Clarifications needed concerning the new Article 59 dealing with pleomorphic fungi

The new rules formulated in Article 59 of the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (ICN) will cause numerous, often undesirable, name changes, when only phylogenetically defined clades are named. Our task is to name fungal taxa and not just clades. Two suggestions are made...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Walter Gams, Hans-Otto Baral, Walter M. Jaklitsch, Roland Kirschner, Marc Stadler
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMC 2012-12-01
Series:IMA Fungus
Subjects:
Online Access:http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/ima/imafung/2012/00000003/00000002/art00017
_version_ 1818758580480770048
author Walter Gams
Hans-Otto Baral
Walter M. Jaklitsch
Roland Kirschner
Marc Stadler
author_facet Walter Gams
Hans-Otto Baral
Walter M. Jaklitsch
Roland Kirschner
Marc Stadler
author_sort Walter Gams
collection DOAJ
description The new rules formulated in Article 59 of the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (ICN) will cause numerous, often undesirable, name changes, when only phylogenetically defined clades are named. Our task is to name fungal taxa and not just clades. Two suggestions are made here that may help to alleviate some disadvantages of the new system. (1) Officially an epithet coined in a list-demoted genus that is older than the oldest one available in the list-accepted genus would have to be recombined in the accepted genus. We recommend that individual authors and committees establishing lists of protected names should generally not recombine older epithets from a demoted genus into the accepted genus, when another one from pre-2013 is available in that genus. (2) Because the concepts of correlated teleomorph and anamorph genera are often incongruent, enforced congruence leads to a loss of information. Retaining the most suitable generic name is imperative, even when this is subordinated to another, list-accepted, generic name. Some kind of cryptic dual generic nomenclature is bound to persist. We therefore strongly recommend the retention of binomials in genera where they are most informative. With these recommendations, the upheaval of fungal nomenclature ensuing from the loss of the former Art. 59 can be reduced to an unavoidable minimum.
first_indexed 2024-12-18T06:29:05Z
format Article
id doaj.art-ca46f2de1d794351a2513122e2b5dc03
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2210-6340
2210-6359
language English
last_indexed 2024-12-18T06:29:05Z
publishDate 2012-12-01
publisher BMC
record_format Article
series IMA Fungus
spelling doaj.art-ca46f2de1d794351a2513122e2b5dc032022-12-21T21:17:58ZengBMCIMA Fungus2210-63402210-63592012-12-0132175177Clarifications needed concerning the new Article 59 dealing with pleomorphic fungiWalter GamsHans-Otto BaralWalter M. JaklitschRoland KirschnerMarc StadlerThe new rules formulated in Article 59 of the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (ICN) will cause numerous, often undesirable, name changes, when only phylogenetically defined clades are named. Our task is to name fungal taxa and not just clades. Two suggestions are made here that may help to alleviate some disadvantages of the new system. (1) Officially an epithet coined in a list-demoted genus that is older than the oldest one available in the list-accepted genus would have to be recombined in the accepted genus. We recommend that individual authors and committees establishing lists of protected names should generally not recombine older epithets from a demoted genus into the accepted genus, when another one from pre-2013 is available in that genus. (2) Because the concepts of correlated teleomorph and anamorph genera are often incongruent, enforced congruence leads to a loss of information. Retaining the most suitable generic name is imperative, even when this is subordinated to another, list-accepted, generic name. Some kind of cryptic dual generic nomenclature is bound to persist. We therefore strongly recommend the retention of binomials in genera where they are most informative. With these recommendations, the upheaval of fungal nomenclature ensuing from the loss of the former Art. 59 can be reduced to an unavoidable minimum.http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/ima/imafung/2012/00000003/00000002/art00017ANAMORPHKEW RULELIST-DEMOTED GENERIC NAMENOMENCLATURETELEOMORPH
spellingShingle Walter Gams
Hans-Otto Baral
Walter M. Jaklitsch
Roland Kirschner
Marc Stadler
Clarifications needed concerning the new Article 59 dealing with pleomorphic fungi
IMA Fungus
ANAMORPH
KEW RULE
LIST-DEMOTED GENERIC NAME
NOMENCLATURE
TELEOMORPH
title Clarifications needed concerning the new Article 59 dealing with pleomorphic fungi
title_full Clarifications needed concerning the new Article 59 dealing with pleomorphic fungi
title_fullStr Clarifications needed concerning the new Article 59 dealing with pleomorphic fungi
title_full_unstemmed Clarifications needed concerning the new Article 59 dealing with pleomorphic fungi
title_short Clarifications needed concerning the new Article 59 dealing with pleomorphic fungi
title_sort clarifications needed concerning the new article 59 dealing with pleomorphic fungi
topic ANAMORPH
KEW RULE
LIST-DEMOTED GENERIC NAME
NOMENCLATURE
TELEOMORPH
url http://www.ingentaconnect.com/content/ima/imafung/2012/00000003/00000002/art00017
work_keys_str_mv AT waltergams clarificationsneededconcerningthenewarticle59dealingwithpleomorphicfungi
AT hansottobaral clarificationsneededconcerningthenewarticle59dealingwithpleomorphicfungi
AT waltermjaklitsch clarificationsneededconcerningthenewarticle59dealingwithpleomorphicfungi
AT rolandkirschner clarificationsneededconcerningthenewarticle59dealingwithpleomorphicfungi
AT marcstadler clarificationsneededconcerningthenewarticle59dealingwithpleomorphicfungi