help interpreting ICBN

[Thomas G. Lammers]

At 06:56 AM 04-04-97 -0700, JOSEPH E. LAFERRIERE wrote:

>I have  a question  concerning interpretation of the ICBN. It
>states  that  if  an  author  states  that  a  name  is  only
>provisionally accepted, it is not validly published. Consider
>then the following scenario:
>
>In 1850,  Chavez publishes  the name  Planta hypothetica.  He
>includes a  description, but  states that  the name  is  only
>provisionally accepted.  In 1860,  Sanchez uses Chavez's name
>with a  longer description,  crediting it  to Chavez. Sanchez
>accepts the name with no mention of provisionality. Does this
>then validate the name? Should the citation be
>
>A) Planta hypothetica Chavez 1850
>B) Planta hypothetica Chavez ex Sanchez 1860
>C) Planta hypothetica Sanchez 1860
>D) None of the above, as the name remains invalid.


I vote for B.

Tom

**************************************************************************
Thomas G. Lammers

Classification, Nomenclature, Phylogeny and Biogeography
of the Campanulaceae, s. lat.

Department of Botany
Field Museum of Natural History
Roosevelt Road at Lake Shore Drive
Chicago, Illinois 60605-2496 USA

e-mail:     lammers at fmppr.fmnh.org
voice mail: 312-922-9410 ext. 317

"I make no pretense of equal time for opposing views.
 For other points of view, read other authors."
                        -- Arthur Cronquist