The Nomenclature Codes (or the "Codes of nomenclature") are the various rulebooks that govern biological nomenclature, each in their own area. To an end-user who only deals with names of species, with some awareness that species are assignable to families, it may not be noticeable that there is more than one Code, but beyond this basic level these are rather different in the way they work.

The successful introduction of two-part names for species by Linnaeus was the start for an ever-expanding system of nomenclature. With all naturalists worldwide adopting this approach to thinking up names there arose several schools of thought about the details. It became ever more apparent that a detailed body of rules was necessary to govern scientific names. From the mid-nineteenth century onwards there were several initiatives to arrive at worldwide-accepted sets of rules. In the course of time these became the present Nomenclature Codes governing the naming of

• animals (International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, abbreviated ICZN)
• plants (incl. Fungi, cyanobacteria) (International Code of Botanical Nomenclature, abbreviated ICBN; with supplementary Codes)
• bacteria (International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria, abbreviated ICNB)
• viruses (see virus classification).

Contents 1 Differences between Codes 1.1 Starting point 1.2 Workings 1.3 Terminology 1.4 Types 2 Other codes 3 Common names 4 References 4.1 External links

[edit] Differences between Codes

[edit] Starting point

The starting point, that is the time from which these Codes are in effect (usually retroactively), varies from group to group, and sometimes from rank to rank. In botany the starting point will often be 1753, in zoology 1758. On the other hand bacteriology started anew, making a clean sweep in 1980, although maintaining the original authors and dates of publication.

[edit] Workings

There are also differences in the way Codes work. For example, the ICBN (the plant Code) forbids tautonyms, while the ICZN, (the animal Code) allows them.

[edit] Terminology

These Codes differ in terminology, and there is a long-term project to "harmonize" this. For instance, the ICBN uses "valid" in "valid publication of a name" (= the act of publishing a formal name), with "establishing a name" as the ICZN equivalent. The ICZN uses "valid" in "valid name" (="correct name"), with "correct name" as the ICBN equivalent. Harmonization is making very limited progress.

[edit] Types

There are differences in respect of what kinds of types are used. The bacteriological Code prefers living type cultures, but allows other kinds. There has been ongoing debate regarding which kind of type is more useful in a case like cyanobacteria.^[1]

[edit] Other codes

A more radical approach is to replace all existing Codes by a BioCode, basically a synthesis of the existing Codes.^[2][3] The BioCode draft has received little attention since 1997; its originally planned implementation date of January 1, 2000, has passed unnoticed. However, a 2004 paper concerning the cyanobacteria does advocate a future adoption of a BioCode and interim steps consisting of reducing the differences between the codes.^[1]

Another code in development is the PhyloCode, which regulates phylogenetic nomenclature rather than Linnaean nomenclature (that is, it requires phylogenetic definitions for every name, and does not contain mandatory ranks). Implementation is tentatively scheduled for sometime before 2010.

The formal names of cultivated plants are governed by the International Code of Nomenclature for Cultivated Plants, abbreviated ICNCP. This Code operates within the limits set by the ICBN, but uses different basic principles.

[edit] Common names

Many plants and animals also have common and familiar names in countries where they occur. In the case of plants a common name may refer to several different plants even within one country. In the case of animals and especially in the case of birds,there is much greater uniformity with common names generally referring to only a single species (although generally inclusive of sub-species). In some case the scientific Genus name has become the common name such as Hydra and Daphnia. The use of common names is governed by the normal rules of grammar in English and they are pluralised according to the same rules. Even though common names may appear to have roots in other languages, especially Latin or Greek, plurals do not follow the grammatical rules of those languages. For example it would be correct to refer to many Hydras or many Octopuses. However, when using the scientific binomial name or any other rank of the taxonomy, plurals are ordinarily not used.

[edit] References

1. ^ ^{a b} Ahoren Oren (2004). "A proposal for further integration of the cyanobacteria under the Bacteriological Code". Int. J. Syst. Evol. Microbiol. 54: 1895–1902. doi:10.1099/ijs.0.03008-0. PMID 15388760. 
2. ^ "Draft BioCode". 1997. http://www.bgbm.org/IAPT/biocode/default.htm. 
3. ^ John McNeill (1996-11-04). "The BioCode: Integrated biological nomenclature for the 21st century?". Proceedings of a Mini-Symposium on Biological Nomenclature in the 21st Century. 

[edit] External links

• ICBN : St. Louis Code (2000)
• ICZN: the 'green book' (1999)
• details on the ICNB of 1992
• draft-BioCode
• PhyloCode