[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Tracy Ford wrote:
> In my list on Ricardoestesia I'm putting in a note explaining that
> this is the correct and intended spelling of the name.
_Ricardoestesia_ was certainly the spelling intended by the authors (Currie,
Rigby and Sloan, 1990) - there's no argument on that point.
However, even though _Ricardoestesia_ was the *intended* spelling, this does
not automatically qualify it as the *correct* spelling. Under ICZN rules,
_Richardoestesia_ is the correct rendering of the genus name. Ben Creisler
offered a nice piece on this: