International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (4th edition, 2000) |
The Code in this form is how we understood it. You can also read the complete Code - it is at least three times as much text and the English is ugly official. We commented some problematic articles. |
1. Definition
and scope |
1.1. System od
scientific names to extant or extinct animals. Animals consist of Metazoa and
some protistan taxa ("when workers treat them as animals"). 1.2. The Code regulates
names of animals on family, genus and species level. 1.3. No names for
hypothetical concepts, abnormal specimens and hybrids as such, for infrasubspecific
entities and some other special ideas. 1.4. Scientific
animal names can be identical with plant and bacterial names. Our comment: This rule is tragic and might probably be changed some day. In publications we can often read "at station X we found Phaseolus" - and sometimes it is not clear which organisms are meant, plants or animals. The internet does not distinguish between plant and animal names. Our proposal: try to move towards a unified biological nomenclature of organisms, replace generic homonyms, in a first step not to allow new generic names that are preoccupied in botany or bacteria. |
2. Admissibility |
2.1. Non-animal
organism taxa are recognized as animal taxa once they were assumed to be animals. 2.2. Even though
they were later not considered to be animals any more. Our comment: there is no regulation as to who decides that. How many publications are needed to fit the term "has been classified as animals"? |
3. Starting
point |
3.1. 01-01-1758
is the starting point of zoological nomenclature (publication date of Linnæus
"Systema Naturæ 10th Edition" and Clerck "Aranei Svecici").
Clerck's "Aranei Svecici" is given precedence to Linnæus 1758,
Systema Naturæ 10. 3.2. No name published before 1758 enters zoological nomenclature. Our
comment: The article sounds strange to our ears. Clerck (1757: Svenska spindlar)
is the first nomenclaturally valid work, so we set the publication date of Clerck's
spider book to 31-12-1757, and Linnæus (1758) to 01-01-1758. Clerck's
spider taxa are commonly cited with Clerck, 1757. In our database the starting
point of modern scientific zoological nomenclature is in 1757, modern zoology
starts with Clerck (1757). Linnæus (1758) is the second valid work. |
| 4. Taxa above species level |
4.1. Names of taxa above species level consist only of one word, with upper-case letter. 4.2. Not allowed to quote subgenus in a species name without genus first. |
| 5. Binominal
nomenclature |
5.1. Species name
consists of 2 words: Genus and species. Example: Homo sapiens. Homo is genus, sapiens species. 5.2. Subspecies can be added as a third word: Genus species subspecies. 5.3. No typographical signs ("?") or expressions like aff., cf. shall form part of a name. |
| 6 Interpolated
names |
6.1. Subgenera are put between genus and species, in parentheses. 6.2. Species aggregates can be put in parentheses between genus and species. (Does not really affect our database because we ignore these cases.) |
| 7. Application |
Articles 8-9 are for new scientific names and nomenclatural acts. |
8. What is published
work? |
8.1. Must be published
for permanent scientific record, must be obtainable to the public, it must be
possible to reproduce numerous identical copies. 8.2. A work containing a statement that it should not be considered as a valid publication, is not considered as a valid publication. 8.3. Same applies to taxonomic statements or names if there is a statement that the names should not be considered valid. 8.4. Before 1986
must have been produced on paper. 8.5. 1985-2000:
paper not needed. Our comment: how
shall we get this information if not in a public library? 8.6. After 1999: copies of non-paper publications must be deposited in at least 5 public libraries identified in the work itself. 8.7. Works suppressed by the Commission remain valid publications unless otherwise ruled, only the taxonomically relevant names and acts are considered as not having been published. |
9. Unpublished
work |
Handwriting facsimiles after 1930, photographs as such, proof sheets, microfilms, acoustic records, specimen labels, copies of unpublished works, www publications, abstracts for participants of meetings are considered as unpublished. |
10. Availability |
10.1. Names are
available only if published according to the criteria of the Code. 10.2. Infrasubspecific
names are only available if published before 1961. 10.3. Collective
group names are treated as genus taxa, a name proposed for a taxon based in
the fossilized work of animals is generally treated like those of recent animals. 10.4. Genus taxa
introduced for "sections" or "divisions" are treated like
subgeneric names. 10.5. Taxa originally
not but somewhen later classified as animals are available. 10.6. A name once
introduced remains available, although it might be a synonym. 10.7. Names not listed in an adopted part of the List of Available Names will not be available. |
11. Requirements
for names |
11.1. Must be published. 11.2. In Latin
alphabet. 11.3. No arbitrary
combination of letters that cannot be used as a word. 11.4. Author must
apply binominal nomenclature. Subspecies are allowed. 11.5. Must be a
currently used name ("must be valid") when proposed. Merely citing
unavailable names without adopting it to taxa does not make the names available. 11.6. Must not
be published merely as a synonym in a list of synonyms. Gets tricky with names
published as synonyms before 1961. No names published before 1758 are made available
by merely citing the names as synonyms. No names published as synonyms after
1960 are available. 11.7. Family names
must be based on the stem of genus names then used as "valid" in this
family. No family names must be based on genera suppressed by ICZN. 11.8. Genus names:
at least 2 letters, used as a noun in the nominative singular, original publication
in any other grammatic case is to be corrected. 11.9. Species names:
at least 2 letters. To be corrected if published otherwise than in nominative
singular. Example:
Coluber novæ hispaniæ
will be Coluber novaehispaniae. 11.10. A new species
taxon (with new authorship and year) can be based on a previously misidentified
record of this species taxon name if adopted as the type species of a new genus.
Example: A misidentified animal once recorded (by Geoffroy in Fourcroy 1785 and others) as Notonecta minutissima Linnæus, 1758 was taken as the type species for Plea Leach (1817). The name of this species is Plea minutissima Leach, 1817. |
| 12. Names published
before 1931 |
12.1. Requirements.
Introduction of name only valid if containing description, definition or indication. 12.2. Indication means bibliographic reference to a published description, definition or illustration, proposal of a new replacement name (nomen novum), formation of a family name from a genus name, use of at least one species name in combination with a new genus name. A description of the work of the animal is also sufficient. Mentioning vernacular names, locations, labels or specimens is not enough. 12.3. Mentioning a vernacular name, locality, geological horizon, host, label or a specimen is not enough to constitute a description, definition or indication. |
13. Names published
after 1930 |
13.1. Requirements.
Introduction of names only valid if containing description or definition allowing
to differentiate the taxon, or bibliographic reference with such a description,
or if proposed expressedly as a replacement name (nomen novum). 13.2. Family names
must be formed from available genus names "then used as valid by the author"
in this family. Families introduced 1931-1960 are only valid if they were used
as current ("valid") family names before 2000. 13.3. Genus names
after 1930 only valid if type species was designated in original description,
except taxa based on fossilized works of animals. Collective groups have no
type species. 13.4. Combined
new genus and single new species description meets the requirements of 13.1.
for both taxa. 13.5. Combined
new family and new genus description meets the requirements of 13.1. for both
taxa, after 1930 only if type species was fixed in genus taxon. But the code
recommends not to publish combined descriptions. 13.6. Most aspects of the "indication" method of description are not recognized after 1930. Description of the work of an extant animal is not sufficient. |
14. Anonymous
authorships |
Valid only until 1950, except the publications of the Commission. |
15. Names published
after 1960 |
15.1. No conditionally
proposed names are available. 15.2. No names with terms "variety" or "form" will be recognized. |
16. Names published
after 1999 |
16.1. Explicit
statement of new taxon to be new is obligate. Recommendation
to use expressions like sp. nov., n.sp., new species or so, at first use of
the new name, nom. nov. only for replacement names, stat. nov. should not be
used. 16.2. New family
needs type genus to be cited. Recommendation
to cite genus, author, year and bibliographic reference of original description. 16.3. Taxa based
on fossilized works of animals need type species, collective groups not. 16.4. Species taxa
need holotype or syntypes to be mentioned in the original publication, except
replacement names. Recommendation to deposit types in an institution with research collection that preserves them and makes them accessible for study. Recommendation to select holotype rather than syntypes, to add information about the type specimens and illustrate holotype or syntypes. |
17. Names based
on unusual specimens or animal parts |
17.1. Name remains
available also if based on types belonging to several taxa. 17.2. Or to hybrids. 17.3. Or to only a part of an animal, unusual specimens, only one sex, one stage, one parthenogenetic form, one generation, one morph or caste. | 18. Inappropriate
or tautonymous names |
| Are allowed. Example: species name brasiliensis also available for non-Brazilian species, same with Bison bison. |
19. Emendations,
incorrect spellings, mandatory changes |
19.1. An unjustified
emendation is an available name, an incorrect subsequent spelling is not. 19.2. Justified
emendation replaces incorrect original spelling and takes author and date of
the original name. 19.3. Alternative
original spellings not adopted by the First Reviser are incorrect and not separately
available. 19.4. Mandatory changes do not affect availability. |
20. Genus names
with -ites etc. for fossils |
Those fossil genus
taxa that were formed by ending a suffix -ites, -ytes or -ithes
to the stem of an extant genus taxon are not recognized. Except if they can
be used to avoid homonymy. Example: The name Pectinites introduced to denote fossil Pecten species (Bivalvia) is not available. Pentacrinites Blumenbach, 1804 is available, it was not introduced to generally denote fossil members of an extant genus. |
21. Determination
of date |
21.2. The date
cited in the publication is to be adopted as correct in absence of evidence
of the contrary. 21.3. If day is
not specified, the earliest day (or last day of earliest month) when the work
is demonstrated to be in existence will be recognized, or last day of month
or year mentioned in the original publication. 21.4. If the day
is found to be incorrect, the earliest date when the publication was documented
to be published, is adopted. 21.5. If works
were published in parts, the publication day of each part has to be determined
separately. 21.6. If only a
range of dates is available as information, the last date of this range is taken. 21.7. If the date
was not specified in a work, the earliest date where the work was documented
to be published is taken. 21.8. Separates
and preprints distributed in advance before 2000 advanced the date of publication.
Separates not after 1999, preprints only with clear indication of date. Recommendation
not to publish and distribute other than on the specified date, authors should
not distribute reprints before the date of publication. New name, type fixation
etc. should be printed at the same day. Date should be specified. Librarians
and binders should not remove sheets containing publication or receipt dates.
Separates should contains complete bibliographic citation including publication
date. Preprints should be clearly identified as such. Correction of date should
be published. Our comment: if a correction of the date is not published, how can we know that the date is different from the date specified on the publication itself? |
22. Citation
of date |
Year follows author
name. Recommendation
to cite author and year at least once in a publication. Not more than a comma
between author and year. Actual date of publication shall be cited if different
from the date specified in the original publication. If both dates shall be
cited, then first the actual date followed by the imprint date in brackets or
so: Ctenotus alacer Storr,
1970 ("1969"). If species is placed in another genus than in the original
publication, author and year should be in brackets: Limax
ater Linnæus, 1758, but Arion
ater (Linnæus, 1758). Our comments: the last recommendation should be a must. The first recommendation is not adopted by most zoological publications. Comma between author and year does not add any information, a space should be sufficient. |
23. Priority |
23.1. Oldest available
name is "valid". Our
comment: the expression "valid" leads to misunderstandings and should
not be used without quotation marks. In our database we work with expressions
like "valid spelling of..." which has nothing to do with the expression
used here. We replaced the expression "valid" in the sense of this
article by "in accordance with current classification". 23.2. Priority
rules are established because they are thought to promote nomenclatural stability. 23.3. If 2 taxa
are brought together, the oldest available name is taken, regardless of its
rank within the family, genus or species level/sublevel. Also if at first description
only a part of the animal was described, if 2 sexes were described as different
animals etc. For names originally based on infrasubspecific entities and later
established on higher level, priority refers to the date were the higher level
was established. If a name is found to be unavailable or invalid it must be
replaced by the next oldest available name among its synonyms. If there is none,
a new name must be established. All names of synonyms are kept available, no
correctly introduced name can be rejected. 23.4. For homonyms
see 52, 55 and 39. 23.5. Oldest available
spelling is recognized as "valid". 23.6. First nomenclatural
act is given precedence, in cases like First Reviser, fixation of type species,
first inclusion of species into a genus, lectotype and neotype designation. 23.7. Names of
collective groups do not compete with genus taxa. A genus taxon name that is
used for a collective group no longer competes in priority with other genera
while so used. Taxa based on the fossilized works of animals do not compete
with the name of the animal as such. Example:
Ticinosuchus Krebs, 1965
does not compete in priority with the name of the footprints Chinotherium Kaup, 1835, although Ticinosuchus is thought have caused these footprints (Krebs 1966). "Ticinosuchus may no be rejected as a
junior synonym of Chirotherium
on that account". Our
comment: it is unclear from this example whether the currently applied ("valid")
name of the animal is Ticinosuchus
or Chirotherium, but we think
it is Chirotherium. In any
case, fossil bones did not belong to the animal either, they are fully silicified
and can be taken as boneprints. The name should apply to the animal behind these
remains. 23.8. Species names
introduced for specimens later found to be hybrids cannot be used for any of
the two parental species, such names may only enter into homonyny. 23.9. Precedence
to older names is not given if the older name has not been used "as a valid
name" after 1899 and if the younger name has been published by at least
10 authors in at least 25 works within at least 10 years somewhen in the immediately
preceding 50 years (see also French text of the Code). An author who discovers
this should cite both names together and state explicitely that the younger
name is valid. Younger name will be cited as nomen protectum, the older one
as nomen oblitum (forgotten name). Authors can also bring forward motions to
the Commission. Our
comments: very problematic. These rules containing the expression "prevailing
usage" were made in times where most scientists did not have access to
the old books. This is going be different if we digitise all old zoological
publications. Sooner or later young scientists will look up the old books to
check which spellings are correct - and they will have difficulties to check
whether somewhen in the century 1900 an old taxon was discovered not to have
been used for a few years or not. The expression nomen oblitum contradicts itself:
no name published in a book that is still available will be forgotten - the
books don't forget. Names should explicitely be rejected by the Commission and
published in the list of rejected names. In our modern times most zoological
names are not any longer looked up in printed matter, but rather in the internet.
We would like to recommend to delete this article from the Code and hand over
its content to the Commission. 23.10. If an author
discovers that the complicate conditions of 23.9. were not met, the case goes
before the Commission. 23.11. If an author
wishes to retain the older synonym, the Commission has to decide. 23.12. Names that
were rejected 1961-1973 (rejected name was cited and junior synonym was used
as "valid" name) have no precedence over junior synonyms in prevailing
usage. Rejected names can become valid again if considered to be synonym of
another name. Our
comments: when developing our database we will insert the oldest names first.
We don't think that these rules make the code more stable, but rather that they
increase uncertainty. We need to be in the possession to relay on the original
publications and the official list of rejected names as the two tools to select
the correct name of a species according to clearly defined priority rules. |
24. Precedence |
24.1. If taxa are
published simultaneously, those at higher rank have precedence. Taxa introduced
as species have precedence over taxa simultaneously introduced as subspecies.
Same with genera/subgenera etc. 24.2. If priority
of simultaneously published taxa can be determined objectively, the First Reviser
citing the different names and selecting one as "valid" decides. Example:
Strix scandiaca Linnæus, 1758 and Strix nyctea Linnæus,
1758 are synonyms (Sauropsida) - the First Reviser Lönnberg (1931) selected
Strix scandiaca as the "valid" name. The First Reviser also decides which
one of several original spellings of the original name will be recognized. If
an author who introduced a name with several alternative spellings and in a
later cited one spelling, this spelling shall be used. |
25. Formation and
treatment of names |
Recommendation not to abbreviate scientific names at first mention and to avoid misunderstandings in abbreviations (Ae. aegypti and An. maculipennis, not only A. for Aedes and Anopheles), and to explain the derivation of a new scientific name. Authors should care that new names are appropriate, compact, sound well, are memorable, and do not cause offence. |
26. If a name is the same as a Greek or Latin word, it will be taken as such, unless otherwise stated. |
27. No special characters, no diacritic marks in scientific names, except hyphen in species names. |
28. Family and genus begin with upper-case letter, species with lower-case letter, regardless of original publication. Recommendation not to start a sentence with a species name. |
29. Family names |
29.1. Family taxa
end with special suffixes. 29.2. Family ends
with -idae, superfamily with -oidea, subfamily with -inae, tribe with -ini,
subtribe with -ina. Species or genus taxa can also have these endings. Example:
the genus Ranoidea (Amphibia)
is available. 29.3. The stem
of the type genus is taken and the case ending of the genitive singular in Latin
laguage is deleted. If the stem ends in -id, the ending -id may be deleted.
Some linking letters can be added if the family name sounds better. Examples:
Coccinella gives Coccinellidae,
Culex (genitive Culicis)
gives Culicidae, Strix (genitive
Strigis) gives Strigidae, Haliotis
(genitive Haliotidis) gives Haliotidae, Leptocerus gives Leptoceridae (disregarding that in Greek the genitive ending
would be Leptocerat-). 29.4. After 1999
it does not matter if authors do not know Latin genitives. Example:
Prorex can give Prorexidae
although genitive stem would be Proregis. 29.5. Family names
that were not correctly introduced but "are in prevailing usage" can
be used regardless of which spelling is correct or not. 29.6. Although
different type genera may have identic stems, the respective family names must
not be identical. Example: Picus (Saurosida) produced Picidae, but later Pica (Sauropsida) must not give Picidae, but Picaidae. |
30. Gender of
genus names |
30.1. If names
or final components of compound names are based on Latin or Greek words, then
consult a standard dictionary because they are treated as such words unless
otherwise stated. Latinized Greek words are treated as Latin unless otherwise
stated. Names with common or variable gender and names with the suffixes -i(s)tes
and -(o)(i)des are masculine unless otherwise applied by the author.
Endings in -ops are definitely masculine. Example:
Petricola is feminine because
it was introduced with species name costata. 30.2. If names
are exactly identic with Latin-written names of modern European languages, they
take the gender of that noun. In the other cases it takes the gender specified
or applied by the author. If no such information is available, then endings
-a produce feminine genera, -um, -on, -u neuter
and the rest masculine genera. Recommendation
to specify gender and derivation when establishing a new genus. Recommendation
to choose gender according to the word's ending. Example:
Pfrille from German is feminine. Our comment: A good example to show the confusion produced by such rules. This word Pfrille is not in standard dictionaries, and although being native German zoologists ourselves, we do not know this word. The gender of such names should be specified by the author or determined by the First Reviser. |
31. Species
names |
31.1. There are
rules for species names formed from personal names, but if applied incorrectly
the original spelling of the name is to be preserved anyway. Recommendation
not to indroduce species names based on personal names as nouns in apposition,
to avoid misunderstandings with authorship citations. 31.2. Species names
that are or end in Latin or latinized adjectives or participles in the nominative
singular must agree in gender with the corresponding genus name (so, they are
changeable), noun phrases and nouns in apposition need not (unchangeable).
Non-Latin words and Latin words in unclear cases are unchangeable. Examples: The species name costata (adjective) is changeable and gives eventually costatus or costatum, diana is unchangeable (noun in apposition), femurrubrum unchangeable (noun phrase, rubrum referring to femur, neuter), m-nigrum is unchangeable (nigrum referring to m, neuter). Oestrus phobifer may be either a masculine adjective or a noun in apposition, so it is unchangeable. |
32. Original
spelling |
32.1. Original
spelling is the spelling used in the original work. 32.2. If not demonstrably
incorrect, it is also the correct original spelling. At different alternative
spelling in the original work, the First Reviser decides. Justified emendation
is treated like correct original spelling, with author and date of the original
publication. 32.3. Correct original
spelling must be preserved except suffixes of gender changeable species taxa. 32.4. Incorrect
original spellings are not available and cannot be used for anything. 32.5. Original
spellings must be corrrected in cases of clear inadvertent errors due to printing/typing
techniques. Incorrect latinizations, transliterations or "wrong" connecting
vowels must not be corrected. Corrections in corrigenda issued simultaneously
is accepted as clear evidence of an inadvertent error. Special characters must
be reduced to their basic letters (æ to ae, ñ to n, é to
e) except in German ä, ö and ü published before 1985, which have
to be corrected to ae, oe and ue (after 1985: a, o and u). Punctuation marks
and ligatures between words including spaces (terra novae) must be deleted,
except in cases like Polygonia c-album, abbreviations and numbers are
spelled out in Latin, abbreviated titles of persons are deleted, upper- and
lower-case letters are formed according to the ICZN rules, genitive is corrected
to nominative. Family names are corrected if they have incorrect suffixes or
were formed from an incorrectly spelled genus name. |
33. Subsequent
spelling |
33.1. Can be either
emendation, or incorrect subsequent spelling, or mandatory change of species
names with changeable gender. 33.2. Emendations
are intentional changes in the original spellings. Needs explicite statement
of intention. Correction of incorrect original spelling according to the rules
is justified, anything else not. Names produced by unjustified emendations are
available with new author and date. Exceptions are possible in cases of prevailing
usage, were unjustified emendations are attributed to the original author and
date. Example:
Elophorus Fabricius, 1775
was changed by Illiger (1801) to Helophorus Fabricius, 1775 (Coleoptera). Because it has been in prevailing usage,
Helophorus is considered
to be a justified emendation. Our
comment: We cannot consider such exceptions of the rule because our program cannot decide whether an incorrect spelling of a word is, has been or was in "prevailing usage". The name Elophorus continues to be in use (Google 2-3-2004: Elophorus 13, Helophorus 1620 hits, if combined with Fabricius the result was 7 : 176). However, this special case was solved by an ICZN decision, so the new spelling is clear. 33.3. Any other
subsequent spellings are incorrect subsequent spellings, are not available and
cannot be used for anything. Exceptions are possible in cases of prevailing
usage, where incorrect subsequent spellings will become correct original spellings. Example:
Trypanosoma brucii Plummer
& Bradford, 1899 has frequently been incorrectly spelled brucei, so brucei is deemed to be correct. Our
comment: We cannot consider such exceptions of the rule because our program
cannot decide whether an incorrect spelling of a word is, has been or was in
"prevailing usage" (Google hits for T. brucii
: T. brucei 3 : 33800, with Trypanosoma-brucii and Trypanosoma-brucei
4 : 13900, but no page was found where the authors Plummer & Bradford were
cited (2004)). 33.4. Species names
ending in -i or -ii are correct the way they were originally published. 33.5. In doubtful cases subsequent spellings are treated as incorrect. |
34. Mandatory
changes |
34.1. Family-like
names must change the suffix (-idae to -inae or so) when placed into another
category. 34.2. Species with changeable gender treatments must change the ending according to the gender of the corresponding genus. Our comment: If a new "changeable" species name (Latin adjective) did not correspond to the gender of the genus in which it was placed, then we consider the species name to be treated as unchangeable. The Code does not say directly what to do in such cases, and in the Official Lists and Indexes (ICZN 1987 and ICZN 2001) these cases were not treated consistently. Examples: Conops buccata (cited by ICZN 2001: 54 as Conops buccatus Linnĉus, 1758 - we will not follow this way), Tenthredo fasciata, Papilio cyanea are unchangeable (all these genera are masculine). |
35. Family-like
taxa ("family-group") |
Our
comment: the expression family-group is misleading (we misunderstood it when we first read the Code),
so where necessary we replaced it by "family-like
taxa". Same with genus-group, species-group. 35.1. Any rank
below superfamily and above genus: superfamily, family, subfamily, tribe, subtribe
or others. 35.2. For all these
ranks the same rules apply. 35.3. Application
of family-like taxon depends on its type genus. 35.4. A family
name is formed according to the rules. If based on incorrectly spelled type
genera, the spelling is corrected. If the questionable type genus spelling is
taken as a substitute name, the family spelling is formed according to the substitute
name. Our
comment: What is a substitute name? Reference to corresponding article wanting. 35.5. No strict
priority rules in family-like taxa. If after 1999 a subfamily name is found
to be older than the name "in prevailing usage" of the family to which
the subfamily belongs to, the older name does not replace the youger higher-rank
family name. Example:
Rophitinae Schenck, 1866 is included in the Halicitidae Thomson, 1869 (Hymenoptera). Our comment: "in prevailing usage" is difficult and should be replaced by something more technical. However, our database has no priority rules applied at the family level. Animals are believed to have evolved, and higher-rank taxa above the genus level will get different (less) significance that in the past. |
36. Coordination |
36.1. A family-like
taxon introduced for one rank is deemed to have been introduced for all possible
family-like ranks simultaneously. All these taxa have same author and date,
same type genus. Example:
Hesperides Latreille, 1809 (Lepidoptera) with type genus Hesperia Fabricius, 1793 simultaneously produced Heperiidae Latreille, 1809;
Heperiinae Latreille, 1809 and Hesperioidea Latreille, 1809, all with the same
type genus, although these names may have been used only many decades later. 36.2. The type genus of a family-like taxon will always remain the same, regardless of possible changes in rank of the family-like taxon. |
37. Nominotypical
taxa |
37.1. When a family-like
taxon is sibdivided, the one containing the type genus retains the name for
the lower-rank family-group taxon, which is the nominotypical taxon. Example:
If Tipulidae Latreille, 1802 is subdivided, the subfamily with the type genus
Tipula becomes Tipulinae. 37.2. Unavailable or invalid family-like names in use must be replaced by the next younger name, producing new nominotypical taxa. |
38. Homonymy for families see 39 and 55. |
39. Invalid
family names |
Family-like taxa
are invalid if based on homonymous or ICZN suppressed type genera. Such family
names must be replaced. Example: Degeeriidae Lubbock, 1873 was based on Degeeria Nicolet, 1842 (Collembola), a junior homonym of Degeeria Meigen, 1838 (Diptera). The family name had to be replaced. The synonym Entomobrya Rondani, 1861 produced Entomobryidae Tömösváry, 1882. |
40. Synonymy
of type genus |
40.1. A type genus
being a synonym of another genus does not affect its stage as type genus for
the family. Example:
Agriolimacidae based on Agriolimax
Mörch, 1865 (Gastropoda) remains in accordance with current classification
although its type genus is a junior synonym of Deroceras Rafinesque, 1820. 40.2. If a family-like
name was replaced before 1961 because of priority rules, the substitute remains
if in prevailing usage. Gets very sophisticated with authorships. Example:
Orphnephilidae Rondani, 1847 (Diptera) was based on Orphnephila Haliday, 1832. Bezzi (1913) synonymized Orphnephila with Thaumalea
Ruthe, 1831 and established Thaumaleidae Bezzi, 1913. Thaumaleidae would be
rejected today, but it came into prevailing usage. Now Thaumaleidae is cited
as Thaumaleidae Bezzi, 1913 (1847). Our comment: we are lucky in that we don't cite author names of families. Too complicate and unnecessary to cite two different years in a taxon. The more so, since scientists in 500 years hardly will be able to control whether taxa came in prevailing or only into some usage in a certain period of time. |
41. In case of trouble with type genera see 65.2. 42. Genus-like
taxa. |
42.1. Taxa below
family-like and above species-like taxa: genus, subgenus. 42.2. For the two
ranks the same rules apply, unless otherwise stated. Collective groups and names
for trace fossils are also treated like genera. 42.3. Application
of genus-like name is determined by its type species. Collective groups have
no type species. Genera established before 1931 and taxa based on the fossilized
work of animals established before 2000 may have no type species fixed, for
these see 69. 42.4. Must be formed and treated according to the rules. |
43. Coordination |
43.1. Establishing
a subgenus name means simultaneaously establishing a genus name, with same author,
date and type species. Same with other ranks of genus-like taxa. 43.2. Type species remains the same if genus taxon is changed in rank. |
44. Nominotypical
taxa |
44.1. If there
are subgenera of a genus, the subgenus containing the genus type species is
the nominotypical subgenus and the subgenus has the same name as the genus. 44.2. If the genus name becomes unavailable and must be replaced, the next younger available genus name within the group of species grouped together at genus level takes over with its type species. The nominotypical species may change then. |
45. Species-like
taxa |
45.1. Taxa at species
and subspecies level. 45.2. For both,
the same rules apply unless otherwise stated. 45.3. Application
of species or subspecies name is determined by the type. 45.4. Must be formed
and treated according to the rules. 45.5. Names for
infrasubspecific entities are not available and not regulated by the Code. A
4th name in the line is automatically infrasubspecific. If such names are cited
for higher ranks in a manner that make the names available, they take the authorship
of the citing author, also if this author attributes the taxon to a previous
author. Example:
Vulpes vulpes karagan natio
ferganensis (published by
Ognev 1927) is infrasubspecific. Flerov (1935) first used it for a subspecies
and made the name available as Vulpes vulpes ferganensis
Flerov, 1935. 45.6. A name following
a binomen is subspecific unless evidently infrasubspecific or otherwise expressed
by the author, for example by useing the terms aberration, ab. or morph, after
1960 also with terms v(ar(iety))., f(orm(a)) (which before 1961 produced available
subspecies). Examples: Arvicola amphibius ab. pallasi published by Ognev 1913 is infrasubspecific, Arvicola amphibius pallasi Ognev, 1950 is subspecific and available. Pyrrhocoris apterus var. pennata Westhoff (1884) was given to a macropterous form of a hymenopteran insect - it was never adopted and is not available, as are neither names for freshly emerged adults as such. Fruticicola unidentata variété (natio) n. subtecta described by Polinski 1929 (Gastropoda) would not have been available, but it was used later as a name of a subspecies in some published classification by an author before 1985 (Klemm 1954), so the name became available as Fruticicola unidentata subtecta Polinski, 1929. |
46. Coordination |
46.1. Establishing
a subspecies name means simultaneaously establishing a species name, with same
author, date and types. 46.2. If species are treated as subspecies or vice-versa, the types remain unchanged. |
47. Nominotypical
taxa |
47.1. If there
are subspecies of a species, the subspecies containing the type of the species
is the nominotypical subspecies and the subspecies has the same name as the
species. 47.2. If the species name becomes unavailable and must be replaced, the next younger available species name within the group of subspecies grouped together at species level takes over with its type. Example: Papilio coenobita Fabricius, 1793 was discovered to be junior primary homonym of Papilio coenobita Cramer, 1780. A replacement name for the younger taxon was established as Pseudoneptis ianthe Hemming, 1964. But the subspecies Pseudoneptis coenobita bugandensis Stoneham, 1938 has priority, the species name must be Pseudoneptis bugandensis Stoneham, 1938, with the two subspecies being Ps. bugandensis bugandensis Stoneham, 1938 and Ps. bugandensis ianthe Hemming, 1964. |
48. Gender change
in species taxa |
Species taxa may change their ending according to the genus gender. |
49. Misidentified
species |
If a species was
misidentified, the wrong name cannot be taken as an available name for the species
unless deliberately taken as a new name for a type species of a newly established
genus. Example: Koch (1847) misidentified a myriapod species as Polydesmus scaber Perty, 1833 and placed this species into a new genus Platyrhacus Koch, 1847, but not fixing it as the type species. The name scaber cannot be used for the true species Koch was dealing with. Leach (1817) took a misidentified animal once recorded (by Geoffroy in Fourcroy 1785 and others) as Notonecta minutissima Linnæus, 1758 as the type species for Plea Leach (1817). The name of this species is Plea minutissima Leach, 1817 (see also 11.10). |
50. Authors |
50.1. The author(s)
is (are) the person(s) who first publish(es) a name or act and fits the criteria
of availability, usually the author(s) of the whole work, if not otherwise stated.
If no author can be determined form the content, the author is anonymous. In
doubtful cases, the author(s) of the whole work take(s) authorship for the taxa.
Example:
in a work published by Westerlund & Blanc (1879), the species taxon Helix olympica var. sciara was established (Gastropoda), with a mark "Westerl." next
to the name and below the description. The name of the taxon is Helix olympica sciara Westerlund, 1879.
In the same publication, the description of Helix bathytera
did not have such a mark - the name of this taxon
is Helix bathytera Westerlund
& Blanc, 1879. Recommendation
to exclude co-workers of the whole work from taxa authorships if they did not
participate in the description itself. Recommendation to use expressions like
Helix olympica sciara Westerlund
in Westerlund & Blanc, 1879. 50.2. Taxa introduced
in meeting reports take the authorship of the person responsible for the name,
not of a reporter. Recommendation
for reporters not to include new scientific names into their reports. 50.3. Changing
the rank from family to subfamily, subspecies to species or so does not affect
authorship. This is different in cases of infrasubspecific names becoming available
by elevating their rank. A species placed into another genus is indicated by
brackets covering author and year. 50.4. Justified
emendations take the original authorship, not that of the person making the
emendation. 50.5. Unjustified
emendations are attributed to the author who first published them. 50.6. For priority
of simultaneously published taxa see 24. This applies also to cases where different
authors described the same name simultaneously - then the authorship will be
decided by First Reviser or so. 50.7. Names originally published as synonyms and which became available by 11.6 take the authorship of the person who first published it as a synonym. |
51. Citation
of author names |
51.1. Author name
does not form part of the name of a taxon, its citation is optional bur recommended,
for names in non-Latin alphabets preferrably in Latin alphabet letters. 51.2. Author name
follows taxon directly. 3 or more authors can be abbreviated using et al., but
should be completely cited somewhere in the work. No other names behind in parentheses,
subsequent users should be denoted by expressions like sensu, as interpreted
by. Anonymously published taxa have author name Anon. Recommentations to avoid
misunderstandings, invalid status of unavailable names should be expressed evidently. 51.3. Species classified
in another genus than the one they were originally described in, obtain author
and year in parentheses. Introduction of a species with an incorrect spelling
of the genus is not enough to justiofy the use of parentheses. The subgenus
is not of interest. Special case see 11.9.3.6, problem of Cubiceps. Example:
The currently applied name of the gastropod species is Pseudoxerophila
bathytera (Westerlund & Blanc, 1879). Recommendation
to cite persons responsible for first having transferred a species into another
genus directly behind the author and date of the species name. Methioplopsis
geniculata (Stål, 1878) Rehn, 1957. Our comment: This is what we call unnecessary nonsense in the Code. It is absolutely unusual in modern zoology, we do strictly not apply this recommendation in our database and would strongly like to discourage collaborators from proceeding so. Classification of species is subjected to ongoing research, and the reasons why one author places a species into a certain genus may be totally different from those of another author - it does not necessarily mean that the second author adopted the system established by the first. |
52. Homonymy |
52.1. Same name
must not be given to different taxa. 52.2. Only the
oldest homonym may be used, with a few exceptions (23.2., 23.9., 59). 52.3. Articles
23 and 24 must be followed concerning priority rules. 52.4. For junior
homonyms see 23.3.5, 23.9.5, 39, 55, 60. 52.5. For suppressed
senior homonyms see 54.4, 81.2.1. 52.6. Corrected
spelling of an incorrect original spelling can enter homonymy, incorrect spellings
cannot. 52.7. Homonymy with clear non-animal taxa is allowed (see 1.4, 2.2, see also our comments there). |
53. Definitions
of homonymy |
53.1. At family-like
level, several names with the same spalling differing, if at all, only in the
suffix, are homonyms. Example:
Metopiinae Foerster, 1869 (Hymenoptera), Metopiini Raffray, 1804 (Coleoptera)
and Metopiini Townsend, 1908 (Diptera) are homonyms, the corresponding type
genera are not. 53.2. At genus-like
level, names with same spelling are homonyms. Example:
Noctua Linnæus, 1758
(Lepidoptera) and Noctua Gmelin
(Sauropsida) are homonyms. 53.3. At species-like
level to be homonyms, several names have to have same spelling and same genus,
regardless if the genus is original (Primary homonym) or follows a later classification
(secondary homonym). Example: Cancer strigosus Linnaeus, 1761 and Cancer strigosus Herbst, 1799 are primary homonyms, although C. strigosus Linnaeus, 1761 might have been classified in another genus in 1799 and later. |
54. No homonyms |
54.1. Names excluded
from the Code provisions. 54.2. Unavailable
names. 54.3. Incorrect
spellings. 54.4. Names suppressed by ICZN. |
55. Homonymy
in family-like names |
55.1. Applies to
all family names, including taxa based on the fossilized work of animals. 55.2. If type genus
names are identical, see 39. 55.3. If type genus
names are similar, the Commission must remove one family. For nomen oblitums
new family-like names sounding slightly different than the forgotten name may
be proposed. 55.4. One letter
is enough to mark the difference between families. Example:
Laridae (Sauropsida) and Larridae (Hymenoptera) are not homonyms. 55.5. Of several simultaneously published family-like homonyms, the one of higher rank gets priority. |
56. Homonymy
in genus-like names |
56.1. Applies to
all genus names, including collective groups and taxa based on the fossilized
work of animals. 56.2. One-letter
difference is enough. 56.3. Of simultaneously published genus and subgenus homonyms, genus has priority. |
57. Homonymy
in species-like names |
57.1.Applies to
all species-level names. 57.2. Primary homonyms
for different taxa are those with same species and original genus name, the
junior homonym being permanently invalid. Except some special cases (23.9, 81,
79.4.3). Example:
Aporia hippia transiens Alpheraky,
1897 and Aporia crataegi transiens Lempke, 1953 are primary homonyms, the latter cannot be used any more. 57.3. Secondary
homonyms result from bringing species with same species and different original
genus name into the same genus. The junior homonym becomes usually invalid.
Replacement genus names are treated like the original genus names. Example: Albinaria scopulosa faueri Hausdorf,
1987 will by a secondary junior homonym of Isabellaria
venusta faueri Nordsieck, 1974 (Gastropoda) in those
publications where Isabellaria
is considered as being congeneric with Albinaria. 57.4. Subgenus
is not of interest. 57.5. Incorrectly
spelling the genus does not change the situation. 57.6. One-letter
difference in species names is enough, exceptions see 58. 57.7. Of simultaneously
published species and subspecies, the species has priority. 57.8. Double homonymy
(genus and species) is no homonymy. Example: Noctua variegata Jung, 1792 (Insecta) is no homonym of Noctua variegata Quoy & Gaimard, 1830 (Sauropsida). The genera are homonyms and the species too. The species name variegata Quoy & Gaimard, 1830 can be used because the genus name has to be replaced anyway. |
58. Where species
names that are of the same derivation are considered not to differ in spelling |
58.1. use of ae,
oe or e (caerulea, coerulea and cerulea are homonyms if
adopted for different taxa) 58.2. use of ei,
i or y (cheiropus, chiropus, chyropus) 58.3. use of i
or j (maior, major) 58.4. use of u
or v (neura, nevra) 58.5. use of c
or k (mikrodon, microdon) 58.6. (non)aspiration
of a consonant (oxyrnchus, oxyrhynchus) 58.7. use of single
or double consonant (litoralis, littoralis) 58.8. use of ct
or t (autumnalis, auctumalis) 58.9. use of f
or ph (sulfureus, sulphureus) 58.10. use of ch
or c (chloropus, cloropus) 58.11. use of th
or t (thiara, tiara) 58.12. use of different
connecting vowels (nigricinctus, nigrocinctus) 58.13. use of y,
ei, ej or ij instead of i (guianensis, guyanensis) 58.14. use of ending
i or ii, ae or iae, orum or iorum, arum or iarum (smithi, smithii;
fasciventris, fasciiventris) 58.15. presence
of i before termination (timorensis, timoriensis; comstockana,
comstockiana) |
59. Valid secondary
homonyms |
59.1. Junior secondary
homonyms must be treated as invalid by anyone who considers the species taxa
to be congeneric. 59.2. Secondary
homonymy ends when the species taxa are placed into different genera again. 59.3. If a junior
secondary homonym was replaced before 1961 it is permanently invalid. But only
unless the substitute name is "not in use". In case of trouble go
to the Commission. 59.4. Junior homonyms rejected after 1960 remain available waiting for a time when the genus classification will change again. Replacement names will then eventually be junior synonyms. |
60. Relacement
of junior homonyms |
60.1. Junior homonyms
must be replaced by either available synonyms or new substitute names. See also
23.9, 39, 55.3, 59. 60.2. Of the available
synonyms, the oldest becomes the correct name of the taxon, with author and
types. Of course, only as long as the taxa are considered to be synonyms. 60.3. If there is no synonym available, the homonym must be replaced by a new substitute name, with own author and date. This taxon will compete in priority with any synonym recognized later. Recommendation to replace objectively if possible, using the same types. |
61. Types |
61.1. Each taxon
has a type determining the taxon's identity. Species-like taxa have specimens
as types, genus-like taxa have type species, family-like taxa have type genera.
Types usually will not be changed. 61.2. Types of
taxa are also the types of their nominotypical other taxa. The rank within the
family-, genus- or species-like taxa has no influence on types. 61.3. Taxa with
different types being united at their rank result in subjective synonyms at
their rank, but not necessarily at a subordinate rank. Taxa with same types
are objective synonyms. If several genera with same type species were used to
produce families, the families are objective synonyms. Genera with different
type species but which have the same types are objective synonyms. Example:
Psittacus elegans Gmelin,
1788 and Platycercus flaveolus Gould,
1837 are united at species level, the species name is Platycercus
elegans (Gmelin, 1788) (Sauropsida). But they belong
to different subspecies Platycercus elegans elegans
(Gmelin, 1788) and Platycercus
elegans flaveolus Gould, 1837. 61.4. Also subgenera and subspecies can be type genera and type species. |
62. (Application: family level) |
The following applies to family-like taxa. |
63. Family-like
taxa have type genera, determining their family name |
63.1 Coordinate family-like taxa have the same type genus. |
64. Type genus for families |
To create a family
name, any genus personally regarded to be in accordance with current classification
can be taken as type genus, not necessarily the oldest one. Recommendation to select a well-known and representative genus. |
65. Identification |
65.1. The author
is assumed to have correctly identified the type genus unless the there is clear
evidence of the contrary. 65.2. In cases of trouble due to possible misidentification go to the Commission. |
66. (Application: genus level) |
The following applies
to genera and subgenera, but not to collective groups at genus level, which
have no type species. 66.1. Taxa on genus level based on the fossilized work of animals need type species only after 1999. |
67. General
provisions for type species |
67.1. Type species
for genera and subgenera are species taxa in the form they were originally described,
even if suppressed. Recommendation
not to use the expression genotype for type species and to cite them in the
original form they were described. Example:
Homarus Weber, 1795 has the
type species Astacus marinus Fabricius,
1775, today classified as Homarus gammarus (Linnæus, 1758) (Crustacea). 67.2. Type species
fixation only possible with species that were originally included without expressed
doubts at the genus establishment. If no species were included, only those species
can be taken which were first expressly included in the genus. Citation of species
accounts of another publication or citation of another genus synonym is not
enough. 67.3. Decisions
concerning type species fixation only possible with the relevant published record. 67.4. Original
fixation only in the original publication of the genus establishment, subsequently
if later. Original fixation obligate after 1930, for genus taxa based on the
fossilized work of animals after 1999. 67.5. Type species
designation only valid if clearly and definitely expressed. Mentioning a species
as an example for a genus or defining a special feature as typical is not enough. 67.6. If spelled
incorretly at the designation, the type species spelling will be cited correctly. 67.7. If authors
and years of type species were cited incorrectly at the designation, they will
be cited correctly. 67.8. Replacement
names have the same type species as the original genus taxa. If the original
taxon had no type species, the type species fixed for the replacement name is
the same as for the original taxon. 67.9. For misidentified
type species see 70.3. 67.10. Ranking
of genus taxa does not affect their type species. 67.11. Species
taxa can be type species of more than one genus. 67.12. Genus-like
taxa first published as synonyms and later made available (11.6) have one of
the type species that were first directly assiciated with them. Example:
Meigen (1818) cited the manuscript name Forcipomyia
as a synonym of Ceratopogon
Meigen, 1803 (Diptera) and associated it for 2 species.
These 2 species are eligible as type species of Forcipomyia
Meigen, 1818, which is available because it came into
use before 1961. The type species of Ceratopogon can be another species taxon. 67.13. If a type
species was fixed deliberately using a name under which the species was erroneously
previously recorded, the author automatically creates a new species name in
the new genus (see 11.10, 70.4). For subsequent designation see 69.2. 67.14. Collective
groups have no type species, type species fixation is useless. Example: Ceracaria Müller, 1773 is currently classified as a collective group for not closer identifiable trematode larvae, but was originally established as a genus. Many authors cited C. lemna Müller, 1773 as its type species. Currently this is disregarded. |
68. Original
type species fixation |
68.1. Valid type
fixation is determined by original designation, monotypy, absolute tautonymy
or Linnaean tautonymy - in case of several possible alternatives the first fixation
in this order of precedence is valid. Recommendation
to cite only the valid type fixation method. 68.2. Original
designation: expressedly designated in the genus description. Using "n.
gen, n. spec." for one species and for the others only "n. spec."
or using a new species taxon name typicum or typus is regarded as original designation.
68.3. Monotypy:
if only one species was included in the new genus taxon or nominotypical subgenus.
Synonyms, subspecies, species not cited by an available name or with doubts
are disregarded. 68.4. Absolute
tautonymy: if an available species taxon name originally included is identical
with the new genus taxon name. Example:
Among several species originally contained in Planorbis
Müller, 1774 (Gastropoda) was Helix
planorbis Linnæus, 1758, type species by absolute
tautonymy, then classified as Planorbis planorbis (Linnæus, 1758). Our comment: identical should mean identical in all characters. Scomber and scombrus are not identic. 68.5. Linnaean
tautonymy: if in a genus establishment before 1931 a name of a pre-Linnaean
synonymy for a species is cited as identical with the new genus taxon name.
Example:
Castor Linnæus, 1758
was established containing 2 species. In the synonymy of C.
fiber Linnæus, 1758 the author cited "Castor
Gesner pisc. 185", a reference to a pre-Linnaean work (Gesner 1598). C. fiber is fixed as type species by
Linnaean tautonymy. 68.6. For fixations of deliberately cited misidentified species see 11.10 and 67.13. |
69. Non-original
type fixation |
69.1. Subsquent
designation: by the first author who designates subsequently one of the
originally included species. The author does not need to be aware of designating
it, clear mentioning as the type species for a genus is enough. Designations
in literature-recording publications are also accepted. Later designations are
not valid. 69.2. All species
originally included in the genus can be chosen. Incorrect spellings of the type
species, either in the original or in the subsequent publication, will be corrected.
The type species is to be cited under its correct name. Citing a subjective
synonym of (only) one of the originally included species is valid, but the name
of the originally included species will be cited as type species. Same with
replacement names for originally included species. In case of a species produced
by deliberately cited misidentified species in the original genus description
(11.10, 67.13), the then produced new species name is to be cited if fixed as
type species. 69.3. Subsequent
monotypy: if in a subsequent publication only one species was included in
a genus that was originally established without any species. 69.4. Elimination
of all but one originally included species in a later classification is not
necessarily a type fixation. Recommendation to designate type species (in order of appearence of these criteria) that are well known, frequent, or with existing type material, if possible the most common or important species (or parasiting in such an animal) or with the name communis, vulgaris, medicinalis or officinalis, or a species name having vitually the same meaning as the genus name, like Bos taurus, Equus caballus, Scomber scombrus, Isabellaria isabellina, Spinicapitichthys spiniceps. Authors should prefer species taxa that are still included in the genus, if possible in a larger group within the genus if there are several groups, to species taxa with mature and not only larval type specimens, to species which the author of the genus taxon knew well or regarded as representative for the genus, perhaps some authors listed typical species first in species lists. |
70. Type species
identification |
70.1. If not evidently
otherwise, authors are assumed to have identified their fixed type species correctly. 70.2. No overlooked
type species fixation will be invalid unless otherwise ruled by the Commission. 70.3. If type species
were undeliberately misidentified, a new type species may be selected. This
could be the true species behind the misidentification (which would have a different
species name - both names must be cited and Article 70.3 of the Code must be
referred to) or the species actually carrying the selected name, disregarding
that it was misidentified. 70.4. In case of a species produced by deliberately cited misidentified species in the original genus description see 11.10, 67.13, 69.2. |
71. (Application: species level) |
The following is for species and subspecific taxa. |
72. General
provisions for types |
72.1. The term
"type" is used in different expressions. Type series comprises all
type specimens, name-bearing types are holotype (fixed originally), syntypes
(all type specimens together), lectotype (fixed subsequently) or neotype (fixed
subsequently), other specimens are paratypes (syntypes minus holotype) and paralectotypes
(syntypes minus lectotype). The term allotype may be used for a specimen of
opposite sex to the holotype but has no name-bearing function. 72.2. Type fixation
before 2000 originally or subsequently. 72.3. After 1999
holotype or syntypes fixation is obligate. Syntypes must be clearly indicated
as such. 72.4. The type
series consists of all specimens assumed (before 2000) to have been present
to the author, mentioned directly or by bibliographic reference in the description.
Except explicitely excluded or doubted specimens and those referred to as distinct
forms indicated by name, letter or number. Misidentification of a species taxon
can be demonstrated by misidentified type specimens (if this is what 72.4.2
means). If an available type species was introduced as a junior synonym (11.6),
either (preferably) the specimens associated with the cited synonymy are the
types or the specimens attributed to the name when it was made available. If
a species name was made aailable by reference to an unavailable name in a bibiographic
reference (12.2, 13.1), the type specimens will be those to which the name was
applied to when making the name available. When the holotype is lost, paratypes
cannot be selected as lectotypes, but as neotypes. If an author lists syntypes
(or types, cotypes, holotype and paratypes) and other specimens separately,
the other specimens are no types. The mere citation of "type" in a
subsequent publication is not enough to fixe specimens as types. 72.5. Name-bearing
types can be parts of animals, an example of the work of an animal (for extant
species only before 1931), a colony of animals living in a single entity not
derived by sexual multiplication, fossil remains in the form of natural impressions,
moulds or casts, in the case of protistans preparations of individuals in different
life cycle stages (a hapantotype, 73.3), microscope preparations (type slide,
where the important animals should be marked), but not illustrations or descriptions
as such. 72.6. Specimens
can be types of different species taxa. 72.7. Types of
replacement names are those that belonged the replaced available taxa. Examples:
When transferred to the genus Mus, Acanthomys leucopus Gray, 1867 became
a secondary homonym of Mus leucopus Rafinesque, 1818 (Mammalia). Mus terrareginae
Alston, 1879 was introduced as a replacement name
for and received the types of A. leucopus Gray, 1867. 72.8. Species and
nominotypical subspecies have the same types. 72.9. Types are
associated to their species taxa independent from their current classification. 72.10. Holotypes,
syntypes, lectotypes and neotypes are important and valuable specimens, to be
held in trust by persons responsible for safe keeping. Recommendation to label unmistakably, to publish all information of the labels to recognize these specimens in the future, instututes should mark them clearly, preserve them safely, make them accessible for study, publish lists of their types and communicate requested information. |
73. Name-bearing
types |
73.1. Holotype
is a single specimen designated in the original publication, either being the
single specimen at the description or clearly designated as "the type"
or holotype. Except in cases of protistans and colonial species (72.5, 73.3).
Before 2000, evidence from outside may help to indentify the specimen. Holotypes
cannot be fixed subsequently. Disappearance of a holotype does not make the
designation invalid. If a holotype consists of several parts belonging to different
individuals, some components can be removed by appropriate citation. Recommendations
for holotypes. Shall be well recognizable in future, preferably a specimen the
author had studied personally, publication shall contain animal or organs' size,
exact locality including geographic coordinates and elevation or water depth,
geological stage and stratigraphical position, date, other label data, sex,
collector's name, collection name and number, for parasites name of the host
species. The other types should be labelled as paratypes, the term cotype should
be avoided, existence of a holotype should only be assumed at clear evidence.
73.2. Syntypes
(cotypes, types) are either expressedly designated or inferred from non-existence
of holotype or lectotype within a type series from before 2000, having either
been seen by the author or by the authors of earlier descriptions to which was
referred to in the description. At lectotype designation, the other specimens
become paralectotypes and remain so when the lectotype is lost. The type locality
comprises all localities the syntypes were from. 73.3. Hapantotypes consist of preparations or cultures of protistans, regarded as indivisible. If a hapantotype contains different species, these can be removed by appropriate citation. |
74. Lectotypes |
74.1. May only
be selected from syntypes, only the first designation is valid. Lectotype designation
supercedes any previous restriction in species taxon classification and removes
the syntype status from the other type specimens. 74.2. A lectotype
later found not to have been part of the syntypes loses its status as lectotype. 74.3. Lectotype
designation must be made specifically for one taxon after another, general statements
like "all specimens responding to a certain condition shall be the lectotypes"
are not valid. 74.4. Lectotype
designation using an illustration or description is enough. 74.5. Lectotype
selection and designation before 2000 must be clear and unmistakably, leaving
no doubts. 74.6. If no information
given in the original description implied that there was more than one type
specimen, and this one specimen was understood as the holotype in a subsequent
publication, this specimen is regarded as lectotype if more type specimens from
the original description are discovered. Example:
In the brief description of Thylacoleo carnifex Owen, 1858 (Mammalia) a cranium was illustrated, which was understood
by McCoy (1876) as "the type of the species", or holotype. Later it
was shown that Owen must have had a mandible too. The cranium automatically
became the lectotype fixed by McCoy (1876) and the mandible the paralectotype. 74.7. Lectotype
designation after 1999 only valid if the term lectotype or an exact translation
is used, if it contains sufficient information to recognize the specimen and
if taxonomic purpose is expressed in a clear statement. Recommendation to select specimens reflecting the current infraspecific classification of the taxon, select illustrated specimens, list all necessary data like as for holotypes, select from public collections, preferably containing the largest number of syntypes, or where the original author(s) worked or where most of their types are deposited. Syntypes of known locality should be preferred, the accuracy of given localities should be verified. Paralectotypes should be labelled as such. |
75. Neotypes |
75.1. If besides
paratypes and paralectotypes no other types are considered to be in existence,
a neotype may be chosen. 75.2. But only
if considered really necessary. 75.3. Only valid
with a clearly expressed need to clarify the taxonomic status or type locality,
with statement (or bibliographic reference) of the characters differentiating
the taxon from other taxa, description and enough data to recognize the specimen
in future, reasons to believe that the original types do not exist any more,
steps that were taken to find them, evidence that the neotype is consistent
with what was known from all sources, including type locality, geological horizon
or host species, and only if deposited in a recognized institution. 75.4. First neotype
designation is valid, no other subsequent designation except by the Commission.
Lost neotypes can be replaced by new neotypes. Recommendation
to choose neotypes from paratypes or paralectotypes, preferably from the type
locality, and take care that the designation does not cause objection by other
specialists. 75.5. The Commission
can set aside a name-bearing type if it does not reveal the species identity
and designate a neotype. Example:
The holotype of Cycloceras laevigatum M'Coy, 1844 (Ammonoidea, Cephalopoda) lacked important diagnostic
features. The Commission designated a neotype (Opinion 1720, 1993). 75.6. The Commission
can set aside a name-bearing type if it does not correspond to prevailing usage
of the species name and designate a neotype. Example:
Kerzhner & Heiss (1993) discovered that the holotype of Aradus
caucasicus (Kolenati, 1857) (Heteroptera) belonged
to another species, not to which the name was attributed for many years. The
Commission designated a neotype and conserved the use of both involved species
names (Opinion 1783, 1994). 75.7. Neotypes
designated before 1961 are only valid if they fulfilled all the conditions of
this article in its present form (2000). Recommendation
to contact authors of such invalid neotype designations before designating new
ones, at prefer the specimens selected before 1961. 75.8. Neotypes are set aside when the original types are surprisingly rediscovered. The Commission can retain such invalid neotypes. |
76. Type locality |
76.1. Comprises
the geographical or stratigraphical places of capture/collection or observation
of the name-bearing types. If the individuals were artificially transported
to another place, the starting point of the unnatural journal is the type locality. Recommendation
to identify type localities using criteria from original publications, labels
and outside information. Erroneous statements about type localities should be
corrected. 76.2. Lectotype
designation restricts the type locality to the place of origin of that specimen,
regardless of any previously published statements. 76.3. Same with neotypes. |
77. The Commission |
77.1. The International
Commission of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN) is a permanent body. 77.2. The 1972
International Congress of Zoology delegated its powers to the International
Union of Biological Sciences (IUBS). 77.3. There are
conditions for delegation. 77.4. And a constitution
of the Commission. 77.5. (Passage about transitional periods.) |
78. Powers and
duties of the Commission |
78.1. Plenary power
follows a resolution of a 1913 congress, enables the Commission to suspend most
provisions of the Code and to publish decisions as Opinions. 78.2. The Commission
may publish a List of Available Names in Zoology and may adopt parts of the
List. In case of need, the Commission determines the matter for requested decisions
as required by the articles and publlish its ruling in an Opinion. In the same
way the Commission also may interpret provisions of the Code. 78.3. The Commission
can issue declarations to clarify provisions of the Code. 78.4. The Commission shall consider any application, publish Official Lists and Indexes with names and works that were rules officially, publish in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature, and report to the international body. |
79. List of
Available Names in Zoology |
79.1. Commission
may propose that the Commission adopts part of the List. 79.1 explains how to
do so. 79.2. Commission
shall appoint an ad hoc committee to consult with proposers, execute notification,
consultation and voting. 79.3. Decision
to adopt parts of the List shall be published in the Bulletin of Zoological
Nomenclature. 79.4. A name in
the List is deemed to be an available name with spelling, date, authorship and
name-bearing type like in the List regardless of evidence of the contrary. No
unlisted name has any status in zoological nomenclature, regardless of previously
having been available. 79.5. In case of
confusions in the List the Commission can amend entries. 79.6. The Commission can add previously available names that were ommitted from the List. |
80. Status of
Commission actions |
80.1. Declarations
are provisional amendments to the Code, must be ratified by the international
body having authority. 80.2. Opinions
is where the Commission rules, concering particular cases or general interpretations
of the Code. 80.3. Opinions
are valid from the date of publication. 80.4. Spelling
errors can be corrected without further vote. 80.5. An Opinion
is only valid for the case it was about, there is not necessarily a general
meaning behind it. 80.6. Official
Lists are with available names, according to the opinions, but in case of inconsistency
the List of Available Names shall be correct. Names in the Official Lists can
also be synonyms according to any classification. 80.7. Official
Indexes are with unavailable names. The Commission can change their status again. 80.8. In case of
contradiction, the List of Available Names will be correct. 80.9. Rulings given by the Commission can only be set aside by the Commission. |
81. Plenary
power |
81.1. The Commission
has the plenary power to modify the applications of the Code in particular cases,
to conserve and suppress names, give precedence, make names available, fix types,
establish replacements. 81.2. Guiding principles.
Homonyms can be totally suppressed for both the Principle of Priority and the
Principle of Homonymy, so a later homonym may continue to be used in current
classifications. A totally suppressed species taxon remains an available name
and can be type species of a genus. Objective synonyms can be partially suppressed
(for the Principle of Priority alone). Subjective synonyms may also be conditionally
suppressed to provide that the older taxon can be used only when the two taxa
are regarded to be distinct or if the are distinct at subspecies level (or subgenus
or so). |
82. Unter consideration |
82.1. When a case
is under consideration by the Commission prevailing usage of the involved names
is to be maintained. 82.2. Consideration begins with the date of first notice in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature. |
83. The Commission is not obligated to verify contents of applications. |
84. Constitution and Bylaws, some official lines. |
85. Title and
authorship of the Code |
| International Commission of Zoological Nomenclature 1999. International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, 4th edition. |
86. Date |
86.1. 4th edition
comes into force 1-1-2000. 86.2. English and
French texts are official and equivalent in force, meaning and authority. 86.3. Previous rules not reaffirmed in this editions are not longer valid. |
87. Translations |
More official and equivalent translations are possible. |
88. Names before 1757 |
No name published
before 1758 enters zoological nomenclature, those after 1757 are governed by
the provisions of this Code. Our comment: 1758 should be replaced by 1757. Clerck 1757 should be considered here. Names published before 1757 entered zoological nomenclature only if they were adopted by post-1757 authors. |
89. Code interpretation |
89.1. For the meanings
of certain words and expressions see the glossary. In doubtful cases the Commission
will decide. 89.2. Recommendations and examples are not part of the legislative text of the Code. |
90. The Code can have amendments, but only if officially approved.
|
Glossary: |
For us the most
significant and questionable expressions are the terms "valid", "prevailing
usage", "nomen oblitum" and the passages dealing with the "List
of Available Names". "Valid"
leads to misunderstandings because it has different meanings, one of which is
in clear contrast to our language feeling and should be replaced by a term like
"in accordance with current classification". "Prevailing
usage" is too difficult to define. The publications determining names
and type designations for a taxon are few - but to judge whether a name is or
has been for some years in prevailing usage is practically impossible. We can
check the current use of different names in searching engines in the internet
- but how will we consider criteria like time or the names reflecting "recent
authors concerned with the relevant taxon". Finally, what is a "substantial
majority"? In some groups we have only ten specialists knowing the taxon,
in others we have thousands of molecular biologists using names not used by
contemporary taxonomists. The expression
"nomen oblitum" contradicts itself: no name published in a
book that is still available to the public will be forgotten - the books don't
forget. If authors had no access to certain old books this is going be different
if we digitise all old zoological publications. It will become difficult (and
for a program it is practically impossible) to check whether the name had not
been cited from 1899-2000. Such names should explicitely be rejected by the
Commission and published in the list of rejected names. In our modern times
most zoological names are not any longer looked up in printed matter, but rather
in the internet. We would like to recommend to delete this article from the
Code and hand over its content to the Commission. As to the "List of Available Names", it should be stated clearly that in contrast to the Official Lists, the List of Available Names has only been sceduled and no single part of it has ever been published. There are no provisions in the Code as to what will happen if new species taxa will be described in the future after the List of Available Names will have been published - will the new names be available? As it stands, it seems as if the project was thought for the day when all species will be known and nothing will change any more in the classification. We would like to discourage to bring forward such a project and would like the passages in the Code to be erased. Discovering old names may indeed lead to commonly used names being replaced by unknown older names in some cases. But in our modern times even the commonly used names of organisations, enterprises and countries change much more rapidly than in the past. We learned to live in a faster world. Replacing a name by another one is not a process modern scientists could not live with.
|