Nepenthes mikei and Nepenthes xiphoides
Fri, 22 Sep 1995 19:10:13 -0400

In a message dated 95-09-22 16:11:43 EDT, you write:

>Furthermore, a name of a taxon new to science must be validated by an
>effectively published description or diagnosis in Latin (the protologue),
>rendering identification of the type specimen (and other specimens
>belonging to the taxon) with the name possible. Scientific plant names are
>Latin (irrespective of origin).
>The names "N.mikei" and "N.xiphioides" apparently lack both, protologue and
>type designation (at least in the sphere of cps, where "N." is supposed to
>mean _Nepenthes_). Thus, they are nomina nuda ("naked" names) and plainly
>invalid, i.e. these should not be used.

Ok, I think I was not clear. The names are _Nepenthes xiphoidesi_ Salmon et
Maulder spec.nov. and _Nepenthes mikei_ Salmon et Maulder spec. nov. In the
describtion there is a diagnosis in Latin and the entire article is very
reminiscent of Andreas's article as well as a designation as to where the
type is located. So they are valid?

Valid or not, the pictures of the plants are beautiful.