I'm fine with most of the proposal; much of it is identical to my proposal from May 12th (yes, it's been a long time), and some of it is probably better (e. g. I proposed to work Note 21.1.1 into Art. 21.1, the new proposal just deletes it, and I agree with the reason stated there). However... First, the big one: the proposal still talks about "infraspecific names" without taking into account that, once the PhyloCode is implemented, there may be two kinds of such names: rank-based ones, and PhyloCode-governed ones that have either been assigned subspecies rank or that happen to designate a clade that lies within a species. Only the former are intended, but both are implied. For this reason (though I failed to make _that_ clear), I proposed a new Note: "Note 21.1.1. In any particular classification, a species or infraspecific taxon may be identical in content to a clade, and a clade may be assigned the rank of species or that of an infraspecific category. In such cases, intercode synonymy may occur between this code and a rank-based one, because names governed by this code have a different form from specific or infraspecific names governed by the ICNP, ICN or ICZN. However, such redundancy is likely to be limited: assigning a rank to a clade name is not a nomenclatural act under this code, and the rank-based codes do not recognize the adoption of any species concept as a nomenclatural act -- under most species concepts, species need not be clades. This situation is similar to monospecific genera under the rank-based codes (cases where a genus and its type species are identical in content in a particular classification)." In this, "a species or infraspecific taxon" in the first sentence should rather be "a taxon with a rank-based name at species or infraspecific rank", and of course I'd be fine with, say, ending the first sentence with "a clade may be assigned species or infraspecific rank". Digging this up also reminded me that it's not called ICBN anymore. It's now "International Code of Nomenclature of algae, plants and fungi", assuming the 2012 Code has been printed at last. I'll look that up tomorrow, and I'll look up if the change from "Bacteria" to "Prokaryotes" is now official as well. The new Art. 21.3 comes with a note in the proposal: "[The last sentence refers to ICZN Art. 11.4.]" Then why not just say so: "For names governed by the ICZN, this practice must be followed throughout the publication that establishes the name (ICZN Art. 11.4)." The first sentence of the new Art. 21.4 contains the phrase "may be treated as the name of the species under this code, termed a species uninomen". Given that this code doesn't govern species names, do we really want to say there is such a thing as "the name of the species under this code"? How about "may be treated as the _de facto_ name of the species, termed a species uninomen"? Example 1 to Note 21.4B.1 lacks the year at the first opportunity, right after the Note says the year is commonly cited under the ICZN. I'll interpret Note 21A.1 as allowing any agreement; thus, I'm looking forward to *Discodorididae sandiegenses*! That should make some heads explode! ;-) Finally, I proposed a new recommendation to deal with a pet peeve of mine. It's not really on topic, and I should propose it to the committees that make the rank-based codes (where of course I have much less influence), but I think it should receive consideration anyway: "When establishing a new species name under the appropriate rank-based code, the protologue should state which species concept the authors have in mind, and it should include a description of the evidence indicating that the new species fulfills that concept, even though the rank-based codes have no such requirements or recommendations. Names for infraspecific taxa should be handled analogously." If people started adhering to this, it would force people to think about species instead of taking them for granted, counting them as a measure of biodiversity, referring new specimens to species for implied reasons that other authors wouldn't accept if they were explicit, and so on...
(740) 593–9381 | Building 21, The Ridges
Ohio University | Athens OH 45701 | 740.593.1000 ADA Compliance | © 2018 Ohio University . All rights reserved.