Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

Artigo Acesso aberto Produção Nacional Revisado por pares

BIBTEX RIS

(081–082) Proposals to allow the use of a hyphen to be treated as a correctable error in all nothogeneric names that are condensed formulas

2021; Wiley; Volume: 70; Issue: 2 Linguagem: Inglês

10.1002/tax.12477

1996-8175

John H. Wiersema, Jefferson Prado, Nicholas J. Turland,

Botany, Ecology, and Taxonomy Studies

In the current Shenzhen Code (Turland & al. in Regnum Veg. 159. 2018), one might infer from the last sentence of Art. H.6.2, which covers nothogeneric names of bigeneric hybrids that are condensed formulas (“The use of a hyphen instead of or in addition to a connecting vowel is treated as an error to be corrected by deletion of the hyphen.”), that this rule applies only to names of bigeneric hybrids. When this sentence, which was new in the Shenzhen Code, was originally proposed by Greuter (in Taxon 65: 419. 2016), its relevance to other nothogeneric names that are condensed formulas was not apparently appreciated. Indeed, the new Ex. 5 under Art. H.6.2 presents two nothogeneric names that both involve bigeneric hybrids, originally published with a hyphen, which are accepted and used without the hyphen: ×Anthematricaria and ×Brassocattleya, having been originally published as ‘Anthe-Matricaria’ and ‘Brasso-Cattleya’, respectively. The current placement of this hyphenation rule under Art. H.6.2 suggests that it does not cover all situations for nothogeneric names that are condensed formulas. In particular, for nothogeneric names of trigeneric hybrids covered under Art. H.6.4, a parallel provision to permit deletion of hyphens in names published with one or more hyphens does not currently exist. Yet the first case cited in Ex. 7 under this Article is of one such nothogenus, ×Sophrolaeliocattleya Hurst (in J. Roy. Hort. Soc. 21: 468. 1898) (Cattleya Lindl. × Laelia Lindl. × Sophronitis Lindl.), which, although not indicated in the Example, was actually published as ‘Sophro-Lælio-Cattleya’. As such, this condensed formula was not, as Art. H.6.4 requires, “combined into a single word”, owing to the intercalated hyphens, so the nothogeneric name cannot be validly published (Art. 32.1(c)). Another related example is the case of ×Brassolaeliacattleya J.G. Fowler (in Gard. Chron., ser. 3, 41: 290. 1907, ‘Brasso-Lælia-Cattleya’), the subject of conservation proposal no. 2457 (Shaw in Taxon 65: 887. 2016), currently awaiting the judgement of the General Committee, which deferred action until after the Shenzhen Congress (see Taxon 66: 743. 2017), presumably wrongly believing the matter of its valid publication would be resolved there. The main objective of the present proposal is to address this problem by creating a new Article under Art. H.6 to clarify that when a nothogeneric name, whether bigeneric or trigeneric, is a condensed formula (see Art. H.6.2 and H.6.4) published with hyphen(s), the name can be validly published and is correctable by deletion of the hyphen(s). The new Article and its new Example, and one small change in Art. H.6 Ex. 7, are presented below. “H.6.n. The use of a hyphen instead of or in addition to a connecting vowel in a nothogeneric name that is a condensed formula is treated as an error to be corrected by deletion of the hyphen(s) (but see Art. 20.3 for non-hybrid generic names; see also Art. 60.12 for names of fossil-genera).” Consequently amend Art. H.6.2 as follows (deleted text in strikethrough): “H.6.2. The nothogeneric name of a bigeneric hybrid is a condensed formula in which the names adopted for the parental genera are combined into a single word, using the first part or the whole of one, the last part or the whole of the other (but not the whole of both) and, optionally, a connecting vowel. The use of a hyphen instead of or in addition to a connecting vowel is treated as an error to be corrected by deletion of the hyphen.” “Ex. n. The nothogeneric name ×Anthematricaria Asch. (in Ber. Deutsch. Bot. Ges. 9: (99). 1892), proposed for bigeneric hybrids with the parentage Anthemis L. × Matricaria L., was originally published as ‘Anthe-Matricaria’; the nothogeneric name ×Brassocattleya Rolfe (in Gard. Chron., ser. 3, 5: 438. 1889), proposed for bigeneric hybrids with the parentage Brassavola R. Br. × Cattleya Lindl., was originally published as ‘Brasso-Cattleya’; ×Brassolaeliacattleya J. G. Fowler (in Gard. Chron., ser. 3, 41: 290. 1907), proposed for trigeneric hybrids with the parentage Brassavola R. Br. × Cattleya Lindl. × Laelia Lindl., was originally published as ‘Brasso-Laelia-Cattleya’; ×Sophrolaeliocattleya Hurst (in J. Roy. Hort. Soc. 21: 468. 1898), proposed for trigeneric hybrids with the parentage Cattleya Lindl. × Laelia Lindl. × Sophronitis Lindl., was originally published as ‘Sophro-Laelio-Cattleya’.” Consequently amend Art. H.6 Ex. 7 as follows (deleted text in strikethrough): “Ex. 7. ×Sophrolaeliocattleya Hurst (in J. Roy. Hort. Soc. 21: 468. 1898) (Cattleya Lindl. × Laelia Lindl. × Sophronitis Lindl.);×Rodrettiopsis Moir (in Orchid Rev. 84: ix. 1976) (Comparettia Poepp. & Endl. × Ionopsis Kunth × Rodriguezia Ruiz & Pav.); ×Holttumara Holttum (see Art. H.8 Ex. 3) (Arachnis Blume × Renanthera Lour. × Vanda W. Jones ex R. Br.).”