Hi James, unfortunately 6.1 only applies if the subgenus is part of a bi/trinonmial. If the name itself IS the subgenus it is apparenlty valid. For sure its common practice even for recently published names: http://zoobank.org/NomenclaturalActs/45E20811-FEC5-4DBF-B7CB-D39AC32A8BFF
Markus On 01 Feb 2016, at 12:42, Nozomi James Ytow <nozomi at biol.tsukuba.ac.jp<mailto:nozomi at biol.tsukuba.ac.jp>> wrote: Oops. From: Nozomi "James" Ytow <nozomi at biol.tsukuba.ac.jp<mailto:noz...@biol.tsukuba.ac.jp>> Date: Mon, 01 Feb 2016 20:36:53 +0900 (JST) It imiles that Ficus (Diconoficus) could be a scientific name only as a part of binomen or trinomen, e.g. Ficus (Diconoficus) gayana. It implies, I meant. James _______________________________________________ API-users mailing list API-users at lists.gbif.org<mailto:API-users at lists.gbif.org> http://lists.gbif.org/mailman/listinfo/api-users -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://lists.gbif.org/pipermail/api-users/attachments/20160201/edb03696/attachment.html>
