In botanical nomenclature, autonyms are automatically-created names, as regulated by the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature (Vienna Code, 2006). Autonyms are cited without an author.
Definition
The definition of an autonym is in Art. 6.8 of the Code: "Autonyms are such names as can be established automatically under Art. 22.3 and 26.3".
- Art. 22.3: "The first instance of valid publication[1] of a name of a subdivision of a genus under a legitimate[2] generic name automatically establishes the corresponding autonym". To make the definition complete for subdivisions of genera, Art. 22.1 says: "The name of any subdivision of a genus that includes the type of the [...] name of the genus to which it is assigned is to repeat the generic name unaltered as its epithet, not followed by an author citation [...] Such names are termed autonyms".
- Art. 26.3: "The first instance of valid publication of a name of an infraspecific taxon under a legitimate species name automatically establishes the corresponding autonym". And as above, but now for inspraspecific taxa, Art 26.1 says: "The name of any infraspecific taxon that includes the type of the [...] name of the species to which it is assigned is to repeat the specific epithet unaltered as its final epithet, not followed by an author citation [...] Such names are termed autonyms".
Interpretation
The application of names of taxonomic groups is determined by means of nomenclatural types.[3] In the case of taxa at the rank of species or below, nomenclatural types are preserved specimens.[4] In the case of an infraspecific taxon, if a botanist finds a specimen different enough from the type of a species name to grant it its own name at infraspecific level, a new element is added to the circumscription of the species. All elements that once formed the old species now become confined within a new infraspecific taxon. But as only the rank has changed, but not the type or the description, there is no need for a change in author citation, as all information that defines the new infraspecific taxon is to be found in the protologue of the species name (or its basionym). The same goes for a subdivision of a genus. If a botanist divides a large genus into two or more smaller portions, or adds species, for which the old description of the genus does not fully apply, to a genus, then one portion, now forming a subdivision of the genus, will be fully described and typified by the old description and type, and will not require a change in author citation. Realize that an author citation is a means to get access to the protologue of a name.
As will be clear from the definition, an autonym can be one of two kinds:
- for a taxon at a rank below that of genus and above that of species (technically a "subdivision of genus", but loosely speaking an "infrageneric taxon"), in which case its epithet repeats the generic name (Art. 22), for example
- Magnolia L. sect. Magnolia, automatically established when A.P. de Candolle published sect. Gwillimia DC., in: Syst. Nat. 1 (1817): 455.
- for a taxon at a rank below that of species (an infraspecific taxon), in which case the infraspecific epithet repeats the specific epithet (Art. 26), for example
- Elmerrillia papuana (Schltr.) Dandy var. papuana, automatically established when var. glaberrima Dandy, and var. adpressa Dandy were published, in Bull. Misc. Inform. Kew 1928(5) (1928): 185.
Other provisions concerning autonyms
The name of a subdivision of a genus that includes the type of the genus is not validly published if its epithet does not repeat the generic name unaltered,[5] in other words: it may not be anything other than an autonym, for example
- When Seringe published Magnolia L. subgen. Gwillimia Ser., in: Fl. Jard. 3 (1849): 222, the autonym Magnolia L. subgen. Magnolia was automatically established. When the latter was named Magnolia L. subgen. Eumagnolia by Seringe, same publication, p. 224, that name was not validly published as it included Magnolia virginiana L., the type of the genus. The autonym however, was validly published, even though it did not appear in print.
The same goes, mutatis mutandis, for infraspecific taxa.[6]
An autonym is considered to have been published at the exact same time as the earliest name(s) in that particular rank under the genus or species (the publication of the earliest name of a section in Magnolia L. established the autonym Magnolia L. sect. Magnolia), even if not explicitly mentioned at that time.[7]
The autonym has nomenclatural priority over the name (or the names, as the case may be) that established it.[8]
The type of an autonym is the same as that for the corresponding genus or species.[9] As an autonym is automatically created (without an author being involved), no author citation follows the name.
Notes and references
- ^ the term valid publication deals with such matters as availability of the printed publication to the general public, designation of a type, presence of a description or diagnosis in Latin language, having a name in Latin form, indication of the rank, and so on (for further reading see ICBN (Vienna Code) Art. 6.2)
- ^ the term legitimate name deals with such matters as priority, homonymy, and so on (for further reading see ICBN (Vienna Code) Art. 6.5)
- ^ ICBN (Vienna Code) Principle II.
- ^ Prior to 1 Januari 2007, a type could also be an illustration. See ICBN (Vienna Code) Art. 37.4.
- ^ ICBN (Vienna Code) Art. 22.2. "A name of a subdivision of a genus that includes the type [...] of the [...] name of the genus is not validly published unless its epithet repeats the generic name unaltered. [...]"
- ^ ICBN (Vienna Code) Art. 26.2. "A name of an infraspecific taxon that includes the type [...] of the [...] name of the species is not validly published unless its final epithet repeats the specific epithet unaltered. [...]"
- ^ ICBN (Vienna Code) Art. 32.8: "Autonyms [...] are accepted as validly published names, dating from the publication in which they were established, whether or not they appear in print in that publication."
- ^ ICBN (Vienna Code) Art. 11.6: "An Autonym is treated as having priority over the name or names of the same date and rank that established it."
- ^ ICBN (Vienna Code) Art. 7.6: "The type of an autonym is the same as that of the name from which it is derived."
External links
- online version of the ICBN (Vienna Code, 2006) (retrieved 20 Mar 2010)