Accès membres

Mot de passe perdu? S'inscrire

07-12-2015 14:17

Zugna Marino Zugna Marino

Buon giorno a tutti, ad un primo momento, non ess

29-01-2026 10:04

Jean-Paul Priou Jean-Paul Priou

Bonjour à tous, Marcel LECOMTE président de L'A

21-01-2026 16:32

Gernot Friebes

Hi,I need your help with some black dots on a lich

17-11-2009 22:22

Pablo Chacón Pablo Chacón

Bonne nuit, Voir si vous m'avez élaguée appor

25-11-2012 20:32

Bometon Javier Bometon Javier

Ascomas cupoliformes abiertos lateralmente, himeni

25-01-2026 16:08

Malcolm  Greaves Malcolm Greaves

This Geoglossum had spores mostly 70-80 (87) with

27-01-2026 11:43

Malcolm  Greaves Malcolm Greaves

Is anyone with experience of DNA testing able to t

26-01-2026 11:49

Margot en Geert Vullings

We found this possible anamorph on a dead Cytisus

25-01-2026 23:23

Tomaz Vucko Tomaz Vucko

Hello! I found this species that resembles Delitsc

18-01-2026 12:24

Josep Torres Josep Torres

Hello.An anamorph located on the surface of a thin

« < 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