DIVISION II. RULES AND RECOMMENDATIONS
CHAPTER IV. EFFECTIVE AND VALID PUBLICATION
SECTION 2. CONDITIONS AND DATES OF VALID
PUBLICATION OF NAMES
43.1. A name of a taxon below the
rank of genus is not validly published unless the name of the genus or
species to which it is assigned is validly published at the same time
or was validly published previously.
Ex. 1. Binary designations for six species of
"Suaeda", including "S. baccata" and "S. vera",
were published with descriptions and diagnoses by Forsskål (Fl.
Aegypt.-Arab.: 69-71. 1775), but he provided no description or
diagnosis for the genus: these were not therefore validly published
Müller (in Flora 63: 286. 1880) published the new genus
with the species "P. hampeana
n. sp.", "P. boliviensis"
Nyl.), "P. sorediiformis"
(= Phlyctis sorediiformis
(= Phlyctis brasiliensis
Nyl.), and "P. andensis"
Nyl.). These were not, however, validly published specific names in this place, because the intended generic name
was not validly published; Müller gave no generic
description or diagnosis but only a description and a diagnosis of the
. This description and diagnosis did not validate the generic name as a descriptio generico-specifica under
since the new genus was not monotypic. Valid publication of the name
was by Müller (1895), who provided a short generic diagnosis and explicitly included only two species,
the names of which, P. ludoviciensis
Müll. Arg. and P. boliviensis
(Nyl.) Müll. Arg., were also validly published in 1895.
This Article applies also when specific and other epithets are published under words not to be regarded as generic names (see
The binary designation "Anonymos aquatica"
(Walter, Fl. Carol.: 230. 1788) is not a validly published name. The correct name for the species concerned is
J. F. Gmel. (1791), and the date of the name, for purposes of priority, is 1791. The name must not be cited as
(Walter) J. F. Gmel."
Despite the existence of the generic name
Ség. (1754), the binary designation "S. paradoxus"
(Rottbøll, Descr. Pl. Rar.: 27. 1772) is not validly published since
in Rottbøll's context was a word not intended as a generic name. The first validly published name for this species is
2006, by International Association for Plant Taxonomy. This page last updated