[Taxacom] Article 16.2 of the ICZN

[pharg at gso.uri.edu]

As one might expect, some are, some are not - and many that are not were
submerged into synonymy on morphological or (recently) molecular grounds.
Despite his curmudgeonly rant, he usually followed the ICBN!
PEH
-- 

> Were they, or are they still, valid names?
> Robin

> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Paul Hargraves" <pharg at gso.uri.edu>
> To: <mivie at montana.edu>
> Cc: "TAXACOM" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 25, 2009 12:20 PM
> Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Article 16.2 of the ICZN
>
>
>> ....and then you have recalcitrance. Friedrich Hustedt, probably the
>> foremost diatomist of the first half of the 20th century, had this to
>> say in one of his very few publications in English: "These rules are
>> made by botanists to bring order into our natural system and to
>> facilitate taxonomy, not to make it absurd.  Therefore in my opinion we
>> must leave the rules in all cases where it seems to be undoubtedly
>> necessary." He had described 89 new species and four new varieties in
>> two small mud samples from the harbor of Beaufort, North Carolina.
>> PEH
>>
>>
>> Paul E. Hargraves
>> Emeritus Professor of Oceanography, University of Rhode Island
>> and
>> Affiliate Research Professor, Harbor Branch Oceanographic Institute,
>> Florida Atlantic University
>> and
>> Research Associate, Smithsonian Marine Station, Ft. Pierce, FL.
>>
>> mivie at montana.edu wrote:
>>> At least in entomology, most journals are on record as having code
>>> compliance as a requirement, but that requires that someone who knows
>>> the
>>> code well enough reviews the paper well enough, to actually check every
>>> little thing.  Lets face it, it is the job of the AUTHORS to be code
>>> compliant.  I am as frustrated as anyone with the issue, as I think I
>>> spend half of my time dealing with people who did not do their job on
>>> nomenclature, and yet they got it through review. This includes
>>> well-respected systematists who just blew it.  But, to blame anyone but
>>> the author is misplaced.
>>>
>>> And yes, the Code is voluntary, and will only be followed if it is not
>>> too
>>> onerous.  What is onerous to me is not the same as it is for someone
>>> else.
>>>  So, we have flex.  The commissioners need to keep this in mind when
>>> they
>>> have the urge to increase legalism.
>>>
>>> Lastly, some journals simply refuse to be code compliant.  I know of
>>> people who had the descriptive parts (Code compliance) stripped from
>>> Science and Nature, and forced to be reduced to an absolute minimum in
>>> the
>>> Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B.  Yet, the journal
>>> wanted them to use the (invalid) scientific name.  The editors of those
>>> prestigious journals feel their space is too precious for such trivia.
>>> Yet, there is great pressure to publish there if you can.
>>>
>>> Mike Ivie
>>>
>>>
>>>> No code regulates the behavior fo editors or reviewers.  That's a
>>>> given.
>>>> But, journals could adopt a policy that no manuscript will be
>>>> published
>>>> until matters involving the code have been dealt with and have passed
>>>> muster by at least one reviewer familiar with the code.  Some journals
>>>> have nomenclature editors to ensure that nomenclatural matters are
>>>> properly dealt with.  Why wouldn't such a system work?  Is it that
>>>> editors/reviewers can't be, or don't want to be, bothered with such
>>>> minutiae?
>>>>
>>>> Cheers,
>>>>
>>>> Dick J
>>>>
>>>> Richard Jensen, Professor
>>>> Department of Biology
>>>> Saint Mary's College
>>>> Notre Dame, IN 46556
>>>>
>>>> tel: 574-284-4674
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: Stephen Thorpe <s.thorpe at auckland.ac.nz>
>>>> To: Bob Mesibov <mesibov at southcom.com.au>, Dick Jensen
>>>>
>>>> ... and no Code which regulates the BEHAVIOUR of taxonomists! To quote
>>>> one
>>>> (anonymous) coleopterist: "I don't care if someone comes along in the
>>>> future and redesignates my types ..."
>>>>
>>>> ________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>>
>>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>>>
>>> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of
>>> these methods:
>>>
>>> (1) http://taxacom.markmail.org
>>>
>>> Or (2) a Google search specified as:
>>> site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> Taxacom Mailing List
>> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>>
>> The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of
>> these methods:
>>
>> (1) http://taxacom.markmail.org
>>
>> Or (2) a Google search specified as:
>> site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
>
>