Source: http://home.kpn.nl/klaasvanmanen/icbn/0049Ch4Sec2a045.htm
Timestamp: 2018-10-18 18:44:47
Document Index: 447210357

Matched Legal Cases: ['Art. 11', 'Art. 15', 'Art. 18', 'Art. 34', 'Art. 11', 'Art. 45', 'Art. 72', 'Art. 60', 'Art. 45']

ICBN (Vienna Code) - Article 45
Ex. 1. “Clypeola minor” first appeared in the Linnaean thesis Flora monspeliensis (1756), in a list of names preceded by numerals but without an explanation of the meaning of these numerals and without any other descriptive matter; when the thesis was reprinted in vol. 4 of the Amoenitates academicae (1759), a statement was added explaining that the numbers referred to earlier descriptions published in Magnol’s Botanicon monspeliense. However, “Clypeola minor” was absent from the reprint, being no longer accepted by Linnaeus, and was not therefore validly published.
Ex. 2. When proposing “Graphis meridionalis” as a new species, Nakanishi (in J. Sci. Hiroshima Univ., Ser. B(2), 11: 75. 1966) provided a Latin description but failed to designate a holotype. Graphis meridionalis M. Nakan. was validly published when Nakanishi (in J. Sci. Hiroshima Univ., Ser. B(2), 11: 265. 1967) designated the holotype of the name and provided a full and direct reference to his previous publication.
Ex. 3. The correction of the erroneous spelling of Gluta “benghas” (Linnaeus, Mant. Pl.: 293. 1771) to G. renghas L. does not affect the date of publication of the name even though the correction dates only from 1883 (Engler in Candolle & Candolle, Monogr. Phan. 4: 225).
45.3. For purposes of priority only legitimate names are taken into consideration (see Art. 11, 52, 53, 54). However, validly published earlier homonyms, whether legitimate or not, shall cause rejection of their later homonyms, unless the latter are conserved or sanctioned (but see Art. 15 Note 1).
Ex. 4. Amphiprora Ehrenb. (1843), an available1 name for a genus of animals, was first treated as belonging to the algae by Kützing (1844). Amphiprora has priority in botanical nomenclature from 1843, not 1844.
Ex. 7. Protodiniferaceae Kof. & Swezy (in Mem. Univ. Calif. 5: 111. 1921, “Protodiniferidae”), available under the International code of zoological nomenclature, is validly published as a name of a family of algae with its original authorship and date but with the original termination changed in accordance with Art. 18.4 and 32.7.
Ex. 8. Pneumocystis P. Delanoë & Delanoë (in Comp. Rend. Acad. Hebd. Séances Acad. Sci. 155: 660. 1912) was published for a “protozoan” genus with a description expressing doubt as to its generic status, “Si celui-ci doit constituer un genre nouveau, nous proposons de lui donner le nom de Pneumocystis Carinii”. Under Art. 34.1(b) Pneumocystis would not be validly published, but Art. 11.5.1 of the International code of zoological nomenclature allows for such qualified publication at that time and therefore Pneumocystis is an available name under the ICZN and, as provided by Art. 45.4, validly published under this Code.
Ex. 9. Pneumocystis jirovecii Frenkel (in Natl. Cancer Inst. Monogr. 43: 16. 1976, ‘jiroveci’), treated as a protozoan, was published with only an English description and without designation of a type, but these conditions are no obstacle to availability under Art. 72.3 and Rec. 13B of the International code of zoological nomenclature. Therefore, when considered the name of a fungus, P. jirovecii, with modified termination (Art. 60.11), is accepted as validly published under Art. 45.4. Subsequent publication of a Latin diagnosis by Frenkel (J. Eukaryot. Microbiol. 46 Suppl.: 91S. 1999), who treated the species as a fungus, was necessary under the edition of the ICBN in operation at that time, but is no longer so; hence, under this Code, P. jirovecii has priority from 1976, not 1999.
45A.1. A new name should be followed by a direct citation indicating its novel status, including the word “novus” (-a, -um) or its abbreviation, e.g., genus novum (gen. nov.), species nova (sp. nov.), combinatio nova (comb. nov.), nomen novum (nom. nov.), or status novus (stat. nov.).
footnote 1. The word “available” in the International code of zoological nomenclature is equivalent to “validly published” in the present Code.