Botanical Nomenclature

[Gurcharan Singh]

Do you think it is ethical to (even if  ICBN permits) describe as New Species when a taxon (which you relegate to synonymy) has already been typified and described (no matter at different rank) and epithet could be transferred at specific rank without being rendered as later homonym or illegitimate otherwise?
 
With so many different opinions and approaches I think Botanical Code needs to be properly worded to help such situations. The purpose of Code is to ensure uniform interpretation and practice.  
 
Gurcharan Singh  
 
Thomas G. Lammers, Ph.D. wrote

>To get around it, to in effect change the epithet upon changing rank, I
>simply describe a new species, based on its own type, and cite the variety
>as a synonym.  Now, instead of one nomenclatural entity, we have two, each
>typified by its own type.  






Gerry Moore Wrote
>> ICBN permits
>>(but does not recommend) the replacement of a name of a taxon when its rank
>>is changed.

>>Summary of when a nom. nov. may be used in botanical nomenclature

>>1. To replace a name that is illegitimate. This is common.

>>2. To replace a name whose epithet cannot be transferred without creating an
>>illegitimate name. This is common.

********************************************************************************
Dr. Gurcharan Singh
Department of Botany                                                  Res: 932 Anand Kunj
Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Khalsa College                            Vikas Puri
University of Delhi , Delhi-110 007, INDIA                          New Delhi-110018
Email: singhg at satyam.net.in; singhkg at id.eth.net
Phone: 5531534  Cell: 9810359089