Montreal Report Committee for Fungi Source: Taxon, Vol

Montreal Report Committee for Fungi Source: Taxon, Vol. 9, No. 9 (Dec., 1960), pp. 266-269 Published by: International Association for Plant Taxonomy (IAPT) Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1217831 . Accessed: 15/03/2014 09:26

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp

. JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

International Association for Plant Taxonomy (IAPT) is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Taxon.

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 212.238.114.212 on Sat, 15 Mar 2014 09:26:45 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions Nowadays this short word ex is written by some authors and not by others; in some groups of plants it is used, in others not; some French authors apply it, but somewhat differently from others. In so far as nomenclature does not pursue any historical aims it is useless to permit this practice. It indicates synonymy, which is a matter of history, and there it is appropriate to speak about the author of a non-valid name of a taxon, but even there this reference should be inserted in square brackets as a non-obligatory one. 3. It is necessary to insert a new Article or Recommendation dealing with the uniform citation of the names of type species of genera. The type-species of genus Tylopilus, for instance, is cited now as Boletus felleus Fr., and now as Tylopilus felleus (Fr.) Karst. or both these names are used. In this case it is more convenient to cite both these names in this way: Gen. Tylopilus Karst... Typus: Tylopilus felleus (Fr.) Karst. (Boletus felleus Fr.). 4. It is desirable to unify the spelling of such words as mycorrhiza and mycorhiza (resp.: cladorrhizus, haplorrhizus). The first spelling corresponds with Greek, the second is original A. B. Frank's original spelling (1885). 5. It is desirable to unify the spelling of the name of the genus: Nematoloma - Naematoloma. In this case and in many others it is often written as Nema ...., but the Karsten's original spelling (1879) was Naematoloma.

MONTREAL REPORT COMMITTEE FOR FUNGI

LETTER TO GENERAL COMMITTEE (ii) The emendation of Art. 32 recommended in the Report (its item 1) no longer received To the Members of the General Committee any considerable support. The the committee for (iii) Opinions are still divided as to the typi- report presented by fication of names validated Fungi and Lichenes at the Montreal Congress pre-starting-point was referred to the combined old and new on or after the starting-point date (Item 2 of committees for and Lichenes for further the Report). The mail-vote relating to Prop. Fungi A to Art. 13 showed a in study and report to the General Committee. slight majority favour of its No, 24; I enclose the report from the secretary of acceptance (Yes, 31; Edit. Comm. 30; voted); the the present committee, who acted also at our only mycologists as the for the combined Committee at Montreal rejected it, accepting request, secretary F to Art. 13 which was committees. This report consists of: Prop. rejected by mail-vote (Yes, 18; No, 33; Edit. Comm. 133), from the Dr. M. A. 1) a letter secretary, the possibility for special provision for Fungi DONK, to the undersigned being left open (cf. Taxon 8: 248); the present 2) a copy of the Montreal report (1959) voting is not decisive in either direction. 3) the summary of voting The additional note added to Prop. F to Art. 13 by the Committee at Montreal (para. For your guidance I take the liberty to add 2 of item 2 of the Report) was closely cor- the following comments: related with the suggested change in Art. 32 - see above 1 of the (i) Only half the members took part in the (ii) (Item Report). voting. If all had participated the results It may be remarkedin this connection that might have been completely different. There- Prop. L to Art. 7 (which was a general ver- fore the following remarks are to be under- sion dealing with the problem) has not been stood as if supplemented by "as far as reported on by the Committee. Although it indicated by the voting-forms received back". would seem that it does not command ap- It should not be forgotten, however, that proval from either of the two opposing there were many lichenologists among the mycological views, it may serve as a basis group: this may also explain why only half until mycologists have made up their mind the members voted. and have amended it (or not). 266

This content downloaded from 212.238.114.212 on Sat, 15 Mar 2014 09:26:45 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions (iv) No preference for changing the starting- December I shall report to you again, and point of Fungi imperfecti was obtained, those publish this letter and the report in Taxon. who voted against forming a small majority Utrecht, 6 October 1960. (Item 3A of Report). Yours sincerely, The change of the starting-point for Hypho- F. A. STAFLEU mycetes (not to be confused with Hymeno- mycetes) found only little support. I venture to suggest that this may be because the group REPORT COMBINED COMMITTEES FOR as such is difficult to circumscribe clearly FUNGI AND LICHENES for nomenclatorial purposes (Item 3B of Report). To the Secretary, General Committee on (v) A few slight and obviously desirable Botanical Nomenclature. textual emendations of Art. 59 were favour- With reference to your letter of November received, viz. A & B to Art. 59 ably Props. 5, 1959, which you wrote to me in my capa- and Item 4c of the Report. As to other city of Secretary of the Committee for Fungi alterations of the Article (Items 4a and 4b of and Lichens, and in which you requested a the the Report), it would seem that voting of the combined Committees of 1954- further consideration of the report hardly suggests 1959 and 1959-1964 on the "Report of the matter involved in the of the preparation Committee for Fungi and Lichenes" edition of the Code. Special forthcoming presented for discussion at the General Ses- (vi) The New Recommendation 73H ("Syn- sion of the Section for Nomenclature of the opsis" p. 70; Item 5 of the Report) and the Ninth International Botanical Congress at present wording of Art. 5, para. 3 (Item 6 Montreal, 1959, I herewith submit to you a of the Report) were unanimously favourably summary of the outcome of the activities of received. the combined committees. (vii) Item 7 of the Report (living types) Enclosure 1 consists of the "Report of the found a majority against it but may still need Special Committee for Fungi and Lichens", further consideration. However, I would point Montreal, 1959, of which you wrote that "it out that the Report speaks of "microscopic was felt that a few of the items brought organisms" in general and that, therefore, in forward in it were of such great importance the present formulation, mycologists would for mycology as a whole that it would be of seem not to be qualified to decide on the advantage to consult many more mycologists matter for the Code as a whole. before accepting them". This Report is not intelligible without having access to the On the whole it may be said that highly "Synopsis of Proposals .... submitted to the controversial items are not supported by the Ninth Interational Botanical Congress Mon- combined committees and that the changes treal - 1959" by J. LANJOUW. that are now proposed are of a technical Oni December 18, 1959, I dispatched a cir- nature. The controversial items may of course cular to all the members of the combined be taken up before and at the next Congress Committees in which they were requested to but for the present the report maintains the send in opinions on the Report before March status quo. 1, 1960. Enclosed were a copy of the Report The General Committee should now take and a copy of your letter to me of November a decision with regard to this new report. 5, 1959. I propose to publish the report, together with Opinions were sent in by 10 members. A this letter in Taxon in the usual way. Botanists stencilled copy of all opinions that had come will be invited to send their remarks to the in was dispatched on May 7, 1960, together undersigned before 1 February 1961. I sug- with a voting-form. It was requested that the gest that the General Committee expresses votes be sent in before July 15, 1960. The itself before 1 March 1961 on the new report. total number of members of the combined Adoption of the report will result in referring committees is 30; the number of voting-forms it to the Editorial Committee. received back is 15. The table making up The members of the General Committee Enclosure 2 shows the results. are herewith invited to let me know before It may be pointed out that the Report is 1 December 1960 whether they agree with silent on the decision of the Committee on this procedure. No answer will be counted Prop. A to Recommendation 50Dbis, see as agreement with the procedure. On 1 "Synopsis of Proposals" page 56 and as to 267

This content downloaded from 212.238.114.212 on Sat, 15 Mar 2014 09:26:45 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions mail-vote, Taxon 8: 250. This omission was otherwise; a name refers only to the detected too late for action in conjunction state represented by its type. The with the voting on the Report. I have no legitimacy of a name or epithet typified authoritative information available on this by the perfect state is not affected by matter as to its fate in Montreal. the earlier publication of any name or As to the "Addendum" to the Report, I epithet typified by another state of the have pointed out to the Editorial Committee same taxon." that concerns a mere this printing error rather b. The third sentence, "The type speci- than an omission, and that it should be rec- men .... stage", to be deleted. tified the Editorial Committee. by c. In the last sentence "of the October 6, 1960. (2nd par.), name of a perfect state" to be sub- M. A. DONK, Secretary stituted for "a perfect state". Committee for Fungi and Lichenes The Committee aproves and recommends for adoption Proposal B for the amendment of this Article. (Enclosure 1) 5. The Committee and recommends REPORT OF THE SPECIAL COMMITTEE approves for New Recommendation 73H. FOR FUNGI AND LICHENES adoption (MONTREAL 1959) 6. The Committee finds that in Article 5, the insertion of the word "infra- 1. The Committee and recommends par. 3, approves generic", after the Paris Congress, is a for adoption, the provision (prob- following satisfactory answer to the question pre- ably as an amendment to Art. 32, 1; par. sented as Proposal A under this Article. but the placing is left to the Editorial Committee): 7. On behalf of the InternationalCommittee "Names of not fungi are validly published on Nomenclature the to Bacteriological Spe- by references descriptions published cial Committee for and Lichenes of Fungi before the starting-point the group offers for the consideration of the Section concerned." on Nomenclature the following amendment to Article that the 2. 10, par. 1, noting The Committee recommends the rejection second sentence of Recommendation 8B of A to amend Article 13. The Proposal implies that living materialmay be a type: Committee approves and recommends for In the third line substitute "cases" for F to amend Article 13, adoption Proposal "case"; and add the following sentence: with the following additional no:e: ".... or for the "A new combination the of microscopic organisms, basionym type may consist of living cells so main- which was first published in a pre-starting- tained that their characteristics are not point work is considered as referring to altered." the validated basionym even if there is no reference to the author." validating The Committee on Fungi considers this sentence so amended to constitute, in 3. The Committee and recommends approves conjunction with all other applicable for adoption the amendment to Article 13e of the Code for offered as item 321 84 of the provisions type specimens, (page a satisfactorydescription of a type culture. Synopsis of Proposals), with the name The attention of the Editorial Committee substituted for "Fungi Imperfecti" "Hy- is called to the fact that as a consequence phomycetes". of Section 1 of this report the first ex- ample under Article 13, ProposalK, should 4. The Committee approves and recommends be deleted. for adoption the following alterations in Article 59: Addendum: The type species requested under Proposal H under Appendix III will a. After the word "Phycomycetes" the be supplied when notes are available; it remainder of the first sentence to be seems to have been lost by an error of deleted and the following to be in- transcription,somewhere. serted: ".... the correct name of all states is DONALDP. ROGERS, one typified by the perfect state; but Secretary.

268

This content downloaded from 212.238.114.212 on Sat, 15 Mar 2014 09:26:45 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions (Enclosure 2) Note 1. One of the Members requested that SUMMARY OF VOTING BY THE the original proposal ("Hyphomycetes") and COMMITTEES FOR FUNGI AND the one included in the Report ("Fungi LICHENES 1954-1959 AND 1959-1964 imperfecti") should be separately dealt with. A stands for the ON REPORT MONTREAL, 1959 changing starting- point of Fungi imperfecti in general; B for changing the starting-point of Hypho- Items of Report yes no Annotations mycetes only. Votes on both A and B were asked for. 1. 2 13 2. 7 8 Note 2. One of the Members requested that 3. A. (Fungi imperfecti) 6 9 see Note 1 the original proposals advanced in connec- B. (Hyphomycetes) 8 11 -- 1 tion with Art. 59 included in the "Synop- 4. Prop. A to Art. 59 11 1 see Note 2 & 3 sis" be also taken into consideration; these Prop. B to Art. 59 13 0 2 are marked "Prop. A to Art. 59" and "Prop. a. 4 10 B to Art. 59". Vote on all five parts, that b. 3 11 is Prop. A, Prop. B, and a, b, and c of the c. 12 2 Report were asked for. 5. 14 0 Note 3. 6. 14 0 An additional 'no' was received with an remark ce 7. 4 8 accompanying "(pour qui concerne le texte francais)".

NEWS AND NOTES

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION Inquiries should be addressed to the Na- tional Science Foundation, Washington 25, D.C. The Division of Biological and Medical Sciences of the National Science Foundation announces that the next closing date for HIERACIOLOGISTS receipt of basic research proposals in the Life Sciences is January 15, 1961. Proposals re- Note that the name of our estonian ceived prior to that date will be reviewed collegue Albert who has a at the spring meetings of the Foundation's Uksip, recently published of Hieracium in Flora advisory panels and disposition will be made monograph genus vol. 30 should be written approximately four months following the SSSR, (1960), Uksip, and not closing date. Proposals received after the Juxip. January 15, 1961 closing date will be re- K. THOMASSON viewed following the summer closing date of May 15, 1961.

The next closing date for submission of PERSONALIA proposals for specialized biological facilities is March 1, 1961. The NSF has two programs W. T. STEARN, of the for of one for Botany Department support facilities, general of the British Museum, Natural Lon- level laboratories and the History, graduate university don, received an doctor's at other for facilities. The honorary degree specialized biological Leiden on 11 November 1960. latter are defined as discrete research instal- University lations which are unique, one-of-a-kind, or Miss ALICIA LOURTEIG will be absent from at least less than ordinary in that they are the Laboratoire de Phanerogamie, Museum not a usual part of a university department National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris until and may represent either new ventures or March 1961. Her address will be Instituto the more traditional establishment. Darwinion, San Isidro, Argentina.

269

This content downloaded from 212.238.114.212 on Sat, 15 Mar 2014 09:26:45 AM All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions