Validation of Pseudoditrichaceae Steere et Iwatsuki fam. nov.

Abstract

When the family name, Pseudoditrichaceae, was proposed (Steere & Iwatsuki, 1974), based on Pseudoditrichum mirabile Steere et Iwatsuki gen. et sp. nov., no Latin diagnosis was furnished for it. oversight is remedied herewith. After publication of Pseudoditrichum mirabile Steere et Iwatsuki gen. et sp. nov. (Steere & Iwatsuki, 1974) with the definite and unambiguous indication that this monotypic genus also constituted the type genus for a new family, Pseudoditrichaceae Steere et Iwatsuki, two bryological colleagues informed us that in their opinion the family name must have a Latin diagnosis in order to be valid. The Preamble to the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature (1972) states that This Code aims at the provision of a stable method of naming taxonomic groups, avoiding and rejecting the use of names which may cause error or ambiguity or science into content downloaded from 157.55.39.112 on Wed, 29 Jun 2016 06:07:49 UTC All use subject to http://about.jstor.org/terms 490 THE BRYOLOGIST [Volume 78 confusion. Our indication of the Pseudoditrichaceae as a new family was in no manner ambiguous, so that this interpretation of the Code seemed to us at first to be unduly legalistic. Our intent was obvious and there was small chance that our oversight could throw science into confusion! As a consequence of the question involved, the senior author requested the opinion of Professor Rogers McVaugh, who had served on the Editorial Committee that prepared and edited the 1972 revision of the Code (Stafleu et al., 1972). We are most grateful to him for his illuminating response: suspect that the Code of Botanical Nomenclature fails to cover your case because it must be only one time in a hundred thousand that a new species in a new genus also turns out to be a new family. The Code is very clear that for 'the name of a monotypic new genus based on a new species' (Art. 42), you may publish a combined generic and specific description or diagnosis, as you have done. Your new genus and species would therefore seem to be validly published (both) on the basis of one description. There is no logic that I can see in excluding the family from this same situation, but apparently no one has ever thought of doing it. Accordingly, as I read the Code, you have to describe the family separately, in Latin. Art. 34 specifically says that the name is not validated by 'the mere mention of the subordinate taxa included,' even, presumably, when there is only one taxon included. Although a family can hardly be considered as a subordinate taxon, we will adhere strictly to the letter of Article 34 of the Code, as recommended by Dr. McVaugh, as follows: Pseudoditrichaceae Steere et Iwatsuki fam. nov. Plantae pertenellae, forma atque magnitudine plantae Ditrichorum simulans. Peristomium duplex, erectum, exterius e 16 dentibus, dentes interni totidem externis oppositi, irregulariter divisis. Type: Pseudoditrichum mirabile Steere et Iwatsuki, Canad. Jour. Bot. 52(4): 701. 1974.