Re: Re-use a name?

[Stanley Friesen <sarima@ix.netcom.com>]

At 06:30 AM 6/28/97 -0700, Jonathon Woolf wrote:
>"In the absence of an ICZN ruling"?  Does this mean that the rules on
>this point aren't automatic and questions like this are decided by the
>equivalent of a judge's court ruling? 

They are "semi-automatic".  That is the normal operation of the rules
happens "automatically", but it is recognized that sometimes applying the
letter of the rules will undermine the intent of the rules.  In this
situation there is provision for appeal to the ICZN to make a binding
ruling about a name.  They are specifically empowered to suppress or
conserve names when the rules, literally applied would cause instability.

A recent ruling of this sort occurred when they redesignated the type of
_Coelophysis bauri_ to be the same Ghost Ranch specimen used as the type
specimen of _Rioarribasaurus_.  They did this because the well known Ghost
Ranch specimens had long been studied as typical _Coelophysis_, and they
deemed it more appropriate to continue treating them as such, rather than
relegate _Coelophysis_ to designate a few poor fragmentary specimens from
the Petrified Forest.
>
>For that matter, could you or someone point me to a publication or
>perhaps an online site where I can find at least the basic rules by
>which the ICZN operates?  

You can order the Rules from the ICZN. You might try writing to:

American Association for Zoological Nomenclature
c/o National Museum of Natural History,
Washington, DC 20560

--------------
May the peace of God be with you.         sarima@ix.netcom.com
                                          sfriesen@netlock.com