Nomenclature codes: Difference between revisions

The successful introduction of two-part names for species by [[Carl Linnaeus|Linnaeus]] was the start for an ever-expanding system of nomenclature. With all naturalists worldwide adopting thisbinominal approach to thinking up namesnomenclature, there arose several schools of thought about the details. It became ever more apparent that a detailed body of rules was necessary to govern [[scientific names]]. From the mid-19th century onwards, there were several initiatives to arrive at worldwide-accepted sets of rules. Presently nomenclature codes govern the naming of:

* [[Animal]]s – ''[[International Code of Zoological Nomenclature]]'' (''ICZN'').

* [[Bacterium|Bacteria]] and [[Archaea]] – ''[[International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes]]'' (''ICNP''), which in 2008 replaced the ''International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria'' (''ICNB'').

* [[Bacterium|Bacteria]] and [[Archaea]] described from sequence data – ''[[Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes Described from Sequence Data]]'' (''SeqCode'').

* [[Cultivar|Cultivated plants]] – ''[[International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants]]'' (''ICNCP'').

* [[Plant association]]s – ''[[International Code of Phytosociological Nomenclature]] (ICPN).''

* [[Virus]]es – [[International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses|''The International Code of Virus Classification and Nomenclature'']] (ICVCN); ''see also [[virus classification]].''

The starting point, that is the time from which these codes are in effect (usually retroactively), varies from group to group, and sometimes from rank to rank.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Nicolson |first=Dan |date=1991 |title=A history of botanical nomenclature |url= https://archive.org/details/cbarchive_53278_ahistoryofbotanicalnomenclatur1991 |journal=Annals of the Missouri Botanical Garden |volume=78 |issue=1 |pages=33–56 |doi=10.2307/2399589 |jstor=2399589}}</ref> In [[botany]] and [[mycology]], the starting point is often 1 May 1753 ([[Carl Linnaeus|Linnaeus]], ''[[Species plantarum]]''),. inIn [[zoology]], 1758{{clarify|date=Decemberit 2016}}is 1 January 1758 (Linnaeus, [[10th edition of Systema Naturae|''Systema Naturae'', 10th Edition]]). On the other hand, [[bacteriology]] started anew, making a clean sweep in 1980 (Skerman et al., "Approved Lists of Bacterial Names"), although maintaining the original authors and dates of publication.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Skerman |first1=V. B. D. |last2=McGowan |first2=V. |last3=Sneath |first3=P. H. A. |date=1980 |title=Approved lists of bacterial names |journal=Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol. |volume=30 |pages=225–420 |doi=10.1099/00207713-30-1-225 |doi-access=free}}</ref>

In 2011, a revised ''BioCode'' was proposed that, instead of replacing the existing ''Codes'', would provide a unified context for them, referring to them when necessary.<ref>{{cite web |url= http://www.bgbm.org/biodivinf/docs/biocode2011/biocode2.html |title=The Draft BioCode (2011) |publisher=International Committee on Bionomenclature (ICB)}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Greuter |first1=W. |last2=Garrity |first2=G. |last3=Hawksworth |first3=D. L. |last4=Jahn |first4=R. |last5=Kirk |first5=P. M. |last6=Knapp |first6=S. |last7=McNeill |first7=J. |last8=Michel |first8=E. |last9=Patterson |first9=D. J. |last10=Pyle |first10=R. |last11=Tindall |first11=B. J. |date=2011 |title=Draft BioCode (2011): Principles and rules regulating the naming of organisms |journal=Taxon |volume=60 |pages=201–212 |doi=10.1002/tax.601019}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last=Hawksworth |first=D. L. |date=2011 |title=Introducing the Draft BioCode (2011) |url= http://iczn.org/content/introducing-draft-biocode-2011 |journal=Taxon |volume=60 |issue=1 |pages=199–200 |doi=10.1002/tax.601018}}</ref> Changes in the existing codes are slowly being made in the proposed directions.<ref name="BioCode intro">DL Hawksworth (2011) BioCode 2011. Introduction. http://www.bionomenclature.net/biocode2011.html</ref><ref name="BioCode prolo">Werner Greuter (2011) BioCode 2011. Explanatory prologue. http://www.bionomenclature.net/biocode2011.html</ref> However, participants of the last serious discussion of the draft BioCode concluded that it would probably not be implemented in their lifetimes.<ref name="Oren19">{{cite book |last1=Oren |first1=Aharon |title=in Bergey's Manual of Systematics of Archaea and Bacteria |date=2019 |publisher=Wiley |isbn=978-1-118-96060-8 |page=1-12 |edition=1 |doi=10.1002/9781118960608.bm00004.pub2 |s2cid=240836383 |url=https://doi.org/10.1002/9781118960608.bm00004.pub2}}</ref>

Many authors encountered problems in using the Linnean system in phylogenetic classification.<ref name="de Queiroz y Gauthier 1990">{{Cite journal |last1=de Queiroz, |first1=K.; |last2=Gauthier, |first2=J. (|date=December 1990). |title=Phylogeny as a Central Principle in Taxonomy: Phylogenetic Definitions of Taxon Names. ''Syst|url=http://vertebrates. Zoolsi.'' (39): 307–322edu/herps/herps_pdfs/deQueiroz_pdfs/1990deQ_GauSZ.pdf doi|url-status=dead |archive-url=https:10//web.2307archive.org/web/20171113112849/2992353 http://vertebrates.si.edu/herps/herps_pdfs/deQueiroz_pdfs/1990deQ_GauSZ.pdf |archive-date=13 November 2017 |journal=Systematic Zoology |volume=39 |issue=4 |pages=307–322 |doi=10.2307/2992353|jstor=2992353 }}</ref> In fact, early proponents of rank-based nomenclature, such as Alphonse de Candolle and the authors of the 1886 version of the American Ornithologists' Union code of nomenclature already envisioned that in the future, rank-based nomenclature would have to be abandoned.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Laurin |first1=Michel |title=The PhyloCode : The logical outcome of millennia of evolution of biological nomenclature? |journal=Zoologica Scripta |date=23 July 2023 |volume=52 |issue=6 |pages=543–555 |doi=10.1111/zsc.12625 |s2cid=260224728 |url=https://doi.org/10.1111/zsc.12625 |language=en |issn=0300-3256}}</ref><ref name="L23CRC">{{cite book |last1=Laurin |first1=Michel |title=The Advent of PhyloCode: The Continuing Evolution of Biological Nomenclature |date=3 August 2023 |publisher=CRC Press |doi=10.1201/9781003092827 |isbn=978-1-003-09282-7 |url=https://www.taylorfrancis.com/books/mono/10.1201/9781003092827/advent-phylocode-michel-laurin}}</ref>. Another ''Code'' that was developed since 1998 is the ''[[PhyloCode]]'', which would now regulateregulates names defined under [[phylogenetic nomenclature]] instead of the traditional [[Linnaean nomenclature]]. This new approach requires using phylogenetic definitions that refer to "specifiers", analogous to "type" under rank-based nomenclature. Such definitions delimit taxa under a given phylogeny, and this kind of nomenclature does not require use of absolute ranks. The ''Code'' took effect in 2020, with the publication of [https://www.routledge.com/Phylonyms-A-Companion-to-the-PhyloCode/Queiroz-Cantino-Gauthier/p/book/9781138332935 Phylonyms], a monograph that includes a list of the first names established under that code.

The [[International Code of Zoological Nomenclature|zoological code]] does not regulate names of taxa lower than subspecies or higher than superfamily. There are many attempts to introduce some order on the nomenclature of these taxa,<ref>Dubois, A. (2006). Proposed Rules for the incorporation of nomina of higher-ranked zoological taxa in the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. 2. The proposed Rules and their rationale. ''Zoosystema'', 28 (1): 165‒258, [https://www.researchgate.net/publication/265399833_Proposed_Rules_for_the_incorporation_of_nomina_of_higher-ranked_zoological_taxa_in_the_International_Code_of_Zoological_Nomenclature._2._The_proposed_Rules_and_their_rationale].</ref><ref>Frost, D. R. et al. (2006). The Amphibian Tree of Life. ''Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History'' 297: 1–291, [http://www.uta.edu/biology/mexicoherps/Frost%20et%20al%202006.pdf],</ref> including the [[PhyloCode]], orthe alsoDuplostensional Nomenclatural System,<ref name="D15">{{cite journal |last1=Dubois |first1=Alain |title=The Duplostensional Nomenclatural System for higher zoological nomenclature |journal=Dumerilia |date=2015 |volume=5 |page=1–108}}</ref><ref name="Duetal21">{{cite journal |last1=Dubois |first1=Alain |last2=Ohler |first2=Annemarie |last3=Pyron |first3=R. Alexander |title=New concepts and methods for phylogenetic taxonomy and nomenclature in zoology, exemplified by a new ranked cladonomy of recent amphibians (Lissamphibia) |journal=Megataxa |date=26 February 2021 |volume=5 |issue=1 |doi=10.11646/megataxa.5.1.1 |issn=2703-3090|doi-access=free }}</ref> and [[Circumscriptional name|circumscriptional nomenclature]].<ref>Klüge, N. J. (2010). Circumscriptional names of higher taxa in Hexapoda. Bionomina, 1, 15-55, [http://www.insecta.bio.spbu.ru/z/dual-nom.htm].</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last=Kluge |first=N. J. |date=1999 |title=A system of alternative nomenclatures of supra-species taxa. Linnaean and post-Linnaean principles of systematics |journal=Entomological Review |volume=79 |issue=2 |pages=133–147}}</ref>

The [[botanical code]] is applied primarily to the ranks of familysuperfamily and below. There are some rules for names above the rank of familysuperfamily, but the [[principle of priority]] does not apply to them, and the [[Principle of Typification|principle of typification]] is optional. These names may be either automatically [[Type (biology)|typified name]]s or be [[Descriptive botanical name|descriptive name]]s.<ref>{{harv|McNeill et al. 2012|loc=Article 16|ref=McNeill}}</ref><ref>{{harv|Turland et al. 2018|loc=Article 16|ref=Turland}}</ref> In some circumstances, a taxon has two possible names (e.g., [[Chrysophyceae]] Pascher, 1914, ''nom. descrip.''; Hibberd, 1976, ''nom. typificatum''). Descriptive names are problematic, once that, if a taxon is split, it is not obvious which new group takes the existing name. Meanwhile, with typified names, the existing name is taken by the new group that still bears the type of this name. However, typified names present special problems for microorganisms.<ref name="auto"/>