ICZN 4: "prevailing usage" and "usage"

[christian thompson]

The difference meant by "prevailing usage" versus "usage" is that
"prevailing usage" meaning what a "substantial majority" use where as
"usage" means ANY use.

Problem is the "IN" which means a time period from the present, but
that is limited by "recent." That is, of the set of "most recent"
publications
on a taxon, the name in question was used as valid (correct) (=usage) or
not (treated as a synonym, invalid name, unavailable, etc.) (no used).

In some taxa, such as birds and flies, usage is easily determined as there
are
many checklists, catalogs, etc. Unfortunately, in little known groups it is
more
difficult to determine as one must search for the most "recent" works,
which
may be rather old and scattered across a range of publications.

So, for example, Gmelin (1790) replaced many secondary homonyms created
when Fabrician species were placed back into Linnaeus' classification.
Most
of those names have been simply treated as junior synonyms in the various
Diptera catalogs and not used in any recent publications. The wording in
the
Code ensures that no one now can resurrect these names by invoking Art.
59.3.

Obviously for Coleoptera, look in Junk, etc.

Cheers

F. Christian Thompson
Systematic Entomology Lab., ARS, USDA
Smithsonian Institution
Washington, D. C. 20560-0169
(202) 382-1800 voice
(202) 786-9422 FAX
cthompso at sel.barc.usda.gov [NB: no terminal "n"]
visit our Diptera site at www.diptera.org


>>> Wolfgang Lorenz <Faunaplan at AOL.COM> 08/15 10:53 AM >>>
Dear Taxacomers,

while trying to fix some controversial names (Coleoptera) I met with the
following problem:
The term "prevailing usage" occurs in several Articles of the new Code
(29.5,
33.2.3.1, 33.3.1, 35.4.1, 35.5) and its meaning is explained in the
Glossary,
but in some other Articles the word "prevailing" is missing.
E.g.,
Art. 59.3. (replacing Art. 59b of the former 3rd ed.) says that a junior
secondary homonym replaced before 1961 is permanently invalid, but in the
new
Code this ruling is mitigated by the words "unless the substitute name is
not
in use"...
Does it mean: NEVER used in publications since it's establishment?

Many thanks in advance for your help!

Best regards
Wolfgang Lorenz, Tutzing/ Germany