Movatterモバイル変換

                                     PREFACE
 

The rules that govern the scientific naming of algae, fungi, and plants are
revised at the Nomenclature Section of an International Botanical Congress
(IBC). This edition of theInternational Code of Nomenclature for algae,
fungi, and plants embodies the decisions of the XIX IBC, which took
place in Shenzhen, China in July, 2017. ThisShenzhen Code supersedes
theMelbourne Code (McNeill & al. in Regnum Veg. 154. 2012), published
six years ago after the XVIII IBC in Melbourne, Australia, and like its
five predecessors, it is written entirely in (British) English. TheMelbourne
Code was translated into Chinese, French, Italian, Japanese, Korean,
Portuguese, Spanish, and Turkish; it is anticipated that theShenzhen
Code, too, will become available in several languages. In questions about
the meaning of provisions in translated editions of thisCode, the English
edition is definitive.

AMENDING THECODE – FROM MELBOURNE TO SHENZHEN

Altogether, 397 numbered proposals to amend theMelbourne Code were
published inTaxon, the journal of the International Association for Plant
Taxonomy (IAPT), between February 2014 and December 2016. A synop-
sis of the proposals, with comments by the Rapporteur-général and Vice-
rapporteur, appeared in February 2017 (Turland & Wiersema in Taxon 66:
217–274. 2017) and served as the basis for the preliminary guiding vote
cast by members of the IAPT, authors of the proposals, and members of the
Permanent Nomenclature Committees, as specified inDivision III of the
Melbourne Code. Tabulation of the preliminary guiding vote (“mail vote”)
was handled at the central office of the IAPT in Bratislava by Eva Senková
and Matúš Kempa. These results were published as an online “fast-track”
article on 26 June 2017 ahead of the Nomenclature Section (Turland & al.
in Taxon 66: 995–1000. 2017).

The Nomenclature Section met from Monday to Friday, 17–21 July 2017
in Lecture Hall 502, 5th Floor, Peking University HSBC Business School,
University Town, Nanshan District, Shenzhen 518055, Guangdong, China
(and was followed, from 23–29 July, by the main part of the IBC at the
Shenzhen Convention & Exhibition Center). There were 155 registered
members in attendance, carrying 427 institutional votes in addition to
one personal vote each, making a total of 582 possible votes. The Section

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– ix –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

officers, previously appointed in conformity withDivision III of the
Melbourne Code, were Sandra (Sandy) Knapp (President), Nicholas (Nick)
Turland (Rapporteur-général), John Wiersema (Vice-rapporteur), and Yun-
Fei Deng and Li Zhang (Recorders). As in Melbourne, the Recorders were
expertly assisted by Anna Monro. The discussions of the Section were
conducted in English.

Each Nomenclature Section is entitled to define its own procedural rules
within the limits set by theCode. This time, before discussions began on
proposals to amend theCode, the Section adopted the relevant procedural
rules  set  out  in  the proposed  new  Division  III,  which  was  formally
discussed and voted on later in the Section. These procedures are detailed
in the Report of Congress action mentioned in the next paragraph. Of the
397 published proposals to amend theMelbourne Code, 113 were accepted
and 103 were referred to the Editorial Committee; an additional seven were
accepted from among 16 new proposals made from the floor of the Section.

The rules of theShenzhen Code became effective immediately upon accept-
ance of the resolution, moved on behalf of the Section at the closing plenary
session of the XIX IBC on 29 July 2017, that the decisions and appointments
of the Nomenclature Section be approved. The “Report of Congress action on
nomenclature proposals”, detailing the committees and officers appointed
by the IBC and the results of the proposals, was published as an online “fast-
track” article on 14 August 2017 (Turland & al. in Taxon 66: 1234–1245.
2017). The full, day-to-day proceedings of the Section will form a sepa-
rate publication, planned for late 2018 or 2019. The audio recordings of the
Section were transcribed by Pacific Transcription, Indooroopilly, Australia,
between November 2017 and January 2018, co-ordinated by Anna Monro
and financially supported by the IAPT. The transcription will be edited into
the usual indirect speech format of previous Nomenclature Section Reports
(see, e.g.,Flann & al. in PhytoKeys 41: 1–289. 2014 [Melbourne] andFlann
& al. in PhytoKeys 45: 1–341. 2015 [Vienna]).

The Nomenclature Section also elected the Editorial Committee for the
Shenzhen Code. As is traditional, and in accordance withDiv. III Prov.
7.4, the Nominating Committee proposed members of the Section who
were physically present there to serve on the Editorial Committee, with the
Rapporteur-général and Vice-rapporteur serving as the Chair and Secretary,
respectively. The Editorial Committee was increased in size from the pre-
vious 14 to the present 16 members to ensure representation from each
continent, to include expertise in the main groups of organisms covered

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– x –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

by theCode (vascular plants, bryophytes, fungi, and algae, both extant and
fossil), and to improve gender balance (there are now three women on the
Committee, compared with one previously).

As usual, the Editorial Committee had a mandate to deal with matters spe-
cifically referred to it, to incorporate into the newCode the changes agreed
by the Section, to clarify any ambiguous wording so long as the meaning
is not changed, to ensure consistency and optimal placement of provisions
while retaining the present numbering insofar as possible, and to add (or
remove) Examples to best illustrate the provisions.

A draft of the main body of theShenzhen Code, incorporating the changes
decided by the Section, was prepared between August and October 2017
by eight members of the Editorial Committee, as follows: Barrie (Art.
16–28), Greuter (Art. 60–62, with restructuring ofArt. 60), May (Chapter
F), McNeill (Art. 51–58), Monro (Art. 46–50,Chapter H), Price (Glossary),
Turland (Preamble,Principles,Art. 29–45,Division III), and Wiersema
(Art. 1–14). This draft of theCode was distributed by e-mail to the full
Committee on 16 October 2017. It was updated according to comments
subsequently received from the members and was used at the Editorial
Committee meeting as the basis for discussion.

The full Editorial Committee met from 11–15 December 2017 at the
Botanischer Garten und Botanisches Museum Berlin, Germany, for five
days of hard work: scrutinizing the entireCode, reviewing not only the
changes made in Shenzhen and the Examples referred to the Committee,
but also reviewing the existing wording and finding new Examples where
necessary. Essential details of the newChapter F were decided, as was
how to incorporate protected names (Art. F.2, formerlyArt. 14.13) into the
Appendices. It was an intense but highly productive week.

Following the meeting, a revised draft of theShenzhen Code was completed
and distributed to all Editorial Committee members on 13 January 2018
for further scrutiny. After a multitude of comments and some five weeks
of e-mail discussions, a near-final draft of theCode was compiled and cir-
culated to all members on 21 February. After a final round of checking
and correcting, the finished text was sent to Franz Stadler, the Production
Editor ofRegnum Vegetabile, on 26 March to begin the formatting and page
layout. The Index of scientific names, compiled by Knapp and Turland, and
the Subject index, compiled by Monro, followed shortly afterward. After
formatting, page layout, proofreading, and final corrections, theShenzhen
Code was sent to Koeltz Botanical Books for publication.

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xi –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

NAMES OF ORGANISMS TREATED AS FUNGI

The most extreme change to theCode resulting from the Shenzhen IBC
was the Nomenclature Section’s decision that future proposals to amend the
Code relating solely to names of organisms treated as fungi will be decided
exclusively by the Nomenclature Session of an International Mycological
Congress (IMC), the decisions of which will be binding on the next IBC.
However, the IMC will have no authority to amend any other provisions of
theCode. If there is any doubt as to whether proposals to amend theCode
relate solely to names of fungi, the General Committee in consultation with
the Nomenclature Committee for Fungi has the final say. These new rules
were developed by the Special Subcommittee on Governance of theCode
with respect to Fungi (May & al. in Taxon 65: 918–920;May in Taxon 65:
921–925. 2016), established by the Melbourne IBC of 2011 to report to the
Shenzhen IBC, and are included in the newDivision III, Provisions for
Governance of theCode, which is discussed below.

FUNGAL PROVISIONS NOW IN CHAPTER F

A significant amendment to the proposal of the Special Subcommittee on
Governance of theCode with respect to Fungi was accepted at the Section,
namely to bring together all the provisions of theCode that deal solely
with names of organisms treated as fungi into a special Chapter, which has
been calledChapter F (the “F” standing, of course, for fungi), so that the
IMC has exclusive authority over this Chapter and the IBC has exclusive
authority over the rest of theCode.Chapter F immediately followsArt.
62 and consists of nine Articles, numberedArt. F.1–F.9 (parallelingArt.
H.1–H.12 on the names of hybrids inChapter H), with theKey to the re-
numbering of Articles, Notes, and Recommendations on p. xxix showing
which provisions in theMelbourne Code have been moved toChapter F
and which are new.Art. F.1 concerns the nomenclatural starting-point for
fungi, extracted fromArt. 13.1.Art. F.2 permits names of fungi, submit-
ted as lists, to be protected and included in the Appendices of theCode
(Art. 14.13 of theMelbourne Code). In this Article, the term “protected”
was introduced in Shenzhen along with an expanded concept that includes
lichen-forming fungi and treats protected names as conserved against com-
peting unlisted synonyms and homonyms.Art. F.3 concerns sanctioned
names and includes the whole of the formerArt. 15, also drawing together
some material on sanctioning previously included in other Articles. The
sanctioning works formerly mentioned under starting-points inArt. 13.1

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xii –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

(in which they had ceased to be starting-points in theSydneyCode of 1983)
have been moved toArt. F.3.1. A sanctioned name may be indicated by
adding “: Fr.” or “: Pers.” to a formal citation, and there is now, underRec.
F.3A.1, an alternative means of indicating them by adding “nom. sanct.”
(nomen sanctionatum) to the citation.Art. F.4 rules on the rank-denoting
term “tribus” in Fries’sSystema mycologicum and is the formerArt. 37.9.
Art. F.5 concerns registration of fungal names and includes the former
Art. 42. In addition to the requirement to register nomenclatural novelties,
starting on 1 January 2019 designation of a lectotype, neotype, or epitype
will require citation of an identifier issued by a recognized repository (Art.
F.5.4).Art. F.6 andF.7 concern rejection of names, whereArt. F.6 is a new
rule that a fungal name published on or after 1 January 2019 is illegitimate
if it is a later homonym of a prokaryotic or protozoan name.Art. F.7 is
the former Art. 56.3, permitting names of fungi, submitted as lists, to be
rejected and included in the Appendices of theCode, although as yet no
such lists of names have been approved.Art. F.8 is the formerArt. 59 on
names of fungi with a pleomorphic life cycle, andArt. F.9 is the former
Art. 60.13 on orthography of epithets of fungal names derived from the
generic name of an associated organism. Comprehensive re-numbering of
the provisions fromArt. 15 onward has been avoided in this edition of the
Code by retaining for the sake of clarity and continuity “Article 15” and
“Article 59” as headings in the regular sequence, but with cross-references
toChapter F to which their content has been transferred.

The introduction toChapter F includes an emphatic reminder that most
of the rest of theCode applies to names of fungi just as much as it does
to names of algae and plants, and thatChapter F is certainly not the only
part of theCode relevant to mycologists. An annotated list of particularly
relevant provisions in other parts of theCode is provided.

BecauseChapter F may be amended by either or both of the International
Mycological Congresses in 2018 and 2022, mycologists should always
consult the online version of theCode, where the amendments will be
incorporated in such a way that it is clear that they originated from a
specific IMC.

GOVERNANCE OF THECODE – A NEW DIVISION III

The second major change to theCode accepted at the Shenzhen IBC is the
replacement ofDivision III, the Provisions for Governance of theCode,

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xiii –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

with an almost completely new and much-expanded version. This was
developed by the Special Committee on By-laws for the Nomenclature
Section (Knapp & al. in Taxon 65: 661–664;665–669. 2016) established
by the Melbourne IBC to report to Shenzhen. The Committee decided
that the operating procedures of the Nomenclature Section and, during the
period between IBCs, of the Permanent Nomenclature Committees, were
largely based on tradition, partly recorded in various reports published
mostly inTaxon, but partly also surviving in the memories of individuals
(e.g. the Rapporteur-général) from one IBC to another. It was decided
that, to protect this knowledge, stabilize practice over time, and to make
nomenclature less arcane, these traditions should be crystallized into
actual provisions of theCode, in an updated and expandedDivision III.
The majority of the newDivision III reflects current practice, although
some procedures are new, notably those concerning institutional votes
(Prov. 3), which were developed by the Special Committee on Institutional
Votes (Funk & Turland in Taxon 65: 1449–1454. 2016) and those on
proposals to amend theCode relating solely to names of fungi (Prov.
8), developed by the Special Subcommittee on Governance of theCode
with respect to Fungi, as mentioned above.Prov. 1 consists of general
provisions on governance,Prov. 2 concerns proposals to amend the
Code,Prov. 4 defines the roles and responsibilities of the Nomenclature
Section,Prov. 5 governs procedure and voting at the Nomenclature
Section,Prov. 6 specifies the reports that will appear after an IBC,
andProv. 7 details the nine Permanent Nomenclature Committees and
their membership, functions, and procedural rules. There are two new
Permanent Nomenclature Committees: the Committee on Institutional
Votes and the Registration Committee. The Committees for Vascular
Plants, Bryophytes, Fungi, Algae, and Fossils are now collectively known
as “Specialist Committees” and what were previously called Special
Committees (established by one IBC to report to the next, with a specific
mandate) become “Special-purpose Committees”.

Other new rules inDivision III include the method by which the Bureau of
Nomenclature is appointed. The President of the Nomenclature Section is
now elected by the General Committee and the Vice-rapporteur is appointed
by the Rapporteur-général and approved by the General Committee. This
makes the General Committee responsible for these officers instead of the
Organizing Committee of an IBC, the members of which do not necessar-
ily have nomenclatural experience.
 

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xiv –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

GOVERNANCE OF FUNGAL PROVISIONS

As specified inDivision III, the IMC operates along much the same prin-
ciples as the IBC, except that it has a Fungal NomenclatureSession (not
Section), with a Fungal Nomenclature Bureau comprising a Chair, Secretary,
and  Deputy  Secretary,  who  are  equivalent  to  President,  Rapporteur-
général, and Vice-rapporteur, respectively. A preliminary guiding vote is
organized prior to an IMC, but there are no institutional votes at a Fungal
Nomenclature Session. The Rapporteur-général is invited to attend the
Session as a non-voting advisor. The Session has its own Nominating
Committee and elects the Secretary of the Fungal Nomenclature Bureau
for the next IMC and the members of the Nomenclature Committee for
Fungi which, in turn, nominates a member of the Editorial Committee.
Relevant publications concerning proposals to amendChapter F of the
Code are published in the journalIMA Fungus instead ofTaxon. The rel-
evant Provisions ofDivision III areProv. 1.4 andfootnote,4.13,7.1(g),7.4,
7.8,7.10,7.14, and8.1–8.12.

Note that for individual proposals concerning fungal names (including
names of fossil fungi) there is no change to the procedure to conserve or
reject names or suppress works, nor to the procedure to request binding
decisions. All such individual proposals or requests that concern names of
fungi must continue to be submitted to the General Committee, which will
refer them for examination to the relevant specialist committees, and sub-
mission is currently effected by publication inTaxon, not inIMA Fungus.
However, lists of names proposed for protection underArt. F.2.1 or rej-
ection underArt. F.7.1 must be submitted to the General Committee by pub-
lication inIMA Fungus.

REGISTRATION OF ALGAL AND PLANT NAMES

The third major change to theCode in Shenzhen was the acceptance of
most of the proposals developed by the Special Committee on Registration
of Algal and Plant Names (including fossils) (Barkworth & al. in Taxon 65:
656–658;670–672. 2016). These are now included inArt. 42 (with the con-
tent of theMelbourne Code Art. 42, which does not concern algal or plant
names, transferred toChapter F, underArt. F.5). The mechanism by which
registration of algal and plant names could operate is laid out inArt. 42.1–
42.3, although such registration is not yet a requirement for valid publica-
tion and cannot become so before the XX IBC in Rio de Janeiro in 2023.

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xv –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

A Registration Committee has been established to assist with the design,
implementation, monitoring, and functioning of nomenclatural repositories
and to advise the General Committee (seeDiv. III Prov. 7).

OTHER AMENDMENTS TO THECODE

Numerous other, smaller changes to theCode were made in Shenzhen, and
they are discussed below. The following list is not intended to cover every
change, but it includes the more important items.

The rules inArt. 6 on defining the status of a name as either a replacement
name or the name of a new taxon have been revised. While a replacement
name is normally proposed as an explicit substitute (avowed substitute) for
an earlier name (Art. 6.11), a name not explicitly proposed as a substitute
may nevertheless be a replacement name (Art. 6.12), or be treated as either
a replacement name or the name of a new taxon (Art. 6.13). An incorrect
statement about the status of a name, e.g. name of a new taxon, new com-
bination, or replacement name, does not preclude its valid publication with
a different status (Art. 6.14).

Art. 7.5 has been refined to make clearer how a name that is illegitimate
because it was nomenclaturally superfluous when published (Art. 52) is
typified. The clause concerning a subordinate taxon not including the
intended type of the illegitimate name has been separated asArt. 7.6.

UnderArt. 8.2, the definition of a gathering, which was only implicit in the
Melbourne Code, has been made explicit in afootnote.

The definition of a holotype inArt. 9.1 has been amended to show that a
holotype is the one specimen or illustration indicated by the author as the
type or, when not so indicated, used by the author. For older names, where no
type was indicated, it is often impossible to be sure that the author used only
a single specimen or illustration, because specimens may have been in the
author’s possession that have since been lost or destroyed. Moreover, mention
of a single specimen or illustration in the protologue is not to be interpreted
as indication of the type, except underArt. 40.3, which applies only for the
purpose ofArt. 40.1, i.e. only to names published on or after 1 January 1958,
and ceases to apply on 1 January 1990 when one must explicitly designate
a type using the word “typus” or “holotypus” or an equivalent (Art. 40.6).

Art. 9.4 has been amended to make it clear that original material includes
illustrations published as part of the protologue. Also, specimens and illus-

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xvi –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

trations are original material if the author associated them with the taxon
and they were available to the author at the appropriate time. This replaces
the rather awkward requirement,first introduced in theTokyo Code of 1994,
to show that the validating description or diagnosis was based on certain
specimens or illustrations in order for them to qualify as original material.

The notion of “second-step” lectotypification or neotypification underArt.
9.17, where a first type designation is later found to refer to a single gath-
ering but to more than one specimen, has been extended to apply also to
epitypification.

UnderArt. 9.19 of theMelbourne Code, a lectotype or neotype that was
in serious conflict with the protologue could be superseded if another
element was available that did not conflict. However, if all the elements of
original material conflicted, the only options were to accept the consequent
nomenclatural disruption or to propose the name for conservation with
a conserved type. Under the amendedArt. 9.19, a conflicting lectotype
may be superseded only by a non-conflicting element; and when no such
elements exist, a neotype may be designated.

Since 1 January 2001,Art. 9.23 has required use of the term “lectotypus”
or “neotypus” or an equivalent for the designation of a lectotype or neo-
type. When designating an epitype, one must now use the term “epitypus”
or an equivalent, and this is retroactive to 2001, which should not cause any
problems because presumably all epitype designations must have used such
a term since the concept first entered theTokyo Code of 1994.

The Special Committee on Publications Using a Largely Mechanical Method
of Selection of Types (Art. 10.5(b)) developed a set of proposals (McNeill
& al. in Taxon 65: 1441–1442;1443–1448. 2016) to deal with the old prob-
lem of type choices that used a largely mechanical method of selection,
e.g. by authors following theAmerican Code of Botanical Nomenclature
(Arthur & al. in Bull. Torrey Bot. Club 34: 172–174. 1907). The propos-
als were accepted in Shenzhen. Under an amendedArt. 10.5, such type
choices are supersedable unless they have been “affirmed” by a subsequent
selection of the same type not using such a method.Art. 10.6 defines “a
largely mechanical method of selection”, andArt. 10.7 lays out the criteria
by which it can be determined that an author used such a method.

Another change toArt. 10.5 was the deletion of the redundant clause (a),
which concerned supersession of a type that seriously conflicted with the
protologue. Either such an element is part of the protologue, and cannot

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xvii –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

therefore conflict with it, or otherwise supersession is already permitted
byArt. 10.2.

The correct name for a taxon below the rank of genus could be determined
underArt. 11.4 of theMelbourne Code, except when the resulting combi-
nation could not be validly published (because it would be a tautonym) or
when it would be illegitimate (because it would be a later homonym). In
such cases, there was no explicit guidance to determine the correct name.
A new final sentence ofArt. 11.4 now explains what is to be done, i.e. the
final epithet of the next earliest legitimate name in the same rank is to be
used, if available, or else a replacement name or the name of a new taxon
may be published.

InArt. 14.3 a sentence has been added to rule that the application of con-
served and rejected names of nothogenera is determined by a statement of
parentage, not by the type, which such names do not have according to Art.
H.9.1. The amendment was sparked by the case of ×Brassolaeliocattleya
J. G. Fowler, which was recently proposed for conservation with that spell-
ing against two earlier synonyms (Shaw in Taxon 65: 887. 2016).

Amendments toArt. 14.15 now permit the date of conservation of a name
to be determined. TheCode was previously silent as to this date, which can
be important, especially in determining whether or not a name was nomen-
claturally superfluous when published, becauseArt. 52.2(c) permits defi-
nite inclusion of type to be effected by citation of thepreviously conserved
type. For names conserved from 1954 onward, conservation takes effect
upon effective publication of the General Committee’s approval of the rel-
evant conservation proposal, and this can be looked up in the online data-
base of the Appendices of theCode (http://botany.si.edu/references/codes
/props/index.cfm). This also applies to names protected underArt. F.2.

When the previous Editorial Committee was preparing theMelbourne
Code, it shied away from universally changing the words “based on”
to “formed from” inArt. 16–19, where this applied to an automatically
typified suprageneric name formed from a generic name, e.g.Asteraceae
formed fromAster, whereas “based on” could wrongly imply thatAster was
the basionym ofAsteraceae. Following a proposal referred to the Editorial
Committee in Shenzhen, “based on” has been changed to “formed from”
wherever appropriate throughout theCode.

Art. 16.3 has been amended so that names of algae at the ranks of division
or phylum and subdivision or subphylum now end in-phyta and-phytina,

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xviii –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

respectively, instead of-phycota and-phycotina as in theMelbourne Code.
However, for names of algae at the ranks of class and subclass, the endings
-phyceae and-phycidae are still required.

The rules on electronic publication introduced at the Melbourne IBC
have for the most part proved resilient. The most controversial aspect has
perhaps been the use of preliminary page numbers in articles published
online ahead of inclusion in a paginated online and/or print issue or volume
of a journal. It had been suggested that preliminary page numbers were
evidence of a “preliminary version that was, or is to be, replaced by a version
that the publisher considers final”, which underArt. 30.2 of theMelbourne
Code would not have been effectively published. In theShenzhen Code,
the emphasis has been shifted to thecontent of the electronic publication,
which is ruled as excluding volume, issue, article, and page numbers (Art.
30.3), so that when there is evidence that thecontent is merely preliminary
and was, or is to be, replaced by content that the publisher considers final,
only the version with that final content is effectively published (Art. 30.2).

Rec. 30A.1, urging that preliminary and final versions of an electronic pub-
lication should be clearly indicated as such upon issue, has been reinforced
with the advice that the phrase “Version of Record” should only be used to
indicate a final version in which the content will not change.

The possibility for a publication to be suppressed underArt. 34.1 and
included inApp. I, so that new names at specified ranks in that publica-
tion are not validly published, has been extended to render ineffective any
nomenclatural act in the publication that is associated with any name at the
specified ranks.Art. 34.2 has also been amended to rule that suppression
has retroactive effect.

UnderArt. 36.3, alternative names published on or after 1 January 1953
are not validly published. The definition of alternative names has been
amended so that, not only are they “two or more different names based on
the same type … proposed simultaneously for the same taxon by the same
author”, but they are names “accepted simultaneously … and accepted as
alternatives by that author in the same publication”. If these criteria apply,
none of these names,if new, is validly published.

Art. 38.4 permits binding decisions as to whether or not a name is validly
published when it is doubtful whether a descriptive statement satisfies the
requirement ofArt. 38.1(a). It is now ruled that such binding decisions have
retroactive effect.

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xix –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

As mentioned above underArt. 9.1 on holotypes, the second sentence of
Art. 40.3 has been amended to make it clear that it applies only for the
purpose ofArt. 40.1, i.e. only for the indication of a type as a requirement
for valid publication of the name of a new taxon of the rank of genus or
below published on or after 1 January 1958. All the other Articles ofArt.
40 were already explicitly limited by date and none applied to names pub-
lished prior to 1958.

Art. 40.8 is new, and requires that, for names published on or after 1 January
2019, when the type is a culture, the protologue must include a statement
that the culture is preserved in a metabolically inactive state.

Author citation has been dauntingly complicated for several editions of the
Code, but a newArt. 46 Note 1 (followingArt. 46.1) may make things
a little easier by pointing out that “A name of a taxon is attributed to the
author(s) of the publication in which it appears … unless one or more of the
provisions ofArt. 46 rules otherwise.”

Art. 46.4 rules that a validly published name taken up from a different
“name” that was not validly published (i.e. a different designation) is to be
attributed only to the authors of the validly published name. The scope of
the rule has now been extended so that it no longer applies only to binary
names and designations (i.e. at specific rank).

Art. 52.2 lists the ways in which definite inclusion of the type of a name
may be effected for the purpose ofArt. 52.1, concerning nomenclatural
superfluity. One of these ways is “by citation of the name itself or any name
homotypic at that time”. A new rule,Art. 52.3, rules that such citation
of a name can be effected “by a direct and unambiguous reference to it”,
which could be citation of its “original sequential number or exact diag-
nostic phrase name”, with the latter meaning, e.g., a Linnaean polynomial
rather than its corresponding binomial. In addition, the newArt. 52 Note 3
points out that citation of a later isonym can in some cases be equivalent to
citation of the name itself.

Art. 53.4 permits binding decisions as to whether or not names are to be
treated as homonyms when it is doubtful whether they or their epithets are
sufficiently alike to be confused. It is now ruled that such binding decisions
have retroactive effect.

Cross-Code homonymy is dealt with underArt. 54.1, where two clauses
are new. First, a name of an organism covered by and validly published
under theInternational Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants,

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xx –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

but originally published for a taxon under anotherCode, is illegitimate if it
is unavailable for use under that otherCode, usually because of homonymy
(Art. 54.1(b)(1)). Second, a name of a genus is treated as an illegitimate later
homonym if it is spelled identically with an earlier intergeneric graft hybrid
“name” established under theInternational Code of Nomenclature for
Cultivated Plants (Art. 54.1(c)). Also concerning cross-Code homonymy,
the newArt. F.6.1, mentioned underChapter F above, rules that a fungal
name published on or after 1 January 2019 is illegitimate if it is a later
homonym of a prokaryotic or protozoan name.

Art. 55.4 is new, and explicitly allows a combination originally placed
under a species or generic name that is a later homonym to be placed under
the respective earlier homonym (where it is in effect the same combination)
without any change to authorship or date of valid publication.

Art. 56.3 has been augmented to rule that the rejection of a name under
eitherArt. 56 orF.7 takes effect on the date of effective publication of the
General Committee’s approval of the relevant rejection proposal. As with
conservation or protection proposals, this can be looked up in the online
database of the Appendices of theCode.

Art. 57.2, which concerned a particular situation among names of pleo-
morphic fungi, was not transferred toChapter F but was deleted as a result
of a proposal accepted in Shenzhen.

In response to a proposal referred to the Editorial Committee in Shenzhen,
Art. 60, dealing with orthography of names, has been restructured, arrang-
ing the rules into a more logical order and eliminating the two “back-door
rules” wherebyArt. 60.8 enforcedRec. 60G.1(a) whileArt. 60.12 enforced
Rec. 60C.1. The relevant material from those two Recommendations has
now been incorporated into the rules, asArt. 60.8 on terminations and
Art. 60.10 on compounding forms.

The  new Art. 60.6 may  seem  superficially  similar  to Art. 60.5  but,
whereasArt. 60.5 concerns use of the lettersu, v ori, j usedinterchange-
ably or in any other way incompatible with moderntypographical prac-
tices,Art. 60.6 concerns their use in any way incompatible with modern
nomenclatural practices (hencejaponicus, not‘iaponicus’), and addition-
ally contains rules on transcription of the Greek diphthong ευ aseu notev
(henceEuonymus, not‘Evonymus’).

Art. 60.12 is also new and rules that a hyphen in the name of a fossil-genus
is always treated as an error to be corrected by deletion of the hyphen. In

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xxi –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

non-fossil generic names, a hyphen present in the protologue must be main-
tained and can only be removed through conservation.

Finally, the former App. I, on the names of hybrids, is no longer an Appendix
but part of the main body of theCode, following a proposal accepted in
Shenzhen. The previous numbering of its Articles (Art. H.1–H.12) has
been maintained, and it formsChapter H (the “H” standing for hybrids),
immediately followingChapter F and immediately precedingDivision III.

BIBLIOGRAPHIC REFERENCES IN THE EXAMPLES

The Editorial Committee was concerned about inconsistency in the
Examples, whereby names were followed, in parentheses, by either the year
of publication or the full bibliographic reference. There had been a ration-
ale for this difference in citation: names that could be found in nomenclatu-
ral indices (e.g. the International Plant Names Index [IPNI]) were cited
with the year only, whereas names more difficult to find, such as names
of infraspecific taxa published prior to 1976 or names of fossil-taxa, were
provided with a full reference. However, sometimes full references were
provided when names could readily be found in indices, partly as a result
of those indices having been developed since the Examples entered the
Code (e.g. Index Fungorum, MycoBank, and Index Nominum Algarum)
and, conversely, sometimes only the year was cited when the full refer-
ence would not be easy to find. Rather than delete references already pro-
vided, the Editorial Committee decided that whenever a date was cited it
should be expanded to a full reference, thus making theCode more self-
contained. Sandra Knapp is especially thanked for completing the arduous
task of looking up and inserting most of these references, which were then
reviewed by the Rapporteur-général.

THE GLOSSARY

TheGlossary has retained its basic structure but has been revised and
updated. New entries in theGlossary include: “affirmation”, “attributed”,
“identifier”, “nomenclatural act”, “pro synonymo”, “protected name”, and
“superseded”, while some existing entries have been substantially revised,
e.g. “autonym”, “holotype”, and “rank”; the entry for “alternative family
name” has been changed to “nomen alternativum” to accord with the pre-
ferred term in theCode. This reflects the fundamental role of theGlossary,
which is strictly to explain terms used in theCode, and where possible to

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xxii –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

do so using the precise wording associated with these terms in theCode.
The Glossary does not seek to cover all terms useful in the nomencla-
ture of algae, fungi, and plants; for that, users can refer to a work such as
Hawksworth,Terms used in Bionomenclature (2010; online athttps://www
.gbif.org/document/80577).

THE APPENDICES

The Appendices of theCode (excludingthe former App. I, nowChapter H,
on names of hybrids) have been maintained over the last several years by
John Wiersema as an online database currently hosted by the Department
of Botany at the Smithsonian National Museum of Natural History in
Washington, DC (http://botany.si.edu/references/codes/props/index.cfm).
They will continue to be available online in this form, while the possibility
of publication as printed matter or in Portable Document Format (PDF) is
not precluded.

Whenthe former App. I (names of hybrids) becameChapter H, the
remaining Appendices required re-numbering. The Editorial Committee
decided thatthe former App. VI (suppressed works), could logically become
the newApp. I, because its impact can affect names at all ranks.App. II–V
therefore remain unchanged, andthe former App. VII andVIII (binding
decisions), which were relatively new to theCode, becomeApp. VIand
VII, respectively. The lists of protected names of fungi (Art. F.2) approved
in Shenzhen are incorporated as individual names, indicated as protected,
inApp. IIA,III, andIV according to their rank. No lists of rejected names
of fungi (Art. F.7) have yet been approved.

FORMATTING AND STANDARDS USED IN THECODE

Recent editions of theCode have used three different sizes of type, with
the Recommendations and Notes set in smaller type than the Articles, and
the Examples and footnotes in smaller type than the Recommendations
and Notes. These type sizes, which have been maintained in this edition,
reflect the distinction between mandatory rules (Articles), complementary
information or advice (Notes and Recommendations), and explanatory
material (Examples and footnotes). Notes, which explain something that
may not at first be readily apparent but is covered explicitly or implicitly
elsewhere in theCode, are appropriately identified (at least in the print
edition of theCode) with an “i” for “information”, highlighted in the

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xxiii –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

same way as the Article numbers. Notes have binding effect but, unlike
Articles, do not introduce any new provision or concept. Examples are
distinguished, in addition to the smaller font size, by being indented. There
are 19 Examples that illustrate particular, lettered clauses of Articles (Art.
9.19,10.7,36.1,41.8, and54.1), in which case the respective letter is cited in
parentheses at the beginning of the Example, e.g. “(a)”.

As in all recent editions, scientific names under the jurisdiction of theCode,
irrespective of rank, are consistently printed initalic type. TheCode sets no
binding standard in this respect, as typography is a matter of editorial style
and tradition, not of nomenclature. Nevertheless, editors and authors, in
the interest of international uniformity, may wish to consider following the
practice exemplified by theCode, which has been well received in general
and is followed in a number of botanical and mycological journals. To set
off scientific names even better, italics are not used for technical terms and
other words in Latin, although they are still used for word elements that are
part of a scientific name.

The Editorial Committee has tried hard to achieve uniformity in biblio-
graphic style and formal presentation. Author citations of scientific names
appearing in theCode are standardized in conformity with Brummitt &
Powell,Authors of plant names (1992), updated as necessary from the
International Plant Names Index (http://www.ipni.org/), albeit with addi-
tional spacing, as mentioned inRec. 46A Note 1. The titles of books in
bibliographic citations are abbreviated in conformity withTaxonomic
literature, ed. 2 (TL-2;Stafleu & Cowan in Regnum Veg. 94,98,105,
110,112,115,116. 1976–1988;Supplements 1–6 by Stafleu & Mennega
in Regnum Veg. 125,130,132,134,135,137. 1992–2000;Supplements 7
& 8 by Dorr & Nicolson in Regnum Veg. 149,150. 2008 & 2009; online
athttp://www.sil.si.edu/digitalcollections/tl-2/index.cfm) or, when not in
TL-2, by analogy, but always with capital initial letters. For journal titles,
the abbreviations follow Bridson & al.,BPH-2. Periodicals with botanical
content. Constituting a second edition of Botanico-periodicum-huntianum
(2004; online athttp://huntbotanical.org/databases/show.php?1) or, when
not inBPH-2, by analogy. Standard herbarium codes follow Thiers,Index
herbariorum (continuously updated; online athttp://sweetgum.nybg.org
/science/ih/).
 
 
 
 

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xxiv –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

We first thank our fellow members of the Editorial Committee for their
hard work, patience, helpfulness, and friendship, and acknowledge the sup-
port for their work on nomenclature by their respective institutions.

We are grateful to the following for their contributions at the Nomenclature
Section: De-Yuan Hong for an inspiring opening speech at the Section; the
Recorders, Li Zhang and Yun-Fei Deng; the Recorders’ Assistant, Anna
Monro; the Vice-presidents, Renée Fortunato, Werner Greuter, De-Zhu
Li, John McNeill, Gideon Smith, and Karen Wilson; the members of the
Nominating Committee, Alina Freire-Fierro, Vicki Funk, Dmitry Geltman,
David Hawksworth, Regina Hirai, Jin-Shuang Ma, David Middleton,
Gideon Smith, and Kevin Thiele; the Tellers, Heather Lindon, Melanie
Schori, Gustavo Shimizu, and Yi-Hua Tong; and of course the Organizing
Committee of the IBC and all the local staff and volunteers in Shenzhen
who helped the Section run smoothly.

The Council and officers of the IAPT, including its successive Presidents,
Vicki Funk and Patrick Herendeen, and Secretary-General, Karol Marhold,
are thanked for maintaining the IAPT’s traditional commitment to nomen-
clature by funding the Editorial Committee meeting in Berlin. Eva
Senková, the Managing Secretary at the IAPT central office in Bratislava,
is especially thanked for her help with the preliminary guiding vote, insti-
tutional votes, and travel logistics and expenses for the IBC and Editorial
Committee meeting. Matúš Kempa, also at the IAPT central office, pro-
vided IT support for the preliminary guiding vote.

Thomas Borsch, Director of the Botanischer Garten und Botanisches
Museum Berlin (BGBM), Freie Universität Berlin, is thanked for hosting
the Editorial Committee meeting, providing a conference room, library
facilities, and internet access. We are also grateful to Gabriela Michaelis,
in the Directorate at BGBM, for valuable help with the logistics of the
meeting. The staff of the BGBM Library are also thanked for providing
publications that were not available online. The staff of the Library of the
Natural History Museum, London, helped Sandra Knapp with access to
various publications during her task of adding bibliographic references to
the Examples of theCode.

We thank Paul van Rijckevorsel for editorial suggestions and especially for
creating such a helpful resource in his “Overview of theCodes since 1867”,
hosted on the IAPT website (http://www.iapt-taxon.org/historic/index.htm).

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xxv –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

This has been invaluable in tracing provisions of theCode back in time to
clarify meanings that were not immediately obvious.

We also gratefully acknowledge others who have provided editorial sugges-
tions, ideas, or Examples: Robert Andersen, John David, Vincent Demoulin,
Yun-Fei Deng, Kanchi Gandhi, Mark Garland, Rafaël Govaerts, Martin
Head, Paul Kirk, Joseph Kirkbride, David Mabberley, Gregory Mueller,
Luis Parra, Richard Rabeler, Rosa Rankin, Alexander Sennikov, Judith
Skog, Mark Watson, Karen Wilson, Peter Wilson, William Woelkerling,
Xiang-Yun Zhu, and Gea Zijlstra.

Franz Stadler, the Production Editor ofRegnum Vegetabile, is thanked for
his excellent editing, formatting, and page layout of the final draft of the
Shenzhen Code. The cover design was skilfully drawn by Pollyanna von
Knorring. The photograph of the Nomenclature Section was taken and pro-
vided by Li Zhang, Recorder. Sven and Per Koeltz, of Koeltz Botanical
Books, are thanked for publishing theShenzhen Code and permitting its
online publication by the IAPT.

The Rapporteur-général thanks his wife, Christine Turland, for remaining
so tolerant and understanding during the time he devoted to this edition of
theCode.

The implementation of theCode between Congresses depends continu-
ously on the effort invested by members of the Permanent Nomenclature
Committees, altogether some 130 individuals, who work principally on
proposals for conservation, protection, or rejection of names, suppression
of works, and requests for binding decisions. There are also the members
of the Special-purpose Committees established by an IBC with a mandate
to investigate particular nomenclatural problems and to report with solu-
tions to the next IBC. Augmenting these efforts with considerable input of
time and expertise are the relevant column editors of the journalsTaxon
andIMA Fungus, where the proposals, requests for decisions, and commit-
tee reports are published. The nomenclature of algae, fungi, and plants is
remarkable for being supported by a vast amount of meticulous and effec-
tive work undertaken voluntarily by so many taxonomists. All users of this
Code benefit from these efforts, and we are sincerely grateful to all who
participate in this work.

The online version of the main text of theCode and the online database of
its Appendices are dependent on the continued support of the two institu-
tions that host the websites: the central office of the IAPT (Bratislava), for

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xxvi –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

the main text, and the Department of Botany at the Smithsonian National
Museum of Natural History (Washington, DC) for the Appendices.

TheInternational Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants is
published under the authority of the International Botanical Congress
(IBC), while itsChapter F, on names of organisms treated as fungi, is
published under the authority of the International Mycological Congress
(IMC). Provisions for the amendment of theCode are detailed inDivision
III. The next IMC, IMC11, will take place in San Juan, Puerto Rico from
16–21 July 2018, with its Nomenclature Session on 19 July. IMC12 will take
place in 2022. The next IBC, the XX IBC, will take place in Rio de Janeiro,
Brazil from 23–29 July 2023, with its Nomenclature Section meeting dur-
ing the preceding week (17–21 July). Proposals to amend thisCode (exclud-
ingChapter F) may be published inTaxon starting in 2020 and ending in
2022. In late 2019 or early 2020 a notice will appear inTaxon announcing
the opening of the Proposals column and providing instructions on proce-
dure and format. Proposals to amendChapter F, to be considered at IMC12
in 2022, may be published inIMA Fungus, in which a similar notice will
appear.

ThisCode, as with previous editions, is the culmination of a multi-year
process of international cooperation and collaboration. Its scientific
standing is dependent on the voluntary acceptance of its rules by authors,
editors, publishers, and other users of the names of algae, fungi, and
plants. We trust that you, as one of these users, will be happy to accept this
Shenzhen Code.

Berlin and Beltsville, 24 May 2018

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xxvii –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xxviii –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

  KEY TO THE RE-NUMBERING OF ARTICLES, NOTES,

AND RECOMMENDATIONS
 

This key includes all changes to the re-numbering of Articles, Notes,
and Recommendations in theCode, including changes resulting from
moving provisions expressly limited to organisms treated as fungi to
Chapter F. Voted Examples and footnotes are also included, but regular
Examples are omitted because these can readily be traced via the Indices,
through the scientific names mentioned.

1.MELBOURNE CODE TOSHENZHEN CODE

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xxix –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xxx –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xxxi –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

2.SHENZHEN CODE TOMELBOURNE CODE

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xxxii –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xxxiii –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xxxiv –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xxxv –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xxxvi –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

                     IMPORTANT DATES IN THECODE
 

DATES UPON WHICH PARTICULAR PROVISIONS OF THECODE

BECOME OR CEASE TO BE EFFECTIVE

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xxxvii –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

PROVISIONS INVOLVING DATES APPLICABLE

TO PARTICULAR GROUPS

PROVISIONS DEFINING THE DATES OF CERTAIN WORKS

Art. 13.1(a–c,e,f),13 Note 1,F.1.1

__________________________________________________________________ 

   International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, 2018  — Shenzhen Code

– xxxviii –

text: © 2018, IAPT  —  web-edition: © 2018, Paul van Rijckevorsel   (all rights reserved)

__________________________________________________________________ 

[to body of the 2018,Shenzhen Code ]