P R E F A C E
The ‘Leningrad Code’ shows only relatively small differences
with respect to
its predecessor, the ‘Seattle Code’.
The general tendency of refinement and
bringing about minor corrections
rather than sweeping reforms to which the
first of us referred
in the preface to the Seattle Code, has continued.
Even so
there are still quite a few amendments or additions in detail,
not in the least of
course in the appendices.
The issue of stabilization was as always an important issue
at Leningrad. The
nomina specifica conservanda proposal
– a steadily recurring item provoking
lengthy discussion –
again did not make it, although the gap between ‘no’ and
‘yes’ narrows
and a tie or even an ultimate yes is perhaps in sight.
A smaller de-
gree of stabilization was built into the Code
by allowing nomina specifica re-
jicienda
in some rather special cases.
The ‘old faithfuls’,
Articles 69,
70 and
71,
were discussed again and either cancelled or heavily reformed.
For a detailed bibliography of past editions of this Code,
1867–1966, see pp.
394–397 of the 1972 edition,
the ‘Seattle Code’ (Regnum Vegetabile Vol. 82);
that information is not repeated in this edition.
For a key to the numbering of the Articles and Recommendations,
comparing
in parallel columns the numbering employed
in the previous five editions
[Stock-
holm (1952) through Seattle (1972)],
see pp. 398–402 of the 1972 edition.
Al-
though there are some errors and omissions,
the lists on those pages will be
useful for historical purposes.
The numbering of the present edition
is essen-
tially that of the previous one.
Major changes in this edition are as follows:
a) Individual paragraphs of all Articles and Recommendations
are numbered in
a decimal-like system, for easier reference.
In the process of doing this,
the Edi-
torial Committee divided some paragraphs,
combined others, changed some
Notes to paragraphs and vice versa,
and rearranged the sequence of some para-
graphs in a more logical way.
Examples were moved when necessary to posi-
tions
following the exact paragraphs to which they pertain.
b) The concept of organ-genera is eliminated for fossil plants. (See Art. 3.)
c) The principle of automatic typification
is extended to those names of taxa
above the rank of family
that are ultimately based on generic names;
applica-
tion of the principle of priority is recommended
when selecting among names
thus typified. (See
Art. 16,
Rec. 16A, and new
Rec. 16B.)
d) The Code makes clear
that it does not apply to names of organisms
treated
as bacteria,
but that it does apply to all other organisms
treated as plants
(without making the taxonomic judgment
that all plants belong in a single king-
dom). (See
Preamble 7,
Principle I,
Art. 45.4, and
Art. 65.)
XI |
______________________________________________________________________
International Code of Botanical Nomenclature, 1978 — Leningrad Code
– i –
text: © 1978, IAPT — web-edition: © 2014, Paul van Rijckevorsel (all rights reserved)
______________________________________________________________________
Preface |
e) A new name or combination published before 1953
without indication of
rank is considered validly published
but inoperative in questions of priority
except for homonymy and for certain names
to be accepted at the rank of va-
riety. (See
Art. 35.)
f)
Art. 69
is modified on the basis of the type method
and provides that a list of
names rejected under it be maintained.
Arts. 70 and
71
are deleted entirely.
g) A thorough rewriting of the section on orthography is presented. (See
Art. 73,
Rec. 73C,
Rec. 73G, and
Art. 75.)
The procedure adopted in the preparation of this edition of the Code
followed
the well established lines
accepted ever since the 1950 Stockholm Congress.
Actually the Leningrad Congress coincided
with the twenty-fifth anniversary of
the new style ‘Code’
as successor to the old rules.
The text is based upon the
decisions reached by
the Nomenclature Section of
the Twelfth International
Botanical Congress
held in Leningrad from 3 July to 10 July 1975.
The Nomen-
clature Section met in nine sessions
on 30 June and 1–4 July;
its decisions were
adopted officially by a plenary session
of the Congress on 10 July 1975.
The pro-
posals had been published in Taxon
and were presented to the Congress
in the
form of a Synopsis of Proposals
which this time was a reprint from
Taxon 24:
201–254. 1975.
The full report of the proceedings and decisions
is in the press
at Leningrad
in the care of the Organizing Committee.
A preliminary survey of
the decisions will be found in
Taxon 25: 169–174. 1976.
All participants, pro-
posers and members of nomenclature committees
and panels are greatly in-
debted to
the U.S.S.R. National Committee for the Congress,
as well as to the
Komarov Botanical Institute,
the City of Leningrad and
the Academy of Sci-
ences of the Soviet Union
for effective and important material support as well
as
for providing the workers on nomenclature
with an exquisite setting, gracious
hospitality
and an engaging ambiance in the House of the Scientists
on the banks
of the beautiful Neva river.
The
Nomencalture
Section decided to continue the publication
of the official
version of the Code
in the English, French and German languages.
These three
texts are all official,
but, should there be any inconsistency between the versions,
it is agreed to regard the English wording arbitrarily as correct.
The English
text has been drawn up and agreed upon
by all members of the Editorial Com-
mittee,
the English-speaking members having the ultimate decision
in matters
of grammar or idiom.
A new and – we hope – improved index
has been a coop-
erative effort
by several members of the Editorial committee.
The Editorial Committee met at Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A.,
at the kind in-
vitation of the University of Michigan, in November 1976.
The home institu-
tions of the members of the Editorial Committee
provided financial support
towards covering the expenses.
A full meeting remains as necessary as ever in
order to reach agreement
on the many questions (of substance as well as of de-
tail)
delegated to the Editorial Committee by the Nomenclature Section.
The
Committee is deeply grateful for the confidence shown
by the Section in leaving
numerous questions to its discretion
for final decision. The Editorial Committee
XII |
______________________________________________________________________
International Code of Botanical Nomenclature, 1978 — Leningrad Code
– ii –
text: © 1978, IAPT — web-edition: © 2014, Paul van Rijckevorsel (all rights reserved)
______________________________________________________________________
Preface |
never, of course, intends to alter the substance of proposals
accepted by the
Congress; however,
it is sometimes necessary to resolve
apparent conflicts or
contradictions,
as well as to reduce ambiguity and to clarify wording.
The French and German texts have been prepared by a subcommittee
consisting
of
Vincent Demoulin,
Werner Greuter,
Paul Hiepko
and the Rapporteur-géné-
ral.
The group benefited from the written advice given by Roger de Vilmorin,
doyen of French language botanical nomenclature;
a friend whose unavoidable
absence from both Leningrad and Geneva
was deeply regretted by his friends of
the Editorial Committee.
The group met at the Conservatoire Botanique de la
Ville de Genève
at the kind invitation of its director,
Prof. Jacques Miège, in
June 1977.
The final responsibility for the French text rested with
Vincent De-
moulin,
that for the German text with
Paul Hiepko.
Thanks are due to many persons.
The publication of the Code is a team ef-
fort.
Foremost in this team are the members of the Editorial Committee.
The
composition of this Committee is different from that after Seattle.
A new gener-
ation of members presented itself in Ann Arbor:
Demoulin, Greuter and Hiep-
ko.
Greuter was added after the Congress to replace Edmond Bonner
whose
premature death, a year after ‘Leningrad’,
was a severe blow to botanical no-
menclature as well
as to his colleagues and friends.
George Schulze and
Roger
de Vilmorin
were not in a position to continue their valuable work
for the com-
mittee
and as a result of this change of membership
the ‘middle generation’ of
members suddenly realized
that maybe the term ‘middle’
is no longer so approp-
riate.
The group in its present form, however,
works with the same spirit as its
predecessors,
characterized by friendliness
as well as strenuous personal input
and we thank our colleagues for their considerable effort
and dedication to our
common task.
We try to maintain our course of striving for precision and clarity
in interpreting the decisions of the Congress
and the intentions of the taxonomic
community.
It is obviously not possible to mention by name all those
who have made a con-
tribution to this Code.
The botanists – nearly a hundred –
serving on the no-
menclature committees
have often had to work hard and long
to deal with the
proposals for conservation.
This work behind the scenes is very important
and
should be acknowledged with great gratitude.
Relatively small and modest-
looking amendments
in the list of nomina conservanda
are often the result of
considerable dedication
and laborious bibliographic research.
Many of the sys-
tematists performing this unobtrusive
but important nomenclatural work find
it difficult
to combine this labour of love with their day-to-day duties.
Without
their efforts, however,
we would never be able to deal with the continuous stream
of questions and proposals
which is a by-product of ongoing taxonomic work.
Nomenclature serves taxonomy,
and we are fortunate to have a large group
of
dedicated taxonomists willing to assist their colleagues
through this time-con-
suming work.
Many botanists have called our attention to minor bibliographic errors
and in-
consistencies in previous Codes;
we have tried to make necessary corrections,
XIII |
______________________________________________________________________
International Code of Botanical Nomenclature, 1978 — Leningrad Code
– iii –
text: © 1978, IAPT — web-edition: © 2014, Paul van Rijckevorsel (all rights reserved)
______________________________________________________________________
Preface |
but in a document which grows from year to year
it is nearly impossible to at-
tain perfect consistency.
Users will note that
the Guide to the citation of Botani-
cal Literature
is omitted from this edition.
In the Code itself we have begun the
process
of standardizing citations of serials according to
‘B-P-H’ [Botanico-
Periodicum-Huntianum
(Hunt Botanical Library, 1968)]
and of other works
according to
‘TL-2’ [Taxonomic Literature, ed. 2 – of which only Vol. 1 (A-G)
is thus far published (Regnum Vegetabile vol. 94, 1976)].
Standardization of
citations in the Code will continue.
In closing, a few words on the precise status of this
International Code of Botani-
cal Nomenclature.
For a full description of the international organization
of bo-
tanical nomenclature we can refer to the account
in
McVaugh, Ross and Stafleu,
An annotated glossary of botanical
nomencalture
(Regnum
vegetabile vol 56,
pp. 28–30. 1968).
The final authority under which this Code is published is the
International Botanical Congress.
The Nomenclature Section of these Congresses
discusses proposals for amendment of the Code
and appoints the members of
the various nomenclature committees.
The decisions taken by the Section are
submitted for ratification
to the final plenary session of the Congress.
In be-
tween these Congresses work is carried out
by the various committees (listed in
Division III
of the Code) under the auspices of the
International Association for
Plant Taxonomy (IAPT)
which is itself a section of the
International Union of
Biological Sciences (IUBS).
All nomenclature committees together constitute
the
International Commission on Botanical Nomenclature of IUBS.
More than ever before our organization has had to stand on its own feet.
The
support of international organizations other than IAPT
is dwindling but our own
resources
are apparently sufficient to continue our activities.
It is a good sign
that also in this respect botanical
nomencalture
has come of age.
February 1978
|
FRANS A.
STAFLEU
EDWARD G. VOSS |
XIV |
______________________________________________________________________
International Code of Botanical Nomenclature, 1978 — Leningrad Code
– iv –
text: © 1978, IAPT — web-edition: © 2014, Paul van Rijckevorsel (all rights reserved)
______________________________________________________________________
[ to body of the 1978, Leningrad Code ]