ISBN Art. 7.11

[Moore, Gerry]

Types of existing names are designated and this is what Art 7.11
addresses. Types for names of new taxa are indicated and the
requirements for this are in Arts. 37.1, 37.2. 
Cheers,
Gerry

Gerry Moore
Research Taxonomist
Brooklyn Botanic Garden
1000 Washington Avenue
Brooklyn, New York 11225-1008
 


-----Original Message-----
From: Michael Vincent [mailto:vincenma at MUOHIO.EDU] 
Sent: Wednesday, May 28, 2003 11:00 AM
To: TAXACOM at USOBI.ORG
Subject: ISBN Art. 7.11


Dear Botanical TAXACOM members:

I wonder how people are interpreting Art. 7.11 of the ISBN (St. Louis
Code).  The text for this section is given below.
___________________________________________________________________
7.11. For purposes of priority (Art. 9.17 and 10.5), designation of a
type is achieved only if the type is definitely accepted as such by the
typifying author, if the type element is clearly indicated by direct
citation including the term "type" (typus) or an equivalent, and, on or
after 1 January 2001, if the typification statement includes the phrase
"here designated" (hic designatus) or an equivalent.

Ex. 6. Chlorosarcina Gerneck (1907) originally comprised two species, C.
minor and C. elegans. Vischer (1933) transferred the former to
Chlorosphaera G. A. Klebs and retained the latter in Chlorosarcina. He
did not, however, use the term "type" or an equivalent, so that his
action does not constitute typification of Chlorosarcina. The first to
designate a type, as "LT.", was Starr (in ING Card No. 16528, Nov 1962),
who selected Chlorosarcina elegans.

Ex. 7. The phrase "standard species" as used by Hitchcock & Green (in
Anon., Nomencl. Prop. Brit. Botanists: 110-199. 1929) is now treated as
equivalent to "type", and hence type designations in this work are
acceptable.
________________________________________________________________________
__

This seems pretty straight forward, and a literal interpretation would
mean that any new taxon would need the phrase "here designated" or
equivalent to be validly published.

In a perusal of several journals for new species publications, I see
that the phrase "here designated" is not included in any of the
articles.  See for example the most recent issue of Systematic Botany,
in which new species of Hymenophyllum, Paspalum, Tridens, and a new
genus (Hekkingia) are described, all without the "here designated"
phrase.  Does this mean all of these are invalid names?

Is anyone actually using the phrase when publishing new species?  I do
see it used when new lectotypifications are done...

Mike

Dr. Michael A. Vincent, Curator
W.S. Turrell Herbarium (MU)
Department of Botany
Miami University
Oxford, Ohio 45056 USA

TEL:  513-529-2755
FAX:  513-529-4243
Email:  Vincenma at muohio.edu