During the preparation of a paper on the correct type of Schizachyrium Nees (Poaceae) (Welker & al., in prep.), we detected that Art. 35.2 of the Shenzhen Code (Turland & al. in Regnum Veg. 159. 2018) has a difficult interpretation considering its current reading.

This Article rules (our emphasis in bold): “A combination (autonyms excepted) is not validly published unless the author definitely associates the final epithet with the name of the genus or species, …”. There is no explanation in the Article about the meaning of “associates the final epithet with”. To understand the meaning of these words it is necessary to read the Examples. The four current Examples presented under Art. 35.2 cover different situations in which a combination is validly or not validly published, but none of them explains the full meaning of these words.

We believe that an amendment to this Article is necessary to clarify this point. By clarifying these details, it will be easier to determine whether or not a new combination was validly published, especially for those names published before 1953.

在准备有关正确类型的Schizachyrium Nees（禾本科）的论文时（Welker等人，正在准备中），我们发现了这种艺术。考虑到目前的解读，《深圳守则》 35.2 （Turland等人在Regnum Veg.159.2018中）的解释很困​​难。

本条规定（我们的重点用黑体表示）：“除非作者明确地将最终的上位词与属名或种名相关联，否则组合（无效的别名）将无效发表。” 该条款中没有“将最终的上一个词与之相关”的含义的解释。为了理解这些词的含义，有必要阅读实施例。在Art.Art中介绍了四个当前示例。35.2涵盖了组合有效或无效发布的不同情况，但是没有一个可以解释这些词的全部含义。

我们认为，有必要对本条进行修正以阐明这一点。通过澄清这些细节，可以更容易地确定新组合是否有效发布，尤其是对于1953年之前发布的名称。