[Crown Copyright Reserved } 
ROYAL BOTANIC GARDENS, KEW. 
BULLETIN 
OF 
MISCELLANEOUS INFORMATION. 
No. 9] [1921 
_ XLI. ALPHABETICAL LIST OF NOMINA 
CONSERVANDA 
(Phanerogamae). 
T. A. SPRAGUE. 
During the course of investigations preparatory to the Inter- 
national Botanical Congress of Vienna (1905) it was found that. 
the strict application of the principle of priority of publication 
to genera would entail the replacement of several hundred well- 
known generic names by little known ones. It was felt that 
the practical disadvantages of such a course were so great that 
it was desirable to adopt some means of preserving the names in 
question, and a list of Nommya CoNnSERVANDA was accordingly 
drawn up. This consisted of generic names which should be 
retained in any case, the operaticn of the Rules of Nomenclature - 
being suspended in so far as they required the rejection of any 
name included in the list. 
A summary of the discussion which took place on this question — 
at the Vienna Congress may be found in Actes Congr. Bot. 
Vienne, 1905, pp. 98-101. The Article providing for a list of 
nomina conservanda was passed by 133 votes against 36, a 
majority of four to one. 
A first list of Nomina Conservanda was appended to the 
International Rules adopted by the Vienna Congress.t This 
included 405 generic names of Phanerogamae. A second list was: 
added in 1910.{ This included 15 genera of Chlorophyceae, 17 
Phaeophyceae, 23 Rhodophyceae, 1 Pteridophyte (Selaginella), and: 
53 additional Phanerogamae. 
he phanerogamic genera were arranged in accordance with 
Dalle Torre et Harms, Genera Siphonogamarum, and were- 
combined in one List in the second edition of the International 
Rules.§ : 
* Actes. Congr. Bot. Vienne, 101 (1906). 
T Le. 234, 
{ Vide Actes. Congr. Bot. Brux., i. pp. 108-116 (1912). 
§ Briquet, Régles Internat. Nomencl. Bot., ed. 2, p. 78 (1912), 
a (78)16359 Wt31—P20 1000 19/21 
