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 List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 16 Mar 2011 11:55:11 -0300
Reply-To:
Conchologists List <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
MIME-Version:
1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
In-Reply-To:
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
From:
Marcus Coltro <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (60 lines)
So does this means a name can be changed if published later by the author in a revision?

"The rules of taxonomic nomenclature (ICZN, 1999: Article 32) mandate that the original spelling of a species epithet such as this
must stand unless there is evidence in the published work itself that the author's intention was inconsistent with that orthography.
Well, there is a bit of a twist here: Article 33.2.1 specifically includes "an author's (or publisher's) corrigenda" as part of the
original work. Thus, the passage of six months notwithstanding, the emended scientific name that heads this report must stand:
Miltha childreni."

Plagiodontes weyenberghi Doering, 1880 was initially published as P. weyemberghi, which is still used by some collectors and
dealers.

Pilsbry accepted Plagiodontes weyenberghi and noted on his work (Pilsbry, H.A., 1901-2, Manual of Conchology, Vol.XIV., pg.100) that
the misspelled name was corrected later to weyenberghi by Doering in 1880.

So, I assume the accepted name should be with N, even if the original work was with M, right?






Marcus

Marcus Coltro
WWW.FEMORALE.COM


-----Original Message-----
From: Conchologists List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Harry G. Lee
Sent: Sunday, March 13, 2011 12:53 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [CONCH-L] Miltha childreni (Gray, 1824) revisited

Dear listers,

With the help of the Internet and Gary Rosenberg, I have delved more
deeply into Children's Lucine and changed my conclusions a bit.

The report I offered you on 18 February has been somewhat revised:
<http://www.jaxshells.org/childa.htm>.

With apologies for my irresolute ways,
Harry

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[log in to unmask] - a forum for informal discussions on molluscs
To leave this list, click on the following web link:
http://listserv.uga.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=conch-l&A=1
Type your email address and name in the appropriate box and
click leave the list.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[log in to unmask] - a forum for informal discussions on molluscs
To leave this list, click on the following web link:
http://listserv.uga.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=conch-l&A=1
Type your email address and name in the appropriate box and
click leave the list.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

ATOM RSS1 RSS2