在植物分类学文献中，在发表新类群时，往往在名称最后标注sp. nov., gen. nov., fam. nov.分别表示发表新种、新属、新科等，并加粗或斜体（同拉丁学名格式），以示醒目。另外一类新名称，主要是新组合，往往标注comb. nov.和（或）stat. nov.。当然，在一些分类学专著、植物志以及期刊（如Taxon）中还对这些新类群、新名称单开一个索引以方便查询。

最近在一专业群里，有同行询问关于comb. nov.与stat. nov.的正确用法，什么时候合用，什么时候单用。若对植物命名法规不够熟悉的话，可能忽略了两词之间细微的区别，很容易误用。结合此前自己投稿后审稿人的修改意见以及自己学习命名法规的一些体会，在此多说一点：

首先，最重要的是细度法规相关内容：

name at new rank (status novus). A new name based on a legitimate, previously published name at a different rank, which is its basionym and which provides the final epithet, name, or stem of the name at new rank (Art. 6.10 and 7.3) (see also basionym, new combination).

new combination (combinatio nova). A new name for a taxon below the rank of genus based on a legitimate, previously published name, which is its basionym and which provides the final epithet of the new combination (Art. 6.10 and 7.3) (see also basionym, name at new rank).

6.10. A new combination (combinatio nova, comb. nov.) or name at new rank (status novus, stat. nov.) is a new name based on a legitimate, previously published name, which is its basionym. The basionym does not itself have a basionym; it provides the final epithet1, name, or stem of the new combination or name at new rank. (See also Art. 41.2).

[footnote]1 Here and elsewhere in this Code, the phrase “final epithet” refers to the last epithet in sequence in any particular name, whether of a subdivision of a genus, a species, or an infraspecific taxon.

Ex. 8. The basionym of Centaurea benedicta (L.) L. (Sp. Pl., ed. 2: 1296. 1763) is Cnicus benedictus L. (Sp. Pl.: 826. 1753), the name that provides the epithet.

Ex. 9. The basionym of Crupina (Pers.) DC. (in Ann. Mus. Natl. Hist. Nat. 16: 157. 1810) is Centaurea subg. Crupina Pers. (Syn. Pl. 2: 488. 1807), the epithet of which name provides the generic name; it is not Centaurea crupina L. (Sp. Pl.: 909. 1753) (see Art. 41.2(b)).

Ex. 10. The basionym of Anthemis subg. Ammanthus (Boiss. & Heldr.) R. Fern. (in Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 70: 16. 1975) is Ammanthus Boiss. & Heldr. (in Boissier, Diagn. Pl. Orient., ser. 1, 11: 18. 1849), the name that provides the epithet.

Ex. 11. The basionym of Ricinocarpaceae Hurus. (in J. Fac. Sci. Univ. Tokyo, Sect. 3, Bot. 6: 224. 1954) is Ricinocarpeae Müll. Arg. (in Bot. Zeitung (Berlin) 22: 324. 1864), but not Ricinocarpos Desf. (in Mém. Mus. Hist. Nat. 3: 459. 1817) (see Art. 41.2(a); see also Art. 49.2), from which the names of both family and tribe are formed.

Note 3. A descriptive name (Art. 16.1(b)) used at a rank different from that at which it was first validly published is not a name at new rank because descriptive names may be used unchanged at different ranks.

Note 4. The phrase “nomenclatural novelty”, as used in this Code, refers to any or all of the categories: name of a new taxon, new combination, name at new rank, and replacement name.

Note 5. A new combination can at the same time be a name at new rank (comb. & stat. nov.); a nomenclatural novelty with a basionym need not be either of these.

Ex. 12. Aloe vera (L.) Burm. f. (Fl. Indica: 83. 1768), based on A. perfoliata var. vera L. (Sp. Pl.: 320. 1753), is both a new combination and a name at new rank.

Ex. 13. Centaurea jacea subsp. weldeniana (Rchb.) Greuter, “comb. in stat. nov.” (in Willdenowia 33: 55. 2003), based on C. weldeniana Rchb. (Fl. Germ. Excurs.: 213. 1831), was not a new combination because C. jacea var. weldeniana (Rchb.) Briq. (Monogr. Centaurées Alpes Marit.: 69. 1902) had been published previously; nor was it a name at new rank, due to the existence of C. amara subsp. weldeniana (Rchb.) Kušan (in Prir. Istraž. Kral. Jugoslavije 20: 29. 1936); it was nevertheless a nomenclatural novelty.

Ex. 13是一个很极端例子，原文读起来很绕，拆分解析下：

Centaurea weldeniana Rchb. (1831)

Centaurea jacea subsp. weldeniana (Rchb.) Greuter (2003)

若在此之前没有其他组合名，那么2003的名称标注comb. & stat. nov.最为准确；

Centaurea weldeniana Rchb. (1831)

Centaurea jacea var. weldeniana (Rchb.) Briq. (1902)

Centaurea jacea subsp. weldeniana (Rchb.) Greuter (2003)

在此情况下，2003的名称标注只能用stat. nov.，而不能用comb. nov；

Centaurea weldeniana Rchb. (1831)

Centaurea amara subsp. weldeniana (Rchb.) Kusan (1936)

Centaurea jacea subsp. weldeniana (Rchb.) Greuter (2003)

在此情况下，2003的名称用comb. nov.，而不能用stat. nov.

Centaurea weldeniana Rchb. (1831)

Centaurea jacea var. weldeniana (Rchb.) Briq. (1902)

Centaurea amara subsp. weldeniana (Rchb.) Kusan (1936)

Centaurea jacea subsp. weldeniana (Rchb.) Greuter (2003)

在此情况下，2003的名称既不能标注comb. nov.，也不能用stat. nov.，只能说是“nomenclatural novelty"（注意：nomenclatural novelty不能缩写为nom. nov. [nomen novum]，法规对前者定义很宽，而后者定义很狭窄，仅用于替代名replacment name）【法规在此处尚不太顺溜，待后文另解】。

以上举的例子是由种名降级到种下名称的情况。举一反三，若由种下名称提升为种名呢？

1）如果种下加词第一次提升为种加词，为comb. & stat. nov.

2）若不是第一次提升，即曾组合在其他属下作种加词，则为comb. nov.，不是stat. nov.

3）是否存在仅能标注stat. nov.的情况？应该不存在吧。

4）既不能标注comb. nov.，也不能用stat. nov.，只能说是“nomenclatural novelty"，这种情况应该也不存在。

总结如下：

1、如果名称或加词是第一次从某一等级转移到另一个等级，用comb. & stat. nov.

2、单独用comb. nov.的情况：

1) 同级转移，如一个种转移到另一个属下：Aaa bbb---> Ccc bbb

2）跨级转移，但已存在在新等级的组合：

Aaa bbb

Ccc bbb

---

Ddd bbb

3、单独用stat. nov.的情况：

仅涉及分类等级的变化，而分类等级两边的属名、种加词、种下加词等都不变。

例如：1）种下等级的变化：加词由变种等级提升到亚种等级，仍在某一种下：

Aa bb var. cc---> Aa bb subsp. cc

2）属下等级，比如有section降级为series

不过说了这么多，其时在发表时把comb. nov.或stat. nov.标注错误甚至不标，并不影响名称的合格发表（Art. 6.14)。也因此，在已发表的出版物中，这两个缩写的误用情况也是蛮多的。

若是分类学新手，在此类细节上犯一两次这样的错误，还可原谅。但倘若已在分类学浸淫多年的老手，难免会给分类学同行不好的印象，进而可能影响到对你分类学处理的严谨性的质疑。因此学好法规，避免犯这样的错误，当是正道！

2021.2.27