3. Which Articles deal with priority vs. usage? Do you agree with the current balance of how they should be weighted?

Comments

http://www.gravatar.com/avatar/07e5156a6b0245a90f8d26913e7db5a3.jpg?d=http%3A//iczn.org/sites/all/modules/contrib/gravatar/avatar.png&s=100&r=G
Submitted by rebet on

Article 23 deals with the Principle of Priority and 23.2
states that it is not intended to upset a previously accepted name. Article 23.9
addresses the reversal of precedence and outlines the conditions of 23.9.1
which must be met in order to accept a well-used name over the original one. It
is still possible to reverse precedence if these conditions are not met but a
case must be presented to the Commission for a ruling under plenary power.

I agree with the balance of how they are weighted as it is
easier to determine the original name if it is validly published whereas there
is room for uncertainty on how often a name is used therefore the principle of
priority appears to be the more stable form of determining a name. However, due
to the history of nomenclature it is plausible for original names to only just
be discovered that would upset the stability of a species name. The option to
keep a name based on usage is therefore equally necessary to maintain
stability.

Scratchpads developed and conceived by (alphabetical): Ed Baker, Katherine Bouton Alice Heaton Dimitris Koureas, Laurence Livermore, Dave Roberts, Simon Rycroft, Ben Scott, Vince Smith