Accès membres

Mot de passe perdu? S'inscrire

26-02-2026 22:06

Malcolm  Greaves Malcolm Greaves

Can someone explain the features that split Geoscy

27-02-2026 17:51

Michel Hairaud Michel Hairaud

Bonjour, Quelqu'un peut il me donner un conseil p

27-02-2026 16:17

Mathias Hass Mathias Hass

Hi, Found this on Betula, rather fresh fallen twi

28-02-2026 11:54

Alain GARDIENNET Alain GARDIENNET

Hi forum,Is anyone aware if the 1936 edition of Si

28-02-2026 14:43

Alain GARDIENNET Alain GARDIENNET

A new refrence desired :Svanidze, T.V. (1984) Novy

01-03-2026 18:02

Francois Guay Francois Guay

I found this mystery Helotiales on an incubated le

01-03-2026 14:10

Antonio Couceiro Antonio Couceiro

Hola, me gustaria conocer opiniones sobre este tem

01-03-2026 20:34

Hans-Otto Baral Hans-Otto Baral

Does someone have access to Phytotaxa? I am intere

28-02-2026 11:05

Yanick BOULANGER

Bonjour à tousLe 24/02/2026 à Montmacq, devant m

01-03-2026 18:46

Robin Isaksson Robin Isaksson

Hi! This species i se from time to time in the

« < 1 2 3 4 5 > »
Aleuria bicucullata - nomenclatural question
Viktorie Halasu, 09-03-2017 22:23
Viktorie HalasuHello forum,

I'd like to ask, which of the two generic names for Aleuria (or Peziza) bicucullata published by Boudier is the one, that should be cited as basionym? And, consequently, if the current author citation is A. bicucullata Boud. or something else.


Name no. 1: 


Aleuria bicucullata Boud., Bull. Soc. bot. Fr. Tom. XXVIII, p. 93. PI. III, fig. 1. (1881).
Published also in: Aleuria bicucullata (Boud.) Gillet, Champignons de France, Discom. (8): 205 (1886) [1879]
New combination: Peziza bicucullata (Boud.) Sacc., Syll. fung. VIII: 75 (1889).


Boudier's description of new species was read by Mr. Malinvaud on a session of the French Botanical Society, then printed in a report from that session. Does this count as a valid publication? Lack of latin diagnosis should be no problem (as much as I know), since it was published before 1.1.1908.
Saccardo cites A. bicucullata Boud. as basionym, but also writes "Gill. Disc. c. ic." - what does the "c. ic." mean?
I also read the combination Aleuria bicucullata (Boud.) Gillet in article by Moravec (1972) - is that a valid combination at all?


Name no. 2:


Peziza bicucullata Boud., Icones Mycologicae Pl. 183 (between 1904 and 1910 - I failed to find any list, which taxon belongs to which "livraison")
New combination: none?


How should I interpret this - invalid combination (without citing the name Aleuria bicucullata Boud. from 1881, only bibliografic source)?
Shouldn't it be rather P. bicucullata (Boud.) Boud.? 


Sources online:
Boudier (1881): http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/8651#page/99/mode/1up
Gillet (1886): http://bibdigital.rjb.csic.es/ing/Libro.php?Libro=3449&Pagina=207
Saccardo (1889): http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/102784#page/99/mode/1up
Boudier (1904-1910, description in Tome IV): http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/105401#page/193/mode/1up


Thank you very much for anything that helps me to understand a bit the intricacies of nomenclature.
Viktorie

Nicolas VAN VOOREN, 09-03-2017 23:10
Nicolas VAN VOOREN
Re : Aleuria bicucullata - nomenclatural question
Hi Viktorie.
Aleuria bicucullata was described and illustrated by Boudier in the Bulletin de la Société botanique de France, vol. 28, in 1881. This name is perfectly valid.
Best.
Nicolas
Viktorie Halasu, 09-03-2017 23:12
Viktorie Halasu
Re : Aleuria bicucullata - nomenclatural question
Hello Nicolas,
thank you very much. But what about the other name he published in Icones?
Viktorie
 
Nicolas VAN VOOREN, 09-03-2017 23:17
Nicolas VAN VOOREN
Re : Aleuria bicucullata - nomenclatural question
You can consider it as an illegitimate combination.