The Name Game

[Doug Yanega]

>Here's the problem. For the past 200 years taxonomists, most of which were
>trained in classical Greek and latin,  proposed species names that were
>correctly declined to go with the genus name - which was the correct way to
>use the Latin language. They also changed the species name if it was
>transferred to a different genus as required.  The current "International
>Code ... " still says this must be done.

The ICZN does allow an "out", which many people choose these days. If you
*specify* in your description of a new taxon that the species epithet is
intended to be a "noun in apposition", then you are explicitly waiving the
need for it to agree with the genus name. Problem avoided. Nonetheless, I
suspect that when the remaining members of the "old guard" have gone, that
the ICZN will change to "original form to be used", for simplicity's sake.
        Of course, unless the ICZN and ICBN fuse (as some hope, the new
BioCode), we can expect the botanists to take about another 200 years
before they agree. >;-) (Smiley included for humor-impaired botanists on
the list).

Peace,


Doug Yanega       Dept. of Entomology           Entomology Research Museum
Univ. of California - Riverside, Riverside, CA 92521
phone: (909) 787-4315
                  http://www.icb.ufmg.br/~dyanega/
  "There are some enterprises in which a careful disorderliness
        is the true method" - Herman Melville, Moby Dick, Chap. 82