feature request #6712
[DISCUSS] Should we remove anamorph from TaxonName (Fungi)
Start date:
06/09/2017
Due date:
% Done:
0%
Severity:
normal
Description
According to Melbourne Code anamorph should not be used anymore, or do we need it for older data.
"One fungus, one name" and "one fossil, one name" are important changes for fungi and for fossils; the concepts of anamorph and teleomorph (for fungi) as well as morphotaxa (for fossils) have been eliminated.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Code_of_Nomenclature_for_algae,_fungi,_and_plants
Related issues
History
#1 Updated by Andreas Müller over 3 years ago
- Related to bug #6297: [Overview] BGBM User group wishes 2017 added
#2 Updated by Andreas Müller over 2 years ago
- Target version changed from CDM UML 5.0 to CDM UML 5.5
#3 Updated by Andreas Müller over 1 year ago
- Target version changed from CDM UML 5.5 to CDM UML 5.15
#4 Updated by Andreas Müller 3 months ago
- Target version changed from CDM UML 5.15 to CDM UML 5.18
