[Tcs-lc] concepts of Higher taxa

[Paul Kirk]

My point re homonym is that nomenclators have not always captured data to indicate which one of two or more homonyms an author intended the new species to belong to - perhaps an imperfection of previous indexing services.
 
Agreed. I see only further confusion if we further muddy the waters between taxonomy and nomenclature. In any case such a proposal to change the ICBN would fail.
 
For me one of the primary elements in defining a "genus concept" is the included species so I fail to see how the description of a new species cannot change (if genus concepts are mutable) or create (if genus concepts are immutable) a genus concept.
 
Paul

________________________________


As for homonyms, rarely is the case (in fishes, at least), where it is not 
clear from the original description which of several hononym genera a new 
species was placed.  Is this a common problem in botany? 

I don't think that would be a good course of action for the codes, for a 
couple of reasons -- mostly because the codes deal with nomenclature, not 
concept circumscriptions. 

If it is expressly different from previous concepts, then a new genus concept is 
implicated.

> In order for a new species to be incorporated into a generic 
> concept a specific act of inclusion must be performed at which 
> point a new generic concept is created. 

Wouldn't you regard the placement of a new species within a genus as a 
specific act of inclusion?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mercury.nceas.ucsb.edu/ecoinformatics/pipermail/tcs-lc/attachments/20050401/6fecffe2/attachment.htm