Theoretical courses

 

Folder Zoological nomenclature

What is nomenclature?

Taxonomic names face a dual problem:

 

  • each name represents a volatile scientific hypothesis that should be modifiable if evidence suggest so 
  • scientific names serve to unlock biosystematic information and thus should be as stable as possible.

 

To rime this duality, the international codes of nomenclature are used. These codes act as objective rule-books that govern and provide clear instructions on how organisms get their correct scientific name which must have maximun universality and continuity. The nomenclatural rules of the codes are tools that are designed to provide the maximum stability compatible with taxonomic freedom.

Why do we need nomenclature?

In order to avoid confusion over the identity of a taxon, each taxon must have one unique name that is the same throughout the world. This appears rather trivial but it has happened on numerous occasions that multiple names have been proposed for the same taxon (synonyms) or that different taxa were given the same name (homonyms). In order to avoid and, if already too late, resolve these problems universally accepted rules for name-giving must be installed: the codes of nomenclature.

How does zoological nomenclature operate?

The codes of nomenclature operate as conventions, are international in scope and are more or less universally accepted. The Code of Zoological Nomenclature consists of mandatory articles and non-mandatory recommendations which enable zoologists to arrive at names for taxa under particular taxonomic circumstances.

The ICZN is underbuild by the following guiding principles:

 

  • the Code never obstructs taxonomic judgment
  • every name is permanently attached to a name-bearing type; this is the principle of typification
  • the principle of priority determines which is the valid name for a taxon, unless usage of the principle threatens stability and universality (e.g. by upsetting a long-accepted name through the validation of little-known or forgotten names)
  • the same name for different taxa must not occur and is prohibited; this is the principle of homonymy
  • two or more different names cannot be used for the same taxon, this is the principle of synonymy
  • the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature reserves the right to have the last word if needed
  • “case laws” do not exist; problems are solved by applying the Code directly or by ruling of the Commission
  • names have coordinate status (dates and authorship of species unchanged by change in rank)

Course

Introduction to Zoological Nomenclature (pdf format)

Common problems in zoological nomenclature (pdf format)

References 

  • Alroy, J. 2002. How many named species are valid? PNAS 99: 3706-3711.
  • Barraclough, T.G. & Nee, S. 2001. Phylogenetics and speciation. TRENDS in Ecology and Evolution 16: 391-399. 
  • Borrell, B. 2007. The big name hunters. Nature 446: 253
  • Brandon-Jones D. et al. 2007. The genetive of species group scientific names formed from personal names. Zootaxa 1541: 41-48
  • Brisola Marcondes, C. 2007. Taxonomic changes: disprove or accept them/ TRENDS in Ecology & Systematics 23: 302-303
  • Cook, L.G., Edwards, R.D., Crisp, M.D., Hardy, N.B. 2010. Need morphology always be required for new species descriptions. Invertebrate Systematics 24: 322-326
  • Dayrat, B. 2005. Towards integrative taxonomy. Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 85: 407-415. 
  • Dayrat, B. 2005. Advantages of naming species under the PhyloCode: An example of how new species of Discodorididae (Mollusca, Gastropoda, Euthyneura, Nudibranchia, Doridina) may be named. Marine Biology Research 1: 216-232.
  • Dellaglio, F., Felis, G.E. & Germond J.-E. 2004. Should names reflect the evolution of bacterial species? International Journal of Systelatic and Evolutionary Microbiology 54, 3 pp. 
  • Dubois, A. 2006a. Incorporation of nomina of higher-ranked taxa into the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature: some basic questions. Zootaxa 1337: 1-37
  • Dubois, A. 2006b. New proposals for naming lower-ranked taxa within the frame of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Comptes Rendus Biologies 329: 823-840 
  • Dubois, A. 2007a. Genetives of species and subspecies nomina derived from personal names should not be emended. Zootaxa 1550: 49-68
  • Dubois, A. 2007b. Naming taxa from cladograms: A cautionary tale. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 42: 317-330.
  • Dubois, A. 2007c. Naming taxa from cladograms: some confusions, misleading statements and necessary clarifications. Cladistics 23: 1-13
  • Dubois, A. 2007d. Phylogeny, taxonomy and nomenclature: the problem of taxonomic categories and of nomenclatural ranks. Zootaxa 1519: 27-68
  • Dubois, A. & Némesio, A. 2007. Does nomenclatural availability of nomina of new species or subspecies require the deposition of vouchers in collections. Zootaxa 1409: 1-22
  • Forey, P.L. 2002. PhyloCode – pain, no gain. Taxon 51: 43-54.
  • Gill, T. 1907. Holothurian Names. Science 26: 185-186
  • Halt, M.N. et al. 2010. Naming species with no morphological indicators: species status of Galeolaria caespitosa (Annelida: Serpulidae) inferred from molecular and mitochondrial gene sequences and morphology. Invertebrate Systematics 23: 205-222.
  • Knapp, S., Lamas, G., Lughada, N. & Novarino, G. 2004. Stability or stasis in the names of organisms. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, London B, 359: 611-622. 
  • Knapp, S., Polaszek, A., Watson, M. 2007. Spreading the word. Nature 446: 261-262.
  • Laurin, M. & Cantino, P.D. 2004. First international Phylogenetic Nomenclature Meeting: a report. Zoologica Scripta 33: 475-479.
  • Laporte, J. 2003. Does a type specimen necessarily or contingently belong to its type species? Biology & Philosophy 18: 583-588.
  • Levine, A. 2001. Individualism, Type Specimens, and the Scrutability of Species Membership. Biology & Philosophy 16: 325-338
  • Lughadha, E.N. 2004. Towards a working list of all known plant species. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. B. 359: 681-687. 
  • Massin, C. 1993. On the taxonomic status of the genus Parathyone (Echinodermata, Holothurioidea, Dendrochirotida). Bulletin van het Koninklijk Belgisch Instituut voor Natuurwetenschappen Biologie 63: 257-258.
  • Minelli, A. 1999. The names of animals. TRENDS in Ecology & Evolution 14: 462-463. 
  • Minelli, A. 2003. The status of taxonomic literature. TRENDS in Ecology & Evolution 18: 75-76
  • Nimis, P.L. 2001. A tale from Bioutopia. Nature 413: 21
  • Polazek, A., 2005. A universal register for animal names. Nature 437: 477. 
  • Polazek, A. 2007. Response to Marcondes: Accepting name changes. TRENDS in Ecology & Evolution 23: 303-304
  • Sereno, P.C. 2005. The Logical Basis of Phylogenetic Taxonomy. Systematic Biology 54: 595-619. 
  • Stevens P.F. 2002. Why do we name organisms? Some reminders from the past. Taxon 51: 11-26.
  • Thiele, K. & Yeates, D. 2002. Tension arises from duality at the heart of taxonomy. Nature 419: 337.
  • Trivedi B.P. 2005. What's in a Species' Name? More than $ 450,000. Science 307: 1399. 
  • Zander, R.H.. 2004. (180-181) Reports of the Special Committee on Electronic Publishing with two proposals to amend the Code. Taxon 53: 592-593 

 

More information is available in the Learn more folder. 

Folder Course