Author
 |
Cline, Erica |
|
Submitted to: Inoculum
Publication Type: Other Publication Acceptance Date: 11/30/2005 Publication Date: 12/15/2005 Citation: Cline, E. 2005. Implications of changes to Article 59 of the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature enacted at the Vienna Congress 2005. Inoculum 56(6):3-5. Interpretive Summary: Technical Abstract: The International Code of Botanical Nomenclature (ICBN) governs naming of plants and fungi. The Code is an evolving document, with changes implemented at International Botanical Congresses (IBC). Fungi with both sexual and asexual states present a nomenclatural challenge. Special rules have been adopted to allow the use of two names for fungal taxa that manifest themselves in both their sexual and asexual states. Many asexually reproducing fungi may not have any sexual state and, even when a sexual state is discovered, the sexual state may be encountered rarely, perhaps only under artificial conditions. In these cases, it may be desirable to retain the anamorph name. With the advent of molecular tools, some mycologists would like to move away from the use of two names for the same taxon, and use one genus name for all species in a monophyletic lineage, even if this lineage includes both sexual and exclusively asexual species. At the latest Nomenclatural Session of the IBC in Vienna, the Congress voted to amend Article 59. The changes to Article 59 allow the possibility of retaining the anamorph name for the holomorph by epitypifying the anamorph name with a specimen of the sexual state. This is intended to increase nomenclatural stability by avoiding the introduction of an unnecessary new name for the sexual state. For those who feel that the goal is to achieve one species name for one fungal taxon including both its sexual and asexual states, the changes to Article 59 are a limited step in that direction. |
