Abstract
A personal synopsis of the decisions made at the Nomenclature Section meeting of the International Botanical Congress in Melbourne in July 2011 is provided, with an emphasis on those which will affect the working practices of, or will otherwise be of interest to, mycologists. The topics covered include the re-naming of the Code, the acceptance of English as an alternative to Latin for validating diagnoses, conditions for permitting electronic publication of names, mandatory deposit of key nomenclatural information in a recognized repository for the valid publication of fungal names, the discontinuance of dual nomenclature for pleomorphic fungi, clarification of the typification of sanctioned names, and acceptability of names originally published under the zoological code. Collectively, these changes are the most fundamental to have been enacted at a single Congress since the 1950s, and herald the dawn of a new era in the practice of fungal nomenclature.
Highlights
The internationally agreed rules that regulate how fungi are named are examined and revised at each International Botanical Congress, the last published being those resulting from the Vienna Congress in 2005 (McNeill et al 2006)
I have participated in all International Botanical Congresses since that held in St Petersburg in 1975, and served on the Editorial Committee of the botanical Code since 1987
The progress made in adapting the rules to the needs of both user and practitioner mycologists over that period has been considerable
Summary
The internationally agreed rules that regulate how fungi are named are examined and revised at each International Botanical Congress, the last published being those resulting from the Vienna Congress in 2005 (McNeill et al 2006) These Congresses are held every six years, and the subsequent one in Melbourne in July 2011 was faced with a staggering 338 proposals made to modify the Vienna edition of the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature (McNeill & Turland 2011). This was the largest number to have confronted any Congress since that held in Paris in 1954. A valuable synopsis of how the current system operates is given by McNeill & Greuter (1986), while Nicolson (1991) provides an authoritative historical account of the development of the Code
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
