CONCH-L Archives

Conchologists List

CONCH-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
Conchologists of America List <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
Article 59c of the Code
From:
Maurizio Perini <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Sun, 24 May 1998 17:11:07 +0200
Content-Type:
multipart/mixed; boundary="---- =_NextPart_000_01BD8736.FF8F3140"
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
Conchologists of America List <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (609 bytes) , application/ms-tnef (2211 bytes) 
 
Sunday    May 24, 1998    04:57 PM
 
 
Dear friends,
 
if I read the following:
 
"Voluta jaspidea (Gmelin,1791) (later transferred to the genus Oliva by Fischer, 1807)
now stands in another genus (Jaspidella, in the subfamily Olivellinae, see Abbott 1974:233).
So, in application of Article 59c of the Code, Oliva jaspidea Duclos, 1835 is not be rejected
as a secondary junior homonym of Oliva jaspidea (Gmelin, 1791), as erroneously stated
by Tursch & Greifeneder (1989a)."
 
Am I wrong if I now consider Oliva jaspidea  Duclos, 1835 as a valid name ?
 
What does exactly Article 59c of the Code say?
 
Thanks in advance,  Ciao!
 
Maurizio
from Italy.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2