[tcs-lc] Next 4 days...

[Gregor Hagedorn]

As a botanist I agree with Rich's statements about the differences, how it is 
not really difficult to reconciple them, and I think both systems make sense to 
me.

One thing I guess I forgot is how is two authors recombine names with homonymic 
epithets into a third genus, priority is established in botany and zoology.

1900: Aus xus published
1901: Bus xus published

2000: Bus xus recombined to Cus xus (1901) 2000
2001: Aus xus recombined to Cus xus (1900) 2001

Which homony of Cus xus has priority - based on publication or protonym or on 
date of recomination? ICBN 58.2 suggests to me it is the first combination, 
because Cus xus (1900) 2001 would be a later homonym combination that cannot be 
validly published? Is that true (Paul?)

---

By the way, something I believe not in the model at all: Names may have equal 
priority. In ICBN a "selection priority" may resolve this, see ICBN 11.5. Good 
short example: "When Dentaria L. (1753) and Cardamine L. (1753) are united, the 
resulting genus is called Cardamine because that name was chosen by Crantz, who 
first united them. This is similar to lecotypification, but needs to be modeled 
differently. It is a nomenenclatural act to be recorded. Not sure it has to be 
in the model as structure, but I believe the model needs to give advice how to 
handle it if it should just go into commentary.

---

"Nasty" aside: who is putting all this on the wiki by the way? And I don't mean 
Rich should do it, is doing more than enough. But I can't either. Wikis really 
are about collaborating and sharing the workload...

Gregor----------------------------------------------------------
Gregor Hagedorn (G.Hagedorn at bba.de)
Institute for Plant Virology, Microbiology, and Biosafety
Federal Research Center for Agriculture and Forestry (BBA)
Königin-Luise-Str. 19           Tel: +49-30-8304-2220
14195 Berlin, Germany           Fax: +49-30-8304-2203