Accès membres

Mot de passe perdu? S'inscrire

07-02-2023 22:28

Ethan Crenson

Hello friends, On Sunday, in the southern part of

19-02-2026 17:49

Salvador Emilio Jose

Hola buenas tardes!! Necesito ayuda para la ident

09-02-2026 22:01

ruiz Jose

Hola, me paso esta colección en madera de pino, t

19-02-2026 13:50

Margot en Geert Vullings

We found this collection on deciduous wood on 7-2-

19-02-2026 12:01

Castillo Joseba Castillo Joseba

Me mandan el material de Galicia (España), recole

17-02-2026 09:41

Maren Kamke Maren Kamke

Good morning, I found a Diaporthe species on Samb

16-02-2026 21:25

Andreas Millinger Andreas Millinger

Good evening,failed to find an idea for this fungu

08-12-2025 17:37

Lothar Krieglsteiner Lothar Krieglsteiner

20.6.25, on branch of Abies infected and thickened

17-02-2026 17:26

Nicolas Suberbielle Nicolas Suberbielle

Bonjour à tous, Je recherche cette publication :

03-02-2013 19:50

Nina Filippova

Good time), I've compared this specimen with the

« < 1 2 3 4 5 > »
Question on nomenclature
Thomas Lehr, 09-03-2005 17:01
Hello,
I have a question concerning the author citation in case of a new combination.
Art. 33.2. of the International Code of Botanical Nomeclature (ICBN) says: "A new combination, or an avowed substitute (nomen novum), published on or after 1 January 1953, for a previously and validly published name is not validly published unless its basionym (name-bringing or epithet-bringing syn-onym) or the replaced synonym (when a new name is proposed) is clearly indicated and a full and direct reference given to its author and place of valid publication with page or plate reference and date."
But what is going to happen with new combinations before 1953?
Let's have a look at an example, which was the concrete reason for my question:
Ciboria coryli was described by Schellenberg the first time as Sclerotinia coryli (1906). In 1943 Buchwald published the new combination Ciboria coryli in an article on Monilinia fructigena. He did it just in a footnote, which does not stand in direct connection to Schellenbergs article of 1906. The footnote says just: "Sclerotinia coryli Schellenb. er i Virkeligheden slet ikke en Sclerotinia-Art, men bør henføres til Ciboria, C. coryli (Schellenb.) comb. nov." That means that there is no "full and direct reference given to its author and place of valid publication with page or plate reference and date" as the ICBN demands. Is the new combination nevertheless valid because published before 1953? Or do we have to refer to Whetzel (1947), who gives a full reference to Schellenbergs article?
Ciboria coryli (Schell). Buchw. 1943 or (Schell.) Whetz. 1947?
Thanks for every information and greetings from Germany
Thomas
Nicolas VAN VOOREN, 09-03-2005 17:32
Nicolas VAN VOOREN
Re:Question on nomenclature
Hello.
It means that before 1953 (january, 1st) the citation of the basionym isn't mandatory. So the correct citation for Ciboria coryli is Ciboria coryli (Schell.) Buchw.
Regards.
Nicolas
Thomas Lehr, 09-03-2005 17:43
Re:Question on nomenclature
Hello Nicolas,
long question, short answer ... :-)
Thanks a lot for your fast and precise help!!
Greetings
Thomas