| Intro | | Search taxa | | Taxon tree | | Search literature | | Taxon match | | Homonyms | | Statistics | | Webservice | | Manual | | FAQ | | LifeWatch | | Download | | Log in |
IRMNG name detailsCarpolithus Brongniart, 1822 †
1345412 (urn:lsid:irmng.org:taxname:1345412)
unaccepted > misspelling - incorrect subsequent spelling
Genus
fossil only
Not documented
Taxonomic remark Previously listed in Index Nominum Genericorum with authorship A.J. Corda, 1841, since removed; considered a spelling variant...
Taxonomic remark Previously listed in Index Nominum Genericorum with authorship A.J. Corda, 1841, since removed; considered a spelling variant of Carpolithes; unsuccessfully proposed for nom. & orth. cons., see Wang, 2011. From Herendeen, 2015: Carpolithes, Carpolithus, and Carpolites occur widely in the paleobotanical literature and have been used interchangeably to describe fossil fruits and seeds that lack sufficient detail to make more precise taxonomic assignments at the genus level. The name Carpolithes Brongn. was the first of these three generic names to be validly published, in 1822, with C. thalictroïdes Brongn. as its type. ... This is one of the most artificial of fossil genera and in modern usage is rarely combined with a species epithet. If this was the name of a genus with real taxonomic utility then perhaps there would be an argument for retaining the slightly commoner usage of Carpolithus. However, because Carpolithes Brongn. has priority and may be the only validly published name the Committee voted unanimously to reject the proposal [to conserve Carpolithus with that spelling]. [details]
IRMNG (2022). Carpolithus Brongniart, 1822 †. Accessed at: https://irmng.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=1345412 on 2025-01-11
Date action by
source of synonymy
Herendeen, P. S. (2015). Report of the Nomenclature Committee on Fossils: 9. <em>Taxon.</em> 64(6): 1306-1312., available online at https://doi.org/10.12705/646.14
note: Wang's (2011) proposal for conservation of this spelling not accepted [details] name verified source Wang, Q. (2011). (1996) Proposal to conserve the name Carpolithus with that spelling (fossil Spermatopsida) ). <em>Taxon.</em> 60(1): 241-242., available online at https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.601032 [details] Unreviewed
Nomenclatural status orthographia [details]Taxonomic remark Previously listed in Index Nominum Genericorum with authorship A.J. Corda, 1841, since removed; considered a spelling variant of Carpolithes; unsuccessfully proposed for nom. & orth. cons., see Wang, 2011. From Herendeen, 2015: Carpolithes, Carpolithus, and Carpolites occur widely in the paleobotanical literature and have been used interchangeably to describe fossil fruits and seeds that lack sufficient detail to make more precise taxonomic assignments at the genus level. The name Carpolithes Brongn. was the first of these three generic names to be validly published, in 1822, with C. thalictroïdes Brongn. as its type. ... This is one of the most artificial of fossil genera and in modern usage is rarely combined with a species epithet. If this was the name of a genus with real taxonomic utility then perhaps there would be an argument for retaining the slightly commoner usage of Carpolithus. However, because Carpolithes Brongn. has priority and may be the only validly published name the Committee voted unanimously to reject the proposal [to conserve Carpolithus with that spelling]. [details] |
