[Taxacom] Clerck 1757/1758

[Roderic Page]

For some background see Direction 104 of the ICZN http://biostor.org/reference/2265 published in 1959.

Regards

Rod

Sent from Outlook<http://taps.io/outlookmobile>




On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 3:26 AM -0800, "Welter-Schultes, Francisco" <fwelter at gwdg.de<mailto:fwelter at gwdg.de>> wrote:

Dear Michael,

Clerck 1757: This is an endless discussion which I would prefer to see being finished in the next edition of the Code.

The book appeared in 1757, which is the true date of publication.
The Code 4th ed. Art. 3.1 (effective since 2000) states that Clerck's publication has to be dated to 01 Jan 1758, and consequently, the taxa are to be cited with the authorship of "Clerck, 1758". Integrating this regulation in the Code has widely caused confusion in the light of Linnaeus also being officially dated to 01 Jan 1758.

Most spider names are usually cited with the date 1757. I see no real future for the date 1758 for a book that appeared in 1757. I always cite Clerck's spider names with the 1757 date. It is not the job of the Code to change the reality of the history of science.

The Code should be modified, Clerck's publication and names of taxa should be cited with the true year 1757, and Clerck's publication should also officially be recognized as the beginning of zoological nomenclature. It was argued that this would affect the important and decisive role of Linnaeus as the founder of zoological nomenclature, but I see no reason for assuming that. I just see this as an interesting detail of history - the founder did not publish the first recognised publication - and something zoologists can always smile about.


Francisco Welter-Schultes
Zoologisches Institut
Berliner Str. 28, 37073 Goettingen

________________________________________
Von: Taxacom [taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu]" im Auftrag von "Michael Schmitt [michael.schmitt at uni-greifswald.de]
Gesendet: Freitag, 6. März 2015 12:01
An: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Betreff: [Taxacom] Clerck 1757/1758

Dear colleagues,



could anybody please enlighten me on the possible justification of citing
Clerck's Aranei Svecici as of 1757. I know that it was actually published in
1757, but find in the ICZN art. 3.1 that it is "deemed to have been
published on 1 January 1758" and having priority over Linneus' 10th edition
of Systema Naturae. I infer from this that names from Clerck's work must be
cited as "Aus bus Clerck, 1758". Obviously, arachnologists have another
opinion as I find Clerck's names listed as of 1757. According to the Code,
these names would not be available (this is the reason why the Commission
has arbitrarily put the publication date of Clerck's book to 1758). Does
anybody know of any FORMAL decision, e.g. opinion of the ICZN, to abandon
art. 3.1?



Any hint will be welcome.



Best regards

Michael



Prof.Dr. Michael Schmitt

Ernst-Moritz-Arndt-Universitaet

Allgemeine & Systematische Zoologie

Anklamer Str. 20

D-17489 Greifswald

Germany



Tel.: ++49 (0) 3834-86 4242

Fax: ++49 (0) 3834-86 4098

E-Mail: michael.schmitt at uni-greifswald.de



http://www.mnf.uni-greifswald.de/institute/fr-biologie/institute-und-forschu
ng/zool-institut-museum/allgemeine-und-systematische-zoologie/personal-staff
/prof-dr-michael-schmitt.html



_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org

Celebrating 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.
_______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org

Celebrating 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.