>>Ah. Apparently this is a difference between the botanical and zoological codes that I wasn't aware of. I'm more familiar with the botanical code, and under the ICBN names (whether new species or only new combinations) aren't valid until published.



Under the ICZN, that also applies for new names. However the ICZN is about rules of nomenclature, and does not seek to govern taxonomic judgement. New combinations arise logically as a result of taxonomic judgement (in this case, accepting the arguments of both Burbrink and Utiger et al. logically leads to the combination Pantherophis alleghaniensis), and thus fall outside the principal remit of the ICZN. The first use of a new combination in a Code-compliant publication will be of interest to the compilers of synonymies, but that's as far as it goes.



I am actually somewhat surprised that the ICBN handles that differently - surely none of the Codes aims to dictate scientific judgement?



Cheers,



Wolfgang
-----
WW Home

[ Reply To This Message ] [ Subscribe to this Thread ] [ Hide Replies ]