Hi Fred & everyone,
> ... it's clear that I would be the only one who believe it
> necessary to put in an application to keep Flabelligeridae - if I read Tom
> & Geoff correctly their interpretation is that Flabelligeridae stands and
> there is no problem. And since I won't write up an application, then I
> think everybody's happy!? We use Flabelligeridae and that's it.
I would have liked to hear directly or indirectly views from other people I
know take an interest in such things.
I have a few further points to make. I don't mind what happens - I looked at
the book as asked to, found the 'precedence' clause of Article 40b and
interpreted it as indicating a formal application was probably unnecessary.
Just one opinion voiced in public, but also shared by Tom Perkins.
However, Tom & I have not convinced Fred, whose expertise in these
matters is very considerable. I suspect Fred might be troubled that Article
23 on priority doesn't cross-reference to the clause, but only to its
companion clause. We think it was a small mistake or oversight and I note
it seems to be corrected in the 4th Edition public draft.
It is a matter of possible conflict between Articles 23 & 40. There is a
recent paper by W J Bock (1994 - History and nomenclature of avian
family-group names. Bull. American Museum of Natural History 222:1-281)
that apparently discusses in great depth this sort of problem with the Code.
I don't have access to it. Perhaps someone interested could look at it and
report back?
Everything changes after 1 January 2000, not too far away at all, when we
get a new code. I believe from looking at the draft, there will be a new
'limitation of the Principle of Priority' section that will allow taxonomists
discovering unused senior synonyms to point them out and effectively
validate the commonly-accepted junior name without need for the
Commission to be involved. I look forward to that day (if & when) and
suspect we can probably safely keep Pherusidae in the archives and not
bother the Commissioners at all.
> All the best/Fred (who would like to go back to biology now...)
:-) For those that don't know, Fred has had probably the most active
participation in matters raised before the Commission of anybody
polychaetological!
--
Geoff Read <g.read at niwa.cri.nz>
-- ANNELIDA LIST
Discuss = <annelida at net.bio.net> = talk to all members
Server = <biosci-server at net.bio.net> = un/subscribes
Archives = http://www.bio.net:80/hypermail/ANNELIDA/
Resources = http://biodiversity.uno.edu/~worms/annelid.html
--