De Wikipedia, la enciclopedia libre. For the purposes of this Code , registration is the acceptance of a cultivar, Group, or grex name by an authority responsible for registering such names. The act of registration is completed by publication of such names which also ensures their establishment where necessary see Appendix I for a list of International Cultivar Registration Authorities ". For a cultivar name to be established on or after 1 January , its epithet is to comprise a word or words in any language but may not be entirely in Latin except as permitted under Art. Notwithstanding Art.

Author:JoJogrel Mibar
Language:English (Spanish)
Published (Last):6 October 2005
PDF File Size:14.90 Mb
ePub File Size:15.88 Mb
Price:Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]

Who amends the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, the participation that the Latin American Herbaria have and how it can be increased? Rico kew. Recibido: 08 marzo Aceptado: 08 septiembre How the Code is amended? The "decision" to conserve the name Acacia with a new type from Australia, one of the most heated and polarized debates over botanical nomenclature, casting doubt over the legitimacy of the procedure and botanical decision-making is taken as example.

Despite a website www. Only delegates present at the Nomenclature Section and the number of active institutional votes that they carry can decide the changes to the Code; from distributed to registered herbaria only of these were taken to Melbourne. Australia and the United States were the countries with the largest number of votes. There is little participation of Latin American Countries, in general of developing countries, how this can be increased and effective throughout herbaria institutional votes?

In this note the steps to follow up are given. Key words: nomenclature, Acacia, herbaria institutional votes. A pesar de los resultados que tuvo el sitio web www. De los votos institucionales que se proporcionaron a herbarios registrados, solo fueron llevados a Melbourne para hacer efectivos. En esta nota se dan los pasos a seguir para ello. Palabras clave: nomenclatura, Acacia, votos institucionales de herbarios.

Who makes decisions to ammend the Code? With regard to the name Acacia, on the first day when ratification of the Vienna Code took place, some session members opposed the inclusion of Acacia penninervis as the conserved type of Acacia in Appendix III conserved names of genera.

This had been introduced into the Code after "approval of the controversial proposal to retypify Acacia" at the Vienna IBC in where the "decision" to conserve the name Acacia with a new type from Australia Acacia penninervis was taken, replacing the original African type Acacia nilotica.

This effectively restricts the name of Acacia to the group of largely Australian "wattles", discontinuing its use for the true acacias, which are widespread in the tropics outside Australia with the exception of 7 native species.

The name Acacia is used well beyond the scope of the scientific community, and this implies numerous problems in other disciplines such as conservation and biogeography. This proposal triggered what has arguably been one of the most heated and polarized debates over botanical nomenclature, casting doubt over the legitimacy of the procedure and botanical decision-making Moore and Cotterill, The events that took place during the voting in Vienna have been clearly described by several authors Rijckevorsel, ; Moore , ; Brummitt, ; Rico Arce, Despite papers published by Moore et al.

On a subsequent day, time was made available to discuss 2 possible compromise proposals, but neither received majority support. A third proposal by Rijckevorsel had been printed and circulated before this second debate took place; its core was the inclusion of a new rule in Article 14 allowing a substitute name for the true acacias, supported by an example: a name of "Africacia" as a working option.

However, this proposal was not discussed formally as those opposing the Acacia retypification did not wish to do so Rijckevorsel, in ms. In other words, they have no voice in the decision-making process.

Accounts of the Melbourne discussions have been published in Taxon by McNeill and Turland and Smith and Figueiredo ; Rijckevorsel has a paper in press. What happens next? Although ill feeling on the retypification of Acacia will linger indefinitely, the matter of retypification itself should now be settled Rijckevorsel, in ms. Users are entitled to use the name Acacia sensu lato, but whenever the different lineages of Acacia are recognized as separate genera, they now have to adopt Acacia for subgenus Phyllodineae and Vachellia for subgenus Acacia.

Summing up, it is important to point out that changes to the Code are made by those who are present at the Nomenclature Section and by the number of active institutional votes that they carry. Prior to the Melbourne nomenclature session, votes were distributed to qualifying registered herbaria McNeil and Turland, , but only of these were taken to Melbourne by delegates and made effective during the various card votes of the session.

Many tropical countries were grossly under-represented or not represented at all and thus had little or no influence on the voting. Brazilian herbaria received 29 institutional votes, only 13 were represented at the nomenclature session; likewise, Argentina and Mexico obtained 19 and 14 respectively, for which only 6 and 10 were made effective. To give Latin American countries more participation, herbarium curators are able to apply for getting or increasing their institutional votes. These requests are considered by the Bureau of Nomenclature; applications must be sent to the Secretary of the IAPT, office in Bratislava office iapt-taxon.

This awareness call, especially to Latin American herbaria, has been made before by Kiesling and Prado The next nomenclature session will take place in in Shenzhen, China, in the week preceding the International Botanical Congress. Latin American botanists are in very good time to apply for, or revise the number of, institutional votes for their herbaria. This will allow them to participate in the decisions to amend the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants even if they cannot be present in China, as institutional votes can be delegated.

In this way, opinions of ecologists, conservationists and other specialists who use names that are decided on by taxonomists or the nomenclature decision-makers can be made to count.

Paul van Rijckevorsel is warmely acknowledged for his wise comments and suggestions. Brummitt, R. Acacia: a solution that should be acceptable to everybody. Taxon Kiesling, R. Darwiniana McNeill, J.

Turland, A. Monro, B. Melbourne, Australia; julio, Moore, A. The Acacia retypification debate: perspectives of African amateur botanist. Moore, G. The handling of the proposal to conserve the name Acacia at the 17 th International Botanical Congress-an attempt at minority rule. Bothalia Linnean Smith, E. Figueiredo, S. Demissew, G. Lewis, B. Schrire, L. Rico and A. Acacia, the Nomenclature Section in Melbourne, and beyond. Rico, A. Luckow, R. Kiesling and M. The Acacia controversy resulting from minority rule at the Vienna Nomenclature Section: much more than arcane arguments and complex technicalities.

Rico-Arce, L. What will happen with the name Acacia Mill.? Revista Mexicana de Biodiversidad Rijckevorsel, P. Acacia: What did happen at Vienna? Smith, G. Conserving Acacia Mill. Servicios Personalizados Revista. Similares en SciELO. Acknowledgements Paul van Rijckevorsel is warmely acknowledged for his wise comments and suggestions. Literature cited Brummitt, R. Circuito exterior, Ciudad Universitaria, Del.


Código Internacional de Nomenclatura para Plantas Cultivadas



Codigo Internacional de Nomenclatura Botanica (Codigo de Saint Louis)


Related Articles