Taxacom: Seeking advice RE higher taxon names to use for 2 groups of fossil plants

Mon Apr 25 03:37:38 CDT 2022

Thanks Paul for that clarification.

Tony

On Mon, 25 Apr 2022, 6:12 pm dipteryx--- via Taxacom, <taxacom at lists.ku.edu>
wrote:

> As I said, the conservation proposal went through. This
> includes ratification by the 2017, Shenzhen Congress
> (which is pretty quick, just over a year since publication
> of the proposal). The only document that has any content
> that is potentially of interest is the report by the Committee
> for Fossils (this is often the case, it is fairly rare that there
> is useful content available at one of the next two steps in the
> process), which is why I linked to it.
>
> BTW, it is not so that names depend on the final ratification
> for them to become usable. There are Rec. 14A, 34A, and
> 56A to give guidance in the interim. And since that same
> 2017, Shenzhen Congress it is no longer the Congress that
> that has the primary power of decision, but rather the
> General Committee.
>
> Another question is if Rec. 16A is all that useful in offering
> guidance. It can be taken to mean that it is important to
> establish priority at each and every rank. I imagine it would
> be more popular to be consistent across ranks, more or less
> regardless of priority. But again, a recommendation is just that:
> it does not mean that the world at large needs to follow it.
>
> Paul
>
>
>
> > Op 24-04-2022 22:21 schreef Tony Rees <tonyrees49 at gmail.com>:
> >
> >
> > Sorry, a sentence in the above message was incomplete:
> >
> > "* 11.10. The principle of priority does not apply above the rank of
> family, however for order, class, or division"
> > append: " 16A.1. In choosing among typified names for a taxon above the
> rank of family, authors should generally follow the principle of priority."
> >
> > Regards - Tony
> >
> >
> > On Mon, 25 Apr 2022 at 05:35, Tony Rees <tonyrees49 at gmail.com mailto:
> tonyrees49 at gmail.com > wrote:
> >
> > > OK, let me try to explore further my own questions...
> > >
> > > Let us deal first with names at the rank of family.
> > >
> > > From the relevant nomenclatural Code i.e. ICNafp, 2018:
> > >
> > > * 11.1. Each family or lower-ranked taxon with a particular
> circumscription, position, and rank can bear only one correct name. Special
> exceptions are made for nine families and one subfamily for which
> alternative names are permitted (see Art. 18.5 and 19.8). The use of
> separate names is allowed for fossil-taxa that represent different parts,
> life-history stages, or preservational states of what may have been a
> single organismal taxon or even a single individual (Art 1.2).
> > >
> > > * 11.3. For any taxon from family to genus, inclusive, the correct
> name is the earliest legitimate one with the same rank, except in cases of
> limitation of priority by conservation or protection (see Art. 14 and F.2)
> or where Art. 11.7, 11.8, 19.4, 56, 57, F.3, or F.7 apply.
> > >
> > > * 18.1 Note 2. The name of a family may be formed from any validly
> published name of an included genus, even one that is unavailable for use,
> although the provisions of Art. 18.3 apply if the generic name is
> illegitimate.
> > >
> > > * 18.3. A name of a family formed from an illegitimate generic name is
> illegitimate unless and until it or the generic name from which it is
> formed is conserved or protected.
> > >
> > > From the above, it is clear that in the cases
> Cycadeoideaceae/Bennettitaceae (based on Cycadeoidea/Bennetites) and
> Horneophytaceae/Langiophytaceae (based on Horneophyton/Langiophyton):
> > >
> > > 1: only one name can be correct in each case [at least, at a
> particular point in time], where the intended taxonomic concept is the same.
> > >
> > > 2: per Art. 11.3, the principle of priority applies to names at family
> rank (other aspects being satisfied) so it seems to me that Cycadeoideaceae
> Buckland ex Fitton (Geol. Sketch Hastings: 77. 26 Jan 1833
> (‘Cycadeoideae’)) (per Doweld) would normally have priority over
> Bennettitaceae Lignier (in Nature 50: 595. 1894 (‘Bennettiteae’) (again per
> Doweld), however this may be affected by the illegitimacy of the type genus
> name i.e. Cycadeoidea Buckland, 1828 (not validly published), later
> Cycadeoidea W. Buckland ex Lindley et W. Hutton, nom. cons. prop.
> (currently a superfluous replacement name for Mantellia, nom. rej. prop.).
> Would I be correct in thinking that, until Doweld's 2016 proposal to
> conserve Cycadeoidea is ratified, Bennettitaceae is still technically
> correct but would then be replaced by Cycadeoideaceae?
> > >
> > > 3, again per Art. 11.3, Horneophytaceae (possibly from Němejc, 1960,
> reference not seen) should have priority over Langiophytaceae Doweld, 2001,
> (in Prosyllab. Tracheophyt.: I), however I am more in the dark about this
> one, and note that Doweld is generally very knowledgeable in these matters!
> So I would appreciate any further information on this.
> > >
> > > 4. Once the family names are settled, I am presuming that it is
> preferable that the higher taxon ranks follow from these, provided that
> they are not descriptive names, noting however:
> > >
> > > * 10.10. The principle of typification does not apply to names of taxa
> above the rank of family, except for names that are automatically typified
> by being formed from generic names (see Art. 16.1(a)), the type of which is
> the same as that of the generic name.
> > >
> > > * 11.10. The principle of priority does not apply above the rank of
> family, however for order, class, or division
> > >
> > > So I _think_ that higher taxon names formed from a genus or family
> would be "automatically typified", giving e.g.
> Cycadeoideaceae/Cycadeoideales/Cycadeoideopsida, such also that
> Cycadeoideaceae/Bennettitales (per Taylor) would be incorrect??
> > >
> > > I note that in the Horneophyta/Langiophytophyta case, both Tropicos
> and the Bryophyte Nomenclator currently use:
> > > ----------------
> > > division:Langiophytophyta Doweld, 2001
> > > class:Langiophytopsida Doweld, 2001
> > > order:Langiophytales Doweld, 2001
> > > family:Langiophytaceae Doweld, 2001
> > > ----------------
> > > not Horneophyta, etc., so I am wondering what would be the reason for
> this?
> > >
> > > Further input appreciated,
> > >
> > > Regards - Tony
> > >
> > >
> > > On Sun, 24 Apr 2022 at 17:14, dipteryx--- via Taxacom <
> taxacom at lists.ku.edu mailto:taxacom at lists.ku.edu > wrote:
> > >
> > > > The conservation proposal went through:
> > > >
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fonlinelibrary.wiley.com%2Fdoi%2Fepdf%2F10.12705%2F661.17&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Ca56746c6156d41c9214408da2696e2ab%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C637864727193096864%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=du%2Bpkl80XfmMarGANF2H6H%2Fm4FdYw3zEG30%2FOPYsqRU%3D&reserved=0
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fonlinelibrary.wiley.com%2Fdoi%2Fepdf%2F10.12705%2F661.17&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Ca56746c6156d41c9214408da2696e2ab%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C637864727193096864%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=du%2Bpkl80XfmMarGANF2H6H%2Fm4FdYw3zEG30%2FOPYsqRU%3D&reserved=0
> > > >
> > > > Paul
> > > >
> > > > > Op 24-04-2022 07:41 schreef Tony Rees via Taxacom <
> taxacom at lists.ku.edu mailto:taxacom at lists.ku.edu >:
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Dear Taxacomers,
> > > > >
> > > > > I am seeking advice as to the best choice of higher taxon names
> for a
> > > > > couple of groups of fossil plants. These are:
> > > > >
> > > > > 1: Order Cycadeoidales Berry, 1916 vs. order Bennettitales Bessey,
> 1910
> > > > > by extension: class Cycadeoideopsida Scott, 1923 vs. class
> Bennettitopsida
> > > > > Engler 1892
> > > > > phylum Cycadeoideophyta T.N. Taylor, 1981 vs. phylum
> Bennettitophyta
> > > > > Kravtsov & Poljarnaja 1995
> > > > > family Cycadeoideaceae Buckland ex Fitton, 1833 vs. Bennettitaceae
> Lignier,
> > > > > 1894
> > > > >
> > > > > Included families:  Cycadeoideaceae R. Br. ex G.R. Wieland (≡
> > > > > Bennettitaceae Lignier), Sturianthaceae Doweld (syn.  Sturiellaceae
> > > > > Němejc), Westersheimiaceae Němejc, Williamsoniaceae (Carruthers)
> Nathorst,
> > > > > Williamsoniellaceae Nakai
> > > > >
> > > > > The type family Cycadeoideaceae/Bennettitaceae includes the type
> genus
> > > > > Cycadeoidea W. Buckland ex Lindley et W. Hutton but no current
> genus
> > > > > Bennettites (although there is a Bennetticarpus Harris and a
> Bennettistemon
> > > > > Harris); Zijlstra et al. (2014) state that "Bennettites Carruthers
> 1870 is
> > > > > the most important synonym of Cycadeoidea Buckland ex Lindl. et
> Hutton
> > > > > 1832. Soon after Seward's conclusion (Seward, 1917, p. 367–386)
> that these
> > > > > genera are inseparable, the use of Bennettites stopped".
> > > > >
> > > > > Doweld, 2016a states that the type generic name, Cycadeoidea
> Buckland, 1828
> > > > > was not validly published, but the genus Mantellia Brongniart,
> 1828 was
> > > > > validly published for the same taxon later the same year.
> Subsequently,
> > > > > Cycadeoidea was validly published by Lindley & Hutton, 1832 but
> this name
> > > > > then becomes a superfluus replacement name for Mantellia; Doweld
> states
> > > > > that Cycadeoidea Buckland ex Lindl. & Hutton was to be the subject
> of a
> > > > > nom. cons. proposal, published as Doweld, 2016b.
> > > > >
> > > > > Bennettitales (in particular) has always been a popular choice of
> name for
> > > > > this group, but would Cycadeoidales in fact be more "correct"?
> Since 2010,
> > > > > according to Google Scholar there are 1,760 hits for Bennettitales
> vs. 121
> > > > > for Cycadeoidales. Novikoff & Barabasz-Krasny, 2015 use
> > > > > Cycadeoideopsida/Cycadeoidales whereas Taylor et al., 2009 use
> > > > > Bennettitales with family Cycadeoidaceae.
> > > > >
> > > > > Doweld, 2016b writes:
> > > > > "The conservation of Cycadeoidea becomes more important and needed
> to
> > > > > legitimize (under the revised provisions in Art. 6.4, 18.3, & 19.6
> of the
> > > > > Melbourne Code) the current use of a distinct family name for this
> group of
> > > > > fossils, Cycadeoideaceae Buckland ex Fitton (Geol. Sketch
> Hastings: 77. 26
> > > > > Jan 1833 (‘Cycadeoideae’)). Although the other available
> suprageneric names
> > > > > in current use such as: ordinal (Cycadeoideales E.W. Berry in Pl.
> World 19:
> > > > > 36. 1916 (‘Cycadeiodales’)), subordinal (Cycadeoideineae Němejc,
> l.c. 1968:
> > > > > 265), subclass (Cycadeoideidae Němejc, l.c. 1968: 275), class
> > > > > (Cycadeoideopsida D.H. Scott (l.c.) (‘Cycadeoideae’)) and phylum
> names
> > > > > (Cycadeoideophyta T.N. Taylor (l.c.) (‘Cycadeoidophyta’)) are not
> made
> > > > > illegitimate, by the illegitimacy of the generic name from which
> they are
> > > > > formed, it would be undesirable to have all the suprafamilial
> nomenclature
> > > > > of this fossil plant group based on a different genus from that of
> the
> > > > > family and changed into that derived from the alternative fossil
> cycadeoid
> > > > > generic name, Bennettites Carruth., which is also available and
> sometimes
> > > > > alternatively used in modern palaeobotany such as the family
> Bennettitaceae
> > > > > Lignier (in Nature 50: 595. 1894 (‘Bennettiteae’) (even although
> > > > > Cycadeoideaceae has priority), suborder Bennettitineae D.H.
> Campbell (Univ.
> > > > > Text-book Bot.: 347. 1902 (‘Bennettiteae’)), order Bennettitales
> Bessey (in
> > > > > Trans. Amer. Microscop. Soc. 29: 94. 1910), subclass Bennettitidae
> > > > > Davitashvili (Kurs Paleontol.: 701. 1949 (‘Bennettitales’)), class
> > > > > Bennettitopsida Engler (l.c. (‘Bennettitales’)) and phylum
> Bennettitophyta
> > > > > Kravtsov & Poljarnaja (l.c.). The legitimization of
> Cycadeoidea-derived
> > > > > suprageneric nomenclature will provide stabilization in the whole
> > > > > classification of extinct gymnosperms."
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > References cited:
> > > > > Doweld, A.B. (2016a). The nomenclature of Cycadeoidea (fossil
> > > > > Spermatophyta: Cycadeoideopsida). Taxon 65: 372-379
> > > > >
> > > > > Doweld, A.B. (2016b) (2436–2437) Proposals to conserve the names
> > > > > Cycadeoidea against Mantellia and
> > > > > C. megalophylla against M. nidiformis (fossil Spermatophyta:
> > > > > Cycadeoideopsida), TAXON 65: 397–399
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdx.doi.org%2F10.12705%2F652.29&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Ca56746c6156d41c9214408da2696e2ab%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C637864727193096864%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=RrPsB4opDY1DInML6j%2Fe0Y%2FL4vAGe2rgZKIhF%2BP4thw%3D&reserved=0
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fdx.doi.org%2F10.12705%2F652.29&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Ca56746c6156d41c9214408da2696e2ab%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C637864727193096864%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=RrPsB4opDY1DInML6j%2Fe0Y%2FL4vAGe2rgZKIhF%2BP4thw%3D&reserved=0
> > > > >
> > > > > Novikoff, A. & Barabasz-Krasny, B. (2015) System of Embryophytes.
> In:
> > > > > Novikoff, A. & Barabasz-Krasny, B. Modern Plant Systematics.
> Liga-Pres,
> > > > > Lviv, Ukraine, pp. 23–63.
> > > > >
> > > > > Taylor, T.N., Taylor, E. & Krings, M. (2009) Paleobotany—The
> Biology and
> > > > > Evolution of Fossil Plants. Second Edition. Elsevier/Academic
> Press,
> > > > > Amsterdam, Boston, etc., 1252 pp.
> > > > >
> > > > > Zijlstra, Gea; van Konijnenburg-van Cittert, Johanna H.A. (2014). A
> > > > > nomenclatural note on Monanthesia and Bennettites. Review of
> Palaeobotany
> > > > > and Palynology, 203: 1–2. doi:10.1016/j.revpalbo.2014.01.001
> > > > >
> > > > > -----------------
> > > > >
> > > > > 2: Class Langiophytopsida Doweld, 2001 (?) vs. Class
> Horneophytopsida
> > > > > Němejc, 1960
> > > > > by extension: Division (=Phylum) Langiophytophyta Doweld, 2001 vs.
> Division
> > > > > (=Phylum) Horneophyta
> > > > > order Langiophytales Doweld vs. order Horneophytales
> > > > > family Langiophytaceae Doweld vs. family Horneophytaceae
> > > > > (included genera according to Novikoff & Barabasz-Krasny: Caia
> Fanning et
> > > > > al., † Horneophyton Bargh. et Darrah, † Hostinella Barrande ex
> D.R.J. Stur,
> > > > > † Langiophyton Remy et Hass., † Pectinophyton O.A. Høeg, †
> Salopella
> > > > > Edwards et Richardson,† Taeniocrada D. White,† Tarrantia Fanning
> et al.,†
> > > > > Tortilicaulis D.S. Edwards)
> > > > >
> > > > > Langiophytopsida (etc.) is used in Novikoff & Barabasz-Krasny
> > > > >
> > > > > Horneophytopsida has 55 hits in Google Scholar (all years),
> > > > > Langiophytopsida has none... (the Novikoff & Barabasz-Krasny
> chapter has
> > > > > apparently disappeared, although is accessible via the Internet
> Archive).
> > > > >
> > > > > Horneophytaceae has a few hits in Google Scholar (all years),
> > > > > Langiophytaceae has none.
> > > > >
> > > > > Horneophytopsida is used in e.g. Cascales-Miñana, Borja; Steemans,
> > > > > Philippe; Servais, Thomas; Lepot, Kevin; Gerrienne, Philippe
> (2019). An
> > > > > alternative model for the earliest evolution of vascular plants.
> Lethaia,
> > > > > (), –. doi:10.1111/let.12323
> > > > >
> > > > > Horneophyton was named by E.S. Barghoorn & W.C. Darrah, 1938, as a
> > > > > replacement for the preoccupied genus name Hornea Kidston & Lang,
> 1920;
> > > > > Langiophyton by W. Remy & H. Hass, 1991, they are believed to
> represent
> > > > > portions of the same plant (sporophyte vs. gametophyte), which are
> allowed
> > > > > to be validly published as separate genera in fossil botany.
> > > > >
> > > > > Division (phylum) Horneophyta does not seem to be validly published
> > > > > although it is used in some texts. Horneophytopsida dates from
> Němejc,
> > > > > 1960; Langiophytopsida dates from Doweld, 2001.
> > > > >
> > > > > Thoughts / opinions very welcome, to assist me in erecting a
> preferred
> > > > > classification for these groups, which are certainly important in
> the plant
> > > > > fossil record.
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards - Tony
> > > > >
> > > > > Tony Rees, New South Wales, Australia
> > > > >
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2FTonyRees&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Ca56746c6156d41c9214408da2696e2ab%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C637864727193096864%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=SV06Jr9d5t87mlfGMh7hvGM7Oj6ZRYJX1IJLRfzjlso%3D&reserved=0
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fabout.me%2FTonyRees&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Ca56746c6156d41c9214408da2696e2ab%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C637864727193096864%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=SV06Jr9d5t87mlfGMh7hvGM7Oj6ZRYJX1IJLRfzjlso%3D&reserved=0
> > > > >
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.irmng.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Ca56746c6156d41c9214408da2696e2ab%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C637864727193096864%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=6dv5xLlrvbmFQE1hR06vWo92%2BEPRGy14dWS48mtencY%3D&reserved=0
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.irmng.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Ca56746c6156d41c9214408da2696e2ab%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C637864727193096864%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=6dv5xLlrvbmFQE1hR06vWo92%2BEPRGy14dWS48mtencY%3D&reserved=0
> > > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > > Taxacom Mailing List
> > > > >
> > > > > Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at lists.ku.edu
> mailto:taxacom at lists.ku.edu
> > > > > For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> https://lists.ku.edu/listinfo/taxacom
> > > > > You can reach the person managing the list at:
> taxacom-owner at lists.ku.edu mailto:taxacom-owner at lists.ku.edu
> > > > > The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Ca56746c6156d41c9214408da2696e2ab%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C637864727193096864%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ZBGwZc8TsRHB3xk4s3iD3iKOyXZPKIHR4J7hBBdZP3Q%3D&reserved=0
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Ca56746c6156d41c9214408da2696e2ab%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C637864727193096864%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ZBGwZc8TsRHB3xk4s3iD3iKOyXZPKIHR4J7hBBdZP3Q%3D&reserved=0
> > > > >
> > > > > Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 35 years,
> 1987-2022.
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Taxacom Mailing List
> > > >
> > > > Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at lists.ku.edu
> mailto:taxacom at lists.ku.edu
> > > > For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> https://lists.ku.edu/listinfo/taxacom
> > > > You can reach the person managing the list at:
> taxacom-owner at lists.ku.edu mailto:taxacom-owner at lists.ku.edu
> > > > The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Ca56746c6156d41c9214408da2696e2ab%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C637864727193096864%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ZBGwZc8TsRHB3xk4s3iD3iKOyXZPKIHR4J7hBBdZP3Q%3D&reserved=0
> > > >
> > > > Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 35 years,
> 1987-2022.
> > > >
> > >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
>
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at lists.ku.edu
> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit:
> https://lists.ku.edu/listinfo/taxacom
> You can reach the person managing the list at: taxacom-owner at lists.ku.edu
> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Ca56746c6156d41c9214408da2696e2ab%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C637864727193096864%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ZBGwZc8TsRHB3xk4s3iD3iKOyXZPKIHR4J7hBBdZP3Q%3D&reserved=0
>
> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 35 years, 1987-2022.
>