Taxacom: Question to botanical experts RE ICNafp Code - rank changes for descriptive names, with changed termination

[Tony Rees]

Thanks Richard... however as I see it, there is a distinction, not
commented upon in the Code, between descriptive names that do not carry any
rank connotation - such as "Angiospermae" - and those that do, such as
"Chlorophyta" - the latter used almost exclusively to denote a Division
(Phylum), while at class level it is Chlorophyceae. I would contend that
"Eophytidae" carries the implied rak of subclass, as explained by the
authors who created the name, and that it would be perfectly reasonable -
in fact to be expected - for the termination to be changed if it were
re-used at another rank...

After all, the Code says that descriptive names " _may_ be used unchanged
at different ranks", not " _must_ be used..." (my emphasis).

Regards - Tony


On Thu, 30 Mar 2023 at 12:34, Richard Rabeler <rabeler at umich.edu> wrote:

> Dear Tony:
>
> An interesting question to which I will offer an observation.
>
> From my reading of your explanation and the relevant Code sections, it
> looks like a descriptive name is not subject to following the terminations
> for ranks above family.  Those endings are noted in Sect. 16.3 which begins:
>
> *16.3.* Automatically typified names end as follows:
>
> That may explain the statements noting that descriptive names "may be
> used unchanged at different ranks"; they are not subject to standard
> terminations.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Rich Rabeler, MICH
>
> On Wed, Mar 29, 2023 at 6:01 PM Tony Rees via Taxacom <
> taxacom at lists.ku.edu> wrote:
>
>> Dear all,
>>
>> I am seeking advice as to how a descriptive name above the rank of family
>> can be re-used, with a change in termination (to signify changed rank)
>> with
>> or without a change in cited authorship and/or "stat. nov." - the latter
>> presumably requiring a formal publication.
>>
>> The name in question is Eophytidae Edwards, Morris, Axe, Duckett, Pressel
>> &
>> Kenrick, 2021, erected as a subclass within class Embryopsida, consistent
>> with the treatment of land plants by Chase & Reveal, 2009, except that
>> "Embryopsida" replaces the latter's "Equisetopsida".
>>
>> This name is erected at a similar rank to bryophytes, marchantiophytes
>> atc.
>> which are at equivalent rank i.e. subclass in the Chase & Reveal
>> treatment.
>> However in other treatments such as that of Ruggiero et al., 2015,
>> followed
>> in my own IRMNG system and elsewhere, bryyophytes, etc. are treated as
>> separate phyla within Embryophyta, which is represented as a superphylum.
>>
>> So my requirement is to treat the "eophytes" (presently Eophytidae) as a
>> separate phylum, e.g. "Eophyta", where it will sit alongside
>> Anthocerotophyta, Bryophyta, Charophyta and so on. Note here, "Eophytidae"
>> is a "descriptive name" per the ICNafp (not based on a genus) so falls
>> under the provisions of Arts. 16 and 6.10, thus:
>> -------------
>> Article 16.1 Names above the rank of family
>> "… descriptive names … may be used unchanged at different ranks"
>> -------------
>> Article 6.10 Note 3
>> Note 3. A descriptive name (Art. 16.1(b)) used at a rank different from
>> that at which it was first validly published is not a name at new rank
>> because descriptive names may be used unchanged at different ranks.
>> -------------
>> So one reading of this is that Eophytidae may be recast as "Eophyta" (with
>> the same circumscription) without a change of authorship, and not
>> requiring
>> a published "stat. nov.". However the alternative reading would be that a
>> published change of authorship would be needed, plus a "stat. nov.", since
>> although the initial portion of the name is unchanged, the termination is
>> -
>> in other words the name is not "unchanged" in the sense of Art. 16.1.
>>
>> Thoughts, advice appreciated.
>>
>> Tony Rees, New South Wales, Australia
>>
>> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2FTonyRees&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Cc74b3f6a242842c7e78b08db30c662d0%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638157400842014691%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Z4%2FBWaIImMtG67blPwx4GnQ8EGr2PaclnwzGzG90Lzc%3D&reserved=0
>>
>> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.irmng.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Cc74b3f6a242842c7e78b08db30c662d0%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638157400842014691%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=0wXApkdDJlZT5whiMSvK7jVMltqC9iR9iS8Y1kyd%2BYo%3D&reserved=0
>> _______________________________________________
>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>
>> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at lists.ku.edu
>> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
>> https://lists.ku.edu/listinfo/taxacom
>> You can reach the person managing the list at: taxacom-owner at lists.ku.edu
>> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
>> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Cc74b3f6a242842c7e78b08db30c662d0%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638157400842014691%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=kx6ez4NkWhuYcu%2FRYqFTXsqe3avCrwBgn8I3GmZh48c%3D&reserved=0
>>
>> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity and admiring alliteration for
>> about 36 years, 1987-2023
>>
>