subjective synonymy by past 
revisors?  In other words— what would happen under the new code if, after 
seeing the actual types, you decide that Rondani had actually described a 
valid species, distinct from the species under which the name is currently 
synonymized?  In that case, the Rondani names would not be "nomen oblitum", 
but valid names.

         I only ask because I can't imagine that the new code would make 
the examination of older type material obsolete, which is what you have 
apparently suggested.  My understanding of a thorough taxonomic revision 
would entail the examination of as much type material as possible otherwise 
you haven't really checked the work of past revisors.  No?

-Christopher J. Marshall




___________________________________
  "There is only one thing in the world worse than being talked about, and 
that is not being talked about".
-Oscar Wilde


Christopher J. Marshall
Entomology Department
Cornell University
Ithaca, NY 14853
cm13 at cornell.edu