Plant Nomenclature

What is Nomenclature?
1. Assignment of plant names utilizing a formal system.
What is the name of the work providing the rules and recommendations for plant nomenclature?
2. International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (ICN) (formerly International Code of Botanical
Nomenclature, ICBN)
What organisms are covered by the ICN?
3. Land plants, "algae," and fungi (+slime molds, water molds)
What are two basic activities governed by the ICN?
1. Naming new taxa
2. Determining the correct name for previously named taxa (altered in some way)
What are legitimate and illegitimate names?
1) Legitimate Names
- in accordance with the rules of the ICN.
2) Illegitimate Names
- violate one or more rules of the ICN.
How are changes to the ICN made?
- International Botanical Congress
- Last held in Shenzhen, China, 23–29 July 2017.
What are the Principles of Plant Nomenclature?
1) Botanical nomenclature is independent of Zoological and Bacteriological nomenclature.
2) The application of botanical names is determined by means of nomenclatural types.
3) Botanical nomenclature is based upon priority of publication.
4) Each taxon of a particular circumscription, position, and rank can have only one correct name, the earliest in
accordance with the rules. [=Fundamental Principle!]
5) Scientific names are treated as Latin.
6) The rules and regulations of the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature are retroactive.
What are the rules vs. regulations of the ICN?
- Rules = required
- Recommendations = not required
What is a scientific name?
- the names assigned by the rules of the ICN
- In Latin language
- E.g., Malpighia, Alliaceae, Zingiberales
Who first consistently used binomials?
- Linnaeus
What is the correct form of binomials?
- Binomial = “two names”
- E.g., for Quercus dumosa Nuttall
 - Quercus = genus name (capitalized) dumosa = specific epithet (not capitalized)
- Quercus dumosa = species name
- Nuttall = author
Scientific Names usually italicized or underlined:
- Quercus dumosa Nuttall
Scientific Names may be bolded:
- Quercus dumosa Nuttall

Name the reasons that common names are disadvantageous?

1) Only scientific names are universal, used the same world- wide, e.g., Ipomoea -Woodvine, Morning Glory
2) Common names are not consistent.
a) A taxon may have more than one common name (e.g., chamise, greasewood for Adenostoma fasciculatum).
b) One common name may refer to more than one taxon (e.g., “hemlock” for both Tsuga and for Conium
maculatum).
3) Common names tell nothing about rank; scientific names do.
4) Many, if not most, organisms have no common name in any language.
What is rank?
- Hierarchical classification in which a higher rank is inclusive of all lower ranks.
What is position?
- Placement as a member of a taxon of the next higher rank
- E.g., Aster & Rosa of same rank (genus) but different positions (Asteraceae & Rosaceae)
What is a ternary name?
- subspecies or variety name (both are infraspecific names)
- E.g., Toxicodendron radicans subsp. diversilobum
- (diversilobum = subspecific epithet)
- Brickellia arguta var. odontolepis
- (odontolepis = varietal epithet)
What is of higher rank?
Authorship?
- the name of the person who first validly published the name
o E.g., Rosaceae Jussieu Conostylideae Lindley Mohavea A. Gray
o Mohavea confertiflora (A. DC.) A. Heller
o Monardella linoides A. Gray ssp. erecta (Abrams) Elvin & A.C. Sanders

AUTHOR NAMES OFTEN ABBREVIATED:

- Haemodoraceae R. Br. (for Robert Brown) Liquidambar styraciflua L. (for C. Linnaeus) CHECK
http://www.ipni.org (standardized)
How to learn scientific names:
1. Syllabize and accent.
2. Use mnemonic devices.
3. Learn the etymology (meaning).
4. Practice and review: oral and written recitation.
What is a nomenclature type?
Herbarium specimen (usu.) permanently associated with a name.
1. Holotype - primary specimen upon which a name is based, designated at the time of publication.
2. Isotype - duplicate of the holotype, collected at the same time by the same person from the same place.
3. Lectotype - selected from the original material to serve as the type when holotype not available.
4. Neotype - specimen derived from a non-original collection that is selected to serve as the type.
Taxa at which ranks have types?
- Types exist for all ranks up to family.
- A specimen described by Linnaeus is the type for Borago officinalis L.
- Borago officinalis L. is the type for the genus Borago L.
- The genus Borago L. is the type for the family Boraginaceae Jussieu
What is a priority of publication?
- Name published first is the legitimate one
When and with what publication begin?
- Species Plantarum by Linnaeus in 1753 (with exceptions)
Adverse consequences?
How to correct?
- Nomina familiarum conservanda
 - Nomina generica conservanda et rejicienda
- Nomina species conservanda
Two reasons for name change?
1) Name contrary to the rules (illegitimate).
2) Additional research has changed definition and delimitation of a taxon.
NEW Research:
- Phylogenetic studies may demonstrate at taxon to be non-monophyletic
Four major ways that names are changed
- United
- Divided
- Changed in position
- Changed in rank
Names may be united:
- E.g., Krynitzkia and Cryptantha (Boraginaceae) have been united into one genus, Cryptantha
Name may be divided:
- E.g., Rhus (Anacardiaceae) split into Malosma, Rhus, and Toxicodendron
Name may be changed in position:
- E.g., Sedum variegata transferred to the genus Dudleya, the new species Dudleya variegata;
Name may be changed in rank:
- E.g., Larrea divaricata ssp. Tridentata changed to rank of species: Larrea tridentata

What is a basionym?
- The “name bearing” name. The original (possibly now rejected) name, part of which (the epithet) has been used in
a new combination.
Author(s) in parentheses?
- Person(s) who named basionym. Retained!
Basionym
- E.g., Sedum variegata S. Watson was transferred to the genus
- Dudleya by Moran, new species name is: Dudleya variegata (S. Watson) Moran [Note: Sedum variegata S.
Watson is the basionym]
- E.g., Muhlenbergia shepherdii (Vasey) Swallen transferred to Blepharoneuron by P. M. Peterson & Annable, new
name: Blepharoneuron shepherdii (Vasey) P. M. Peterson & Annable [Sporobolus shepherdii Vasey, Bull. Torrey
Bot. Club 14: 8. 1887] (=basionym)
What is an autonym?
- Automatically created name for infrafamilial, infrageneric, and infraspecific taxa.
- Created when taxa are divided.
- Assigned based on priority of publication. Autonyms have no authors.
Autonyms:
- E.g., Lotus stipularis (Benth.) Greene split by Isely into 2 varieties:
- Lotus stipularis (Benth.) Greene var. ottleyi Isely
- Lotus stipularis (Benth.) Greene var. stipularis
- Later, genus Hosackia accepted: Hosackia stipularis Benth. var. ottleyi (Isely) Brouillet
- Hosackia stipularis Benth. var. stipularis
- Family Euphorbiaceae divided into subfamilies: Euphorbioideae (the autonym) must be one of them
- Genus Ceanothus split into two subgenera: Subgenus Ceanothus Subgenus Cerastes
- (Subgenus Ceanothus contains type species for the genus.)
What are the main criteria of valid publication?
 1. Name must be effectively published = in a journal generally available to botanists
- As of 1 Jan 2012: Electronic material published online in Portable Document Format (PDF) with an
International Standard Serial Number (ISSN) or an International Standard Book Number (ISBN) will
constitute effective publication
2. Name must be published in the correct form, properly Latinized
with the correct rank ending.
3. Name must be published with a Latin description or diagnosis or
with a reference to such. [Vernacular description typically included.]
- As of 1 Jan 2012: A description or diagnosis may be in either
Latin or English.
4. Rank must be indicated (e.g., “sp. nov.,” “subsp. nov.,” or “var.
nov.”)
5. Nomenclatural type must be indicated (for genus and below).

What is a synonym?
- a rejected name, by a particular author or authors.
- Synonyms usu. indicated in brackets; e.g.,
 - Malosma laurina (Nutt.) Abrams [Rhus laurina Nutt.]
Why rejected?
1) because illegitimate.
2) because of taxonomic judgement.
Two types of synonyms:
1. Homotypic (nomenclatural) – based on the same type specimen
- E.g., Cryptantha decipiens (M. E. Jones) A. Heller
- [Krynitzkia decipiens M. E. Jones]
2. Heterotypic (taxonomic) – based on a different type specimen
- E.g., Aesculus L. (1753) [Pavia Mill. (1754)]
- E.g., Cryptantha mohavensis (Greene) Greene (1887) [Cryptantha fallax Greene (1902)]
What is a correct name?
- A legitimate (and therefore validly published) name that is accepted by a particular author or authors.
- Each taxon can have only one correct name.
How can a name be legitimate but not correct?
- There may be 2 (or more) alternative, legitimate names.
- Only one of these can be correct (in any given work).

a) Malacothrix incana (Nutt.) Torrey & A. Gray

o [Malacomeris incanus Nutt.]
o (=basionym, homotypic synonym)
b) Porophyllum gracile Benth.
o [P. caesium Greene; P. vaseyi Greene]
o (=heterotypic synonyms)
c) Gilia diegensis (Munz) A. D. & V. E. Grant
o [Gilia inconspicua (Sm.) Sweet var. diegensis Munz]
o (=basionym, homotypic synonym)

What is a homonym?
- synonym identical to accepted, correct name.
- E.g.: Eritrichium hispidum Philippi, 1860 [Eritrichium hispidum Buckley,1862] E.g., Piptocalyx Bentham
(Trimeniaceae), 1870 [Piptocalyx Torrey, 1874]
What is a tautonym?
- binomial in which genus and specific epithets are identical in spelling.
- Tautonyms are not permitted by the ICN!
- E.g., Helianthus helianthus would be a tautonym and illegitimate.
- Ziziphus zizyphus (L.) H. Karst. (Jujube) is not a tautonym and is permitted.
Abbreviations:
1. "in" = "in the publication of”
- E.g., Arabis sparsiflora Nutt. in T. & G. May be abbrev: Arabis sparsiflora Nutt.
2. "ex" = "validly published by.”
- E.g., Microseris elegans Greene ex A. Gray May be abbrev.: Microseris elegans A. Gray.
3. s.l. (sensu lato) means “in the broad sense”
4. s.s. or s.str. (sensu stricto) means “in the narrow sense”
 - E.g., Boraginaceae s.l. includes the families Hydrophyllaceae, Ehretiaceae, Heliotropaceae, Cordiaceae, and
others Boraginaceae s.s. does not (those families are separate)
5. "x" = a hybrid.
- E.g., Salvia xpalmeri (A. Gray) Greene
- S. apianax S. clevelandii.
6. "sp. nov." = species novum
- E.g., "Eryngium pendletonense sp. nov."
7. "cf." = confer, meaning "compare.”
- E.g., "Calyptridium cf. monandrum” (meaning check this specimens of species for confirmation)
8. aff. (affine) means “related to”
- E.g., Cryptantha aff. wigginsii (meaning something different but a close relative to this species)
Independence of Botanical Nomenclature
- Same names can exist in botanical and zoological codes.
- Morus = mulberry and a bird, the gannet
- Ficus = figs and of a group of gastropods.
- Both codes can treat same organisms, e.g., some "Protista".
Retroactivity of the ICN

Introduction to Scientific Nomenclature

Why nomenclature?
Fundamental aim of nomenclature: avoid a Tower of Babel
- “The objects of the Code are to promote stability and universability in the scientific names of animals and to
ensure that the name of each taxon is unique and distinct.
- All its provisions and recommendations are subservient to those ends and none restricts the freedom of taxonomic
thought or actions” (ICZN 1999:2)
History of scientific nomenclature
• Greek and Roman naturalists, medieval herbalists; folk taxonomists: vernacular names
• Pre-Linnaean naturalists:
 names in Latin
 nomina specifica; binominal, trinominal or even polynominal names (e.g. Iris perpusilla saxatilis
Norbonensis a caulis ferme)
 names inconsistent and often paragraphs long (diagnosis, description, identification purposes)
• Linnaeus’ 18th century taxonomic system [cf. Species plantarum (1753) and Systema naturae (1758)]
 nomina trivialia; always binominal in structure
 diagnostic style
• Need for universal codes!
 History of zoological nomenclature

1758 Formal starting point = 10th Edition of Linnaeus’s Systema Naturae and Clerck’s Aranei Svecici

1842 Strickland Code (botany and zoology)

1889 First ICZ meeting (Paris); tentative adoption of a set of rules

1901 Fifth ICZ meeting (Berlin); Rules of Zoological Nomenclature: Règles

Internationales de la Nomenclature Zoologique (French, English & German)

1961 First edition of the Code of Zoological Nomenclature

1964 Second edition

1985 Third edition

1988 Launch of fourth edition project

1995 Draft of fourth edition released by Secretariat

1999 Fourth edition (current edition) Takes effect from 1 January 2000

2005 Discussion on registration of names re-opened; “zoobank”

Why do names change?

 Increased scientific understanding (e.g., discoveries; changes in species concept (s.l.) and phylogenetic
understanding)
 Correct application of nomenclatural codes (e.g., correction of errors; homonyms;…)
All changes are governed by legalistic, scientifically neutral conventions: the codes of nomenclature
E.g.: the ICZN (1999; http://www.iczn.org/iczn/index.jsp) consists of:
- Preamble
- 90 Articles, grouped in 18 chapters
o One or more mandatory provisions
o Non-mandatory recommendations
o Examples
- Glossary
Ruling principles
• Nomenclature = naming tool
• Nomenclature only follows taxonomy
1. Typification
• The taxonomic identity of a name is determined by that of its type
Principle of Typification
Art. 61.1. Each nominal taxon in the family, genus or species groups has actually or potentially a name-bearing type. The
fixation of the name bearing type of a nominal taxon provides the objective standard of reference for the application of the
name it bears.
1. The valid name from a taxon is determined only from the name-bearing type(s)
2. Objectivity through typification is continuous through the hierarchy of names, from species to family group
3. Name-bearing types (generally) are stable and provide objective continuity in the application of names (ICZN)
=> Identity of a name relies only on its type, not on its description or diagnosis
2. Principle of Synonymy
- 1 taxon should only have 1 name
3. Principle of Homonymy

- 1 name can apply to only 1 taxon (but see independence of codes)

4. Principle of Priority
- “the oldest fool is always right”
Principle of bionominal nomenclature
• Names of taxa above species: uninominal: e.g., Hominidae, Homo
• Names of species: binominal: e.g.,Homo sapiens
What’s in a name?
Monostyla closterocerca Schmarda, 1853

 new combination:
- Lecane closterocerca (Schmarda, 1853) Edmondson, 1935
 With subgenus name:
- Lecane (Monostyla) closterocerca (Schmarda, 1853) Edmondson, 1935
 Short:
- Lecane (M.) closterocerca (Shmarda, 1853) Or: L. closterocerca
 With subspecies name: trinomen
 - Lecane (Monostyla) closterocerca amazonica Koste, 1972 Or: L. closterocerca amazonica
Scientific Names are Latin
- Rules of Latin grammar apply
- Agreement in gender
Formation of Scientific Names
• Formation of species names:
1. After features: adjectives e.g.:
o Lepadella minuta

o Scaridium grande

o S. longicaudum

o Brachionus bidentatus

o Keratella taurocephala

2. After other species: noun in apposition, adjective

o e.g., Trichocerca tigris, T. rattus, T. cavia, T. mus, T. musculus, T. porcellus, T. orca. also: Seison
nebaliae.
3. After people: noun in genitive case
o one man: Lecane ludwigii
o one woman: Brachionus josefinae several man/woman: L. gallagherorum several woman: stem + arum
4. After places: adjectival toponym
o e.g., Lecane papuana
o Brachionus budapestinensis
5. no diacritic or other marks, ligature, apostrophes, etc…:
o Trichocerca dixon-nutalli becomes T. dixonnutalli;
o Dicranophorus lütkeni becomes D. luetkeni;
o Filinia novaezaelandiae;
o (ñ becomes n, ø becomes o, …) But Zygiella x-notata

Principle of Typification
Type: sole bearer on identity of a name
Description, diagnosis,… are
required, but irrelevant (for
nomenclatural purposes)
 How does it work?
• Genus Pinus Linnaeus, 1753 (pine trees)
• Taxonomy: five distinct genera
Genus 1 : P. cedrus
Genus 2 : P. larix
Genus 3 : P. picea, P. balsamea
Genus 4 : P. abies
Genus 5 : P. sylvestris, P. pinea, P. cembra, P. strobus P. taeda.
1. Type of Pinus : P. sylvestris. Hence, = (5)
2. Others: new names (Cedrus, Larix, Abies and Picea, respectively).
Synonyms and Homonyms
1. Synonyms: 2 or more names = 1 taxon

 Nomenclatural (= objective, homotypic) synonyms

 Taxonomic (= subjective, heterotypic) synonyms

Example:
• Lecane ludwigii (Eckstein, 1883) or
• Lecane stokesi (Pell, 1890) or
 • Lecane ohioensis (Herrick, 1885) ?
• Lecane ornata (Harring & Myers, 1926)
• Lecane ornata (Daday, 1897) (syn. of L. ludwigii (Eckstein, 1883))
Problem: name for L. ornata (Harring & Myers, 1926) non (Daday, 1897)?
2. Homonyms: 1 name = 2 or more taxa
 Argus Bohadsch, 1761(gastropod);
 Argus Scopoli, 1763 (butterfly);
 Argus Scopoli, 1777 (butterfly);
 Argus Poli, 1791 (mollusk);
 Argus Temminck, 1807 (bird);
 Argus Lamarck, 1817 (hesperid);
 Argus Boisduval, 1832 (lycaenid);
 Argus Walckenaer, 1836 (arachnid);
 Argus Gray, 1847(mollusk);
 Argus Gerhard, 1850 (lycaenid))
Who’s right?
Principle of Priority: “the oldest fool is always right”
But This Can Cause Problems The commission can intervene! (nomina rejicienda, conservanda)
Formal requirements in ICZN (1)
• Name or nomenclatural act must be Published;
• Scientific names must be spelled using the 26 letters of the Latin Alphabet;
• Derivation: a name may be derived from any language, or even an arbitrary combination of letters if this is
formed to be used as a word (not cbafdg);
=> lots of freedom allowed!
Some examples..
1. One-letter difference:
Tortricidae (Moths, Northern Mexico: (Kearfott, 1907)
Eucosma fandana
Eucosma gandana
Eucosma handana
Eucosma landana
2. Fun with Latin:

• Stupidogobius Aurich, 1938 (stupid fish)

3. Localities:
• Panama canalia Marsh, 1993 (braconid)
• Belgica antarctica (chironomide)
• Mexico (beetle and virus)
 • Texas (pentatomid and virus)
• Neotiglossa (Texas) californica Bliven, 1958
4. Mythology:
• Zeus Linnaeus, 1758 (fish)
• Kali Lloyd, 1909 (fish)
• Satan Hubbs & Bailey, 1947 (fish),…
5. Not another one…
• Cyclocephala nodanotherwon Ratcliffe (scarabid)
• Ochisme, Polychisme, Dolichisme, Peggichisme Kirkaldi, 1904
• Iyaiyai Evenhuis, 1994
• Agra vation Erwin, 1983
• Notnops, Taintnops, and Tisentnops Platnick, 1994 (spiders originally in genus Nops MacLeay, 1839
6. Persons (“honorifics”):
• Cartwrightia cartwrighti Cartwright, 1967 (scarab)
• Hoia hoi (parasitic copepod), after Ju-Shey Ho
• Leonardo davincii Bleszynski, 1965 (pyralid butterfly)
7. But also (“horrorifics”):
• Dyaria Neumoegen, 1893 (liparid butterfly) after Mr. Dyar.
Formal requirements in ICZN (2)
• New requirements for species-group names published after 1999:
– Explicit indication of name as intentionally new (n. sp., gen. nov., nom. nov.,…)
– Fixation of name-bearing types explicit designation & deposition
The different codes: a comparison
1) The codes have different starting dates and works
• Botanical : Species Plantarum : Linnaeus, 1753.
• Zoological : Systema Naturae : Linnaeus, 1758; Araneae swecici Clerck, 1757,…
• Bacteriologial : January 1, 1980 (older names only when included in list of approved names)
2) The codes are independent
=> inter-code homonyms are possible, allowed, and common
• Lactarius nonfungus Nolf & Bajpai 1992: fish
• Lactarius nonpiscis Verbeken 1996: fungus
Table 1. Inter-Code Generic homonyms
Some binomen homonyms:
• Poria cocos: Coleoptera and Fungus;
• Pieris japonica: butterfly and plant;
• Culcita novaeguineae: seastar, and Culcita novae-guineae: fern
• Lactarius nonfungus Nolf & Bajpai 1992: fish
• Lactarius nonpiscis Verbeken 1996: fungus
The different codes: a comparison
1. Principle of co-ordination:
Names established at any rank within the F/G/S groups are deemed established at any rank within the group
– Family-group: Super-,Family, sub-, Tribus, sub-
– Genus-group: Genus, sub-
– Species-group: Species, sub-
Zoology only
2. Tautonyms
- (Bison bison, Glis glis, Mops mops...) allowed in zoology;
3. Latin diagnosis
- required in botanical nomenclature
4. Application & different standardised endings
Something really rotifer… what about variants / forms?
• Infrasubspecific categories not treated by the ICZN
• In rotiferology: Brachionus calyciflorus Pallas 1766 f. amphiceros Ehrenberg, 1838
• But what if?
– Testudinella tridentata Smirnov, 1931 f. curvata Wulfert 1965
– Brachionus variabilis Hempel, 1896 var. novae-zelandiae Morris, 1913
A matter of Availability
• Est’d as valid
• Est’d as « variety » or « form »
– Before 1961: available if
• not explicitly as of infrasubspecific rank
• Used as subspecies level before 1985 (Kutikova 1970!)
– After 1961: unavailable
Hence:
Testudinella tridentata Smirnov, 1931
f. curvata Wulfert 1965
becomes
Testudinella greeni Koste 1981 and Brachionus variabilis Hempel, 1896 var. novae-zelandiae Morris, 1913
becomes
Brachionus novaezelandiae Morris, 1913
Interesting websites:
• International Code of Botanical Nomenclature : http://www.bgbm.fu-
berlin.de/iapt/nomenclature/code/SaintLouis/0000St.Louistitle.htm
• International Commission and Code on Zoological
• Nomenclature : http://www.iczn.org
• Nomenclator Zoologicus (347,000 zoölogical genus- and subgenus names from 1758 to 1994:
http://www.ubio.org/NomenclatorZoologicus
• GBIF (www.gbif.org), Species2000 (www.sp2000.org),
• FaunaEuropaea (www.faunaeur.org), ERMS, TaDWG,….
• BioNET International (http://www.bionet- intl.org/opencms/opencms/index1.jsp)
• Global Taxonomy Initiative (http://www.biodiv.org/programmes/cross-cutting/taxonomy/)
• (zoogle),