[Taxacom] "Bos domesticus" issue

[Douglas Yanega]

On 10/14/21 3:43 PM, Michael A. Ivie via Taxacom wrote:
> Hi Doug,
>
> We used this in my Biosystematics Class today, and we conclude a 
> replacement name for this is contrary to the goal of Stability. Two 
> better options than a replacement name name are available: First, 
> search for prevailing usage under 23.9.1. There should be 25 uses of a 
> bovid name in the last 50 years if you search everywhere.  The Code 
> does not say the species epithet has to be used in this combination in 
> all those uses, right?  So, uses in Bibos would count.

There are two parts to Art. 23.9.1, and *both* parts need to be 
satisfied for a name to automatically be eligible for preservation.

The first part (Art. 23.9.1.1) is that the senior homonym (in this case) 
could not have ever been used after 1899. It appears to have been used 
fairly often, however, as "Bos taurus domesticus"; though most of these 
works are not taxonomic, they still count. So, this condition evidently 
fails, and that's why I didn't bring it up. The condition you're 
referring to is the second part of the Article (Art. 23.9.1.2), which is 
showing evidence that the junior name has been used as valid in 25 
recent works. In this case, that might be true, but since it fails 
23.9.1.1 you would still need to submit a formal application to the ICZN 
to suppress the older name rather than replacing the junior name.

> If not, there is 81.2.1. If two names are homonyms the older homonym 
> may be "totally suppressed", i.e. suppressed for the purposes of both 
> the Principle of Priority and the Principle of Homonymy so that the 
> later homonym may continue in use as a valid name.

81.2.1 is an odd Article that says the Commission may allow a senior 
homonym to be /suppressed but still remain available/ (calling it 
"totally" suppressed is therefore quite misleading, actually). This 
would be an additional stipulation that would go along with an 
application as above, and it would realistically only be needed if 
"domesticus Erxleben" is the type species of a genus or subgenus (it isn't).

Peace,

-- 
Doug Yanega      Dept. of Entomology       Entomology Research Museum
Univ. of California, Riverside, CA 92521-0314     skype: dyanega
phone: (951) 827-4315 (disclaimer: opinions are mine, not UCR's)
              https://faculty.ucr.edu/~heraty/yanega.html
   "There are some enterprises in which a careful disorderliness
         is the true method" - Herman Melville, Moby Dick, Chap. 82