REJECTION OF NAMES
51.1. A legitimate name must not be rejected merely because it, or its epithet, is inappropriate or disagreeable, or because another is preferable or better known (but see Art. 56.1 and F.7.1), or because it has lost its original meaning.
Ex. 1. Changes such as the following are contrary to Art. 51.1: Mentha to Minthe, Staphylea to Staphylis, Tamus to Tamnus, Thamnos, or Thamnus, Tillaea to Tillia, Vincetoxicum to Alexitoxicon; and Orobanche artemisiae to O. artemisiepiphyta, O. columbariae to O. columbarihaerens, O. rapum-genistae to O. rapum or O. sarothamnophyta.
Ex. 2. Ardisia quinquegona Blume (Bijdr. Fl. Ned. Ind. 13: 689. 1825) is not to be rejected in favour of A. pentagona A. DC. (in Trans. Linn. Soc. London 17: 124. 1834) merely because the specific epithet quinquegona is a hybrid word (Latin and Greek) (contrary to Rec. 23A.3(c)).
Ex. 3. The name Scilla peruviana L. (Sp. Pl.: 309. 1753) is not to be rejected merely because the species does not grow in Peru.
Ex. 4. The name Petrosimonia oppositifolia (Pall.) Litv. (Sched. Herb. Fl. Ross. 7: 13. 1911), based on Polycnemum oppositifolium Pall. (Reise Russ. Reich. 1: 484. 1771), is not to be rejected merely because the species has leaves only partly opposite, and partly alternate, although there is another closely related species, Petrosimonia brachiata (Pall.) Bunge, that has all its leaves opposite.
Ex. 5. Richardia L. (Sp. Pl.: 330. 1753) is not to be rejected in favour of Richardsonia, as was done by Kunth (in Mém. Mus. Hist. Nat. 4: 430. 1818), merely because the name was originally dedicated to Richardson.