The International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN; hereafter, the Code) governs not only the availability and application of scientific zoological names once they enter the realm of nomenclature but also what is to be considered published work for the purpose of zoological nomenclature. Article 8.1.1 of the Code clearly demands that to be considered published in the meaning of the Code, works “…must be issued for the purpose of providing a permanent public and scientific record.” This requirement is often unfulfilled with the publication of nomenclatural acts in hobbyist magazines and amateur literature. Nevertheless, some names published in such outlets are in use today although, under strict application of the Code, these names could be de facto nonexistent for the purpose of nomenclature and cannot be made available simply by subsequent usage (ICZN, 1999: Articles 11.5.2, 16.1). In this paper, I discuss the application of Article 8.1.1 to the nonscientific literature and, as a consequence, resolve a nomenclatural problem posed by two populations of snakes in the genus Leiopython Hubrecht, 1879 that have been recognized as valid species but that do not have valid names under the requirements of the Code.
You have requested a machine translation of selected content from our databases. This functionality is provided solely for your convenience and is in no way intended to replace human translation. Neither BioOne nor the owners and publishers of the content make, and they explicitly disclaim, any express or implied representations or warranties of any kind, including, without limitation, representations and warranties as to the functionality of the translation feature or the accuracy or completeness of the translations.
Translations are not retained in our system. Your use of this feature and the translations is subject to all use restrictions contained in the Terms and Conditions of Use of the BioOne website.
Vol. 48 • No. 2