XVIII International Botanical Congress: Preliminary mail vote and report of Congress action on nomenclature proposals
Fungi with a pleomorphic life cycle
The following set of proposals relating to fungi with a pleomorphic life cycle was accepted (with editorial amendments approved by the proposers incorporated here):
Replace the entire Article 59 with:
“59.1. On and after 1 January 2013, all names of fungi, including fungi with mitotic asexual morphs (anamorphs) as well as a meiotic sexual morph (teleomorph), must conform to all the provisions of this Code that are not restricted in application to other groups of organisms or from which names of fungi are not specifically excluded.
“Note 1. Previous editions of this Code provided for separate names for so called “form-taxa”, asexual forms (anamorphs) of certain pleomorphic fungi, and restricted the names applicable to the whole fungus to those typified by a teleomorph. All legitimate fungal names are now treated equally for the purposes of establishing priority, regardless of the life history stage of the type.
“59.2. Names published prior to 1 January 2013 for the same taxon of non lichenized Ascomycota and Basidiomycota with the intent or implied intent of applying to, or being typified by separate morphs (e.g., anamorph, synanamorph or teleomorph) are not considered to be alternative names under Art. 34.2; nor are they to be treated as nomenclaturally superfluous under Art. 52.1. If they are otherwise legitimate, they compete in providing the correct name for the taxon under Art. 11.3 and 11.4.”
Add to Article 14 (new):
“14.n. For organisms treated as fungi under this Code, lists of names may be submitted to the General Committee, which will refer them to the Nomenclature Committee for Fungi for examination by subcommittees established by that Committee in consultation with the General Committee and appropriate international bodies. Accepted names on these lists, which become permanent as Appendices XX–YY once reviewed by the Nomenclature Committee for Fungi and the General Committee, are to be listed with their types together with those competing synonyms (including sanctioned names) against which they are treated as conserved. For lists of rejected names see Art. 56.n.”
Add to Art. 56 (new) [specifically referred to the Editorial Committee for wording and placement]:
“56.n. For organisms treated as fungi under this Code, lists of rejected names may also be included in the Appendices established under Art. 14.n. Such names are to be treated as though rejected outright under Art. 56.1 and may become eligible for use only by conservation under Art. 14.”
Add a new paragraph to Art. 57:
57.2. In pleomorphic fungi, in cases where, prior to 1 January 2013, both teleomorph-typified and anamorph-typified names were widely used for a taxon, an anamorph-typified name that has priority must not be taken up until retention of the teleomorph-typified name has been considered by the General Committee and rejected.