Talk:sp.

RFV discussion: October 2019–April 2020
Translingual really? --Vealhurl (talk) 13:18, 7 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Maybe similar to, , cf. . , have "spec. nova", "sp. nova", "sp. nov." (mentionings and not usages?), and  mentions sp./spp. (specis, sg./pl.), sp. aff. (species affinis, species related to), sp. nov. (species nova, new species). --Marontyan (talk) 11:42, 14 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Cited in multiple languages. -Mike (talk) 19:58, 7 February 2020 (UTC)
 * RFV-kept &mdash; surjection &lang;??&rang; 13:33, 21 April 2020 (UTC)

n.sp.
Should n.sp. and/or n. sp. (and n.var. and/or n. var.) be added? Usage as in:
 * "The forms, [...], are Anabaena gelatinosa n.sp., A. naviculoides n.sp., A. variabilis Kütz. var. ellipsospora n.var., a form of A. torulosa (Carm.) Lagerh., A. thermalis Vouk var. indica n.var., and Phormidium foveolarum Gom."

"The role of blue-green algae in nitrogen fixation in rice-fields" by P. K. De, 1939. Looking at the RfV discussion, perhaps n. = nova? —DIV (1.145.27.253 03:55, 16 October 2023 (UTC))