[Taxacom] new nomina nuda (was Re: e-only taxonomic publication)

[Geoff Read]

>>> On 11/02/2010 at 2:36 p.m., "Stephen Gaimari" <SGaimari at cdfa.ca.gov>
wrote:
> The authors may or may not care whether their work is code compliant.

I'll bet they're more interested in reaction to the discovery that a
"clade of extinct, siphon-bearing, fluid-feeding insects, early members of
the order Mecoptera (scorpionflies), were likely feeding on gymnospermous
ovulate secretions during the late Middle Jurassic to mid–Early
Cretaceous" as in the non-supplement main part of the paper.

Isn't a name just a permanent, human friendly tag that links information
on a recognizable organism lineage (aka a species, etc)? That purpose
seems perfectly fulfilled in this publication.  And there's a draft code
change out there that allows the e-only option. These names will probably
be OK post hoc.

Proposed "10.8.1. Where stability of nomenclature would be promoted
thereby, a name or nomenclatural act appearing in such a work (electronic
pre 2010) may be referred to the Commission for a ruling ..."

The editors of Science may have performed a particularly arrogant
downgrading of the taxonomic process here. They know the current code
requirements for sure (the authors probably didn't have much of a say in
the matter). But of all the poor behaviour in the world of taxonomy I
could rail against, code non-compliance of names of fossils because they
were merely e-published by an influential journal in an online supplement
is fairly well down the list.


Geoff