(43‐45) Three proposals to limit the principle of priority

Abstract

At present, the principle of priority can be set aside only by conservation, sanctioning or (for taxonomic synonyms) rejection. The proposals on names in current use (NCU) try to set additional bounds to the unlimited application of the principle of priority. It is not sure, however, that the NCU principle will be accepted, let alone a list of names in current use. Especially for species names, in most groups of plants the acceptance of NCU lists still is far away. The present proposal may be considered as a first step toward making people aware of the need to further limit the principle of priority, an awareness that is necessary if the principle of names in current use is to be accepted. The intention of the proposals is to put a hold to the activities of taxonomists who search obscure literature to find names of which the existence was unknown, or dig up earlier places of publications of well-known names. Two examples of the kind of exercises that would no longer be of relevance in the 21st century: Mabberley's (in Taxon 31: 65-73. 1982) list of 108 previously overlooked names of plants; and Reveal's (in Bull. Mus. Natl. Hist. Nat., B, Adansonia 13: 197-239. 1991) list with some 310 previously unnoticed but validly published and currently available generic names .... One of the names uncovered by Mabberley (1.c.) was Hydrostemma Wall. (Jun 1827), which had to be rejected against Barclaya Wall. (Dec 1827; see Brummitt in Taxon 36: 737. 1987).