[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Pantydraco and the worst dinosaur name
When it comes to the naming of prokaryotes, the International Code
of Nomenclature of Bacteria (ICNB) is prepared to hold its authors to
a much higher standard (Rule 57a: "Any name or epithet should be
written in conformity with the spelling of the word from which it is
derived and in strict accordance with the rules of Latin and
latinization.) Not only do new bacterial names come with a complete
etymology (including gender), but also a recommended pronunciation.
That said, the ICNB has such strict requirements for naming new species
that microbiologists do not routinely name new ones the way many
zoologists and quite a few botanists do. To name a species under the
ICNB, you first need to cultivate it under laboratory conditions -- and
for many known taxa that anyone would immediately want to name as a
species, this is plainly not possible, at least not yet --, and then you
need to publish the name in one particular journal because it's not
valid otherwise. In fact, the ICNB has an official candidate status for
names, and even that isn't easy to reach.
And are those "rules of [...] latinization" written down anywhere?
In so many respects, the ICZN is well behind the ICNB.
The historical development has of course gone in the opposite direction
-- the Strickland Code even prescribed one single way to transcribe Greek.