nomenclature precedence

[Thomas Lammers]

At 11:54 AM 2/26/01 +0000, you wrote:
>In a recent paper author X states that author Y (published in 1821) failed
>to give a clear definition of a taxon (plant).  Author X therefore
>re-names this taxon using what he considers to be the first validly
>published name.  However, author Y refers to an earlier plate (published
>in 1820) which author X accepts as representing a pure specimen of this
>taxon (indeed author X even lectotypifies the taxon with this plate).  Was
>author Y required to give a full description in order for his name to be
>validly published given that the plate he refers to is accepted as an
>accurate representation of this taxon?  In other words should I use the
>modern name or the 1821 name in my work.

Art. 32.1 -- "In order to be validly published, a name ... must ... be
accompanied by a description or diagnosis or by a reference to a previously
and effectively published description or diagnosis (except as provided in
... Art. 44.1 ...) ..."

Art. 44.1 -- "The name of a species or of an infraspecific taxon published
before 1 January 1908 may be validly published even if only accompanied by
an illustration with analysis (as defined in Art. 42.4)."

Unless I'm missing something here, I interpret this to mean that if a name
is to be validated by an illustration, that illustration must ACCOMPANY the
publication of the name, not merely be referred to.  That may be an
unintentioned loophole, or it may be what the codifiers meant, but either
way, it seems Author Y was correct.



Thomas G. Lammers, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor and Curator of the Herbarium (OSH)
Department of Biology and Microbiology
University of Wisconsin Oshkosh
Oshkosh, Wisconsin 54901-8640 USA

e-mail:       lammers at uwosh.edu
phone:      920-424-1002
fax:           920-424-1101

Plant systematics; classification, nomenclature, evolution, and
biogeography of the Campanulaceae s. lat.
-----------------------------------------------------------
"Today's mighty oak is yesterday's nut that stood his ground."
                                                 -- Anonymous