Date: Wed, 24 Dec 2003 16:58:13 +1300
Reply-To: Conchologists of America List <CONCH-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
Sender: Conchologists of America List <CONCH-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU>
From: Andrew Grebneff <andrew.grebneff@STONEBOW.OTAGO.AC.NZ>
Subject: Re: anabathrum
Content-type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii
>Some treat C. anabathrum burryae as a separate species (e.g. Conus burryae
>Clench, 1942). I believe this is not allowed since the taxon was originally
>proposed as a subspecies. For names originally proposed as subspecies, the
>International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature needs to be petitioned
>to elevate the taxon in rank to a species.
If a "subspecies" is really distinct and does not intergrade with the
species, then it really belongs at specific rank. I don't believe
that it needs any petition, as the name is valid and available.
Dunedin, New Zealand
64 (3) 473-8863
Seashell, Macintosh & VW/Toyota van nut
I want your sinistral gastropods!
Opinions in this e-mail are my own, not those of my institution
Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
A: Why is top posting frowned upon?