Observation 93848: Xylaria cubensis (Mont.) Fr.
When: 2012-05-04
(35.0° 84.0° )
Herbarium specimen reported

Proposed Names

Please login to propose your own names and vote on existing names.

Eye3 = Observer’s choice
Eyes3 = Current consensus


Add Comment
One fungus, one name, but…
By: Dan Molter (shroomydan)
2012-07-25 04:49:46 CEST (+0200)

From wikipedia


International Botanical Congress in Melbourne in July 2011 made a change in the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants and adopted the principle “one fungus, one name”.3

When names are available for both anamorph and teleomorph states of the same fungus, the holomorph either takes the teleomorph name, or it can under some circumstances take the anamorph name if it is subsequently epitypified with a teleomorph.

After 1 January 2013, one fungus can only have one name; the system of permitting separate names to be used for anamorphs then ends.3 This means that all legitimate names proposed for a species, regardless of what stage they are typified by, can serve as the correct name for that species.3 All names now compete on an equal footing for priority regardless of the stage represented by the name-bearing type.3 In order not to render names that had been introduced in the past for separate morphs as illegitimate, it was agreed that these should not be treated as superfluous alternative names in the sense of the Code.3 It was further decided that anamorph-typified names should not be taken up to displace widely used teleomorph-typified names until the case has been considered by the General Committee established by the Congress.3 Recognizing that there were cases in some groups of fungi where there could be many names that might merit formal retention or rejection, a new provision was introduced.3 It was decided that lists of names can be submitted to the General Committee and, after due scrutiny, names accepted on those lists are to be treated as conserved over competing synonyms (and listed as Appendices to the Code).3 Lichen-forming fungi (but not lichenicolous fungi) had always been excluded from the provisions permitting dual nomenclature; the new Code will include a paragraph to make it explicit that lichen-forming fungi are excluded from the newly accepted provisions.3

My understanding is that some anamorph names will be retained. I don’t know if a decision has yet been made about Xylocoremium flabelliforme.

night time reading…
By: damon brunette (damonbrunette)
2012-07-25 03:22:19 CEST (+0200)
By: damon brunette (damonbrunette)
2012-07-24 18:23:57 CEST (+0200)

as silly and non functional as it seems, Danny said the anamorph name is no longer valid, and the species only has one name. Ill try to find the paper he sent me on it.

Is Xylocoremium flabelliforme
By: walt sturgeon (Mycowalt)
2012-07-24 04:41:58 CEST (+0200)

a defunct name?

Created: 2012-05-05 00:05:23 CEST (+0200)
Last modified: 2012-07-25 03:11:09 CEST (+0200)
Viewed: 121 times, last viewed: 2016-06-10 03:00:40 CEST (+0200)
Show Log