Search

If it is not possible to preserve any specimens other than the holotype, a photograph of the holotype should be included in the protologue, so that if the holotype is lost or destroyed, the photograph will be available for designation as the lectotype." Authors should publish the name of a new species or infraspecific taxon not only with a holotype but also with isotype(s) and/or paratype(s). [Extracted from the article]

2018), field numbers, collecting numbers, accession numbers, or specimen identifiers alone do not necessarily denote different gatherings. The number 215 represents the species number rather than the collecting number of Pantling.". [Extracted from the article]

The nomenclature of the species currently treated in the genus Decalepis is reviewed. The names Baeolepis nervosa, Decalepis hamiltonii and Pentanura khasiana are lectotypified. The combinations D. khasiana and D. salicifolia are validated. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

An isotype is any duplicate of the holotype irrespective of whether or not it is cited in the protologue or seen by the author(s) of the name. In response to our query, N.J. Turland (pers. comm. 2021) kindly informed us that duplicates of the holotype are isotypes irrespective of whether or not they were cited in the protologue or seen by the author(s) of the name, but this has not been explicitly spelled out in the I Code i (Turland & al. in Regnum Veg. [Extracted from the article]

A lectotype is selected for Chrysobaphus roxburghii Wall. (= Anoectochilus roxburghii (Wall.) Lindl.) using a specimen from WU. Specimens from the Wallichian Catalogue (Numer. List), cited as types for C. roxburghii in some recent publications, are determined as not original material for the name. The only other original element known is a Rumphius illustration, t. 41. fig. 3 (miscited as t. 51 fig. 3 in the protologue). The Rumphius illustration is not a good choice for lectotype becasue its identity is ambiguous. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses proposals to amend the International Code of Nomenclature pertaining to herbaria, plant collections and holotype specimen.

The article focuses on the proposals concerning addition of recommendation and examples to the Rec.D46 of the International Code of Nomenclature (ICN). Topics discussed include the unambiguous standard forms for authors of names of organisms provided by the Index Fungorum and the International Plant Names Index. It suggests a recommendation which allows authors publishing nomenclatural novelties and changing their personal names should continue to use the name under which they first published.

The article discusses proposals to amend the International Code of Nomenclature pertaining to herbaria, plant collections and cultures of microorganisms.

The article discusses proposals to amend the International Code of Nomenclature pertaining to publication.

The article discusses a proposal to include a recommendation to electronically publish all nomenclature, which was submitted to the XVIII International Botanical Congress.

The article discusses a proposal to add a new example after article 9.19 of Melbourne Code and mentions need of inclusion of inadvertent neotypification.

The article focuses on proposal to add a new paragraph to recommendation 9B for authors designating an epitype should state why the holotype, lectotype, neotype, or all original material is ambiguous such that epitypification is necessary.