Taxacom: Minimalist revision of Mesochorus Gravenhorst, 1829

[Thomas Pape]

Dear Marco,

I agree that the Code can be considered "a working tool", and it is important to realise that no legislation can cover every thinkable situation.
But in order to be an efficient working tool, the exact wording is important as it often has decisive importance.

Article 11.5 runs like this:
"To be available, a name must be used as valid for a taxon when proposed".
This is not a requirement, that the author 'knows for sure' or 'can guarantee' or 'is correct' that a given name is valid. The decisive issue is how the author uses the name.

You say that: "Sharkey did not judge his names correct (sensu ICZN) ...". But neither did he consider any of the names invalid (or in any other way 'incorrect'). The names are used as valid for the taxa they are proposed for, and therefore fulfill the requirements of Art. 11.5. 
You state that in your opinion "each name was proposed conditionally". This would imply that each name was proposed with stated reservation(s).
Could you specify what those reservations are?

I see only a very general reservation that would translate into something like:
-- "unless there is already an available name for this taxon".
-- "unless the name will later be shown to be a junior synonym".

This is in a way implicit in every nominal taxon proposed.

Think of the scenario that a species is discovered to actually be two different species, that can be separated (at least for now) only by molecular data. What if the name-bearing type has been lost, and somebody describes both of the two species as new? The author would be almost sure that one of the new names must be a junior synonym, but he/she cannot tell which. I would consider both names as available, and I would have to treat them as valid until a solution is found, e.g., the designation of a neotype for the old name chosen from one of the two holotypes (to settle unambiguously which name is synonymous) or for that matter it could be a suppression of the old name.

Regards,
Thomas



-----Original Message-----
From: Taxacom <taxacom-bounces at lists.ku.edu> On Behalf Of Marco Uliana via Taxacom
Sent: 1. september 2023 09:04
To: Taxa com <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
Subject: Re: Taxacom: Minimalist revision of Mesochorus Gravenhorst, 1829

Thanks Richard.

About the second point you raised ("code warriors"), I think ICZN should be considered just as a working tool that taxonomists are required to apply.
Application of rules should not be dependent on how much addressees are aware of, willing to cope with, or on what one assumes to be correct "by default".

Getting back to the specific case, I find unquestionable that each name was proposed conditionally, since doubt on potential synonymy was expressed collectively.
See also 11.5, "*Names to be used as valid when proposed*"
*"valid"*, from the ICZN glossary: "*in the case of a name, which is the correct name of a taxon in an author's taxonomic judgment*"
From Sharkey: "*few synonyms will be generated in our current effort*", "*The probability of any of these [already described] ten species being in the current revision can be estimated [...]*".

In my view, these sentences are not consistent with "Sharkey judged that each name he proposed was the correct name for the taxon", that is what the code requires.
Rather, they fit much better with "Sharkey did not judge his names correct (sensu ICZN), as this would have required coordinating them with the pre-existing ones he choosed not to apply".

Marco


Il giorno gio 31 ago 2023 alle ore 19:14 Richard Pyle < deepreef at bishopmuseum.org> ha scritto:

> Two things:
>
> 1) I didn't see Thomas Pape's reply along the lines of Art. 15.1 
> before sending my missive, but I'm happy to see we agree on how to 
> interpret that Article (though I do acknowledge there is a potentially 
> legitimate alternative interpretation)
>
> 2) My SINCERE apologies to those who read the Digest version of this 
> list!  I will try to be better about trimming the superfluous "fat" of 
> quoted and re-quoted prior messages when I respond to threads like this.
>
> Aloha,
> Rich
>
> Richard L. Pyle, PhD
> Senior Curator of Ichthyology | Director of XCoRE Bernice Pauahi 
> Bishop Museum
> 1525 Bernice Street, Honolulu, HI 96817-2704
> Office: (808) 848-4115;  Fax: (808) 847-8252
> eMail: deepreef at bishopmuseum.org
> BishopMuseum.org
> Our Mission: Bishop Museum inspires our community and visitors through 
> the exploration and celebration of the extraordinary history, culture, 
> and environment of Hawaiʻi and the Pacific.
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Richard Pyle <deepreef at bishopmuseum.org>
> > Sent: Thursday, August 31, 2023 7:09 AM
> > To: 'Stephen Thorpe' <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>; 'Marco Uliana'
> > <marco.uliana.1 at gmail.com>
> > Cc: 'Taxa com' <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>; 'Carlos Alberto 
> > Martínez Muñoz' <biotemail at gmail.com>
> > Subject: RE: Taxacom: Minimalist revision of Mesochorus Gravenhorst, 
> > 1829
> >
> > > My personal view on this situation is to simply chose a 
> > > justifiable interpretation of the Code and run with it.
> >
> > I always advocate that, when there is obvious doubt or acknowledged 
> > ambiguity in the Code, one should always err on the side of 
> > "assuming
> it's
> > available unless there is a clear and explicit reason why it fails 
> > to
> fulfill some
> > criterion of the Code".
>
>
> ᐧ
_______________________________________________
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%7C2fa3b7b890034db55a6f08dbaad329bf%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638291596153917449%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=zsz%2FNsFdteb7HZu7dXPJdd0RK27Vm%2BiQ0GxlfGsE4rM%3D&reserved=0

Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity and admiring alliteration for about 36 years, 1987-2023.