[Taxacom] A new issue of Bionomina

[Alain Dubois]

Dear all,

The issue *8* of *Bionomina* was just published. It includes 3 papers
dealing with zoological nomenclature:

Alain Dubois. Further proposals about higher zoological nomenclature, and a
lesson of humility: the solution to a recent controversy about the
authorship and date of the nomen Amphibia had already been published one
century ago.
doi: 10.11646/bionomina.8.1.1
*Abstract*: The absence in the Code of Rules for the nomenclature of
zoological taxa above the rank superfamily is an impediment
to universal and unambiguous communication about the higher taxonomy of
animals. Pending the possible fixing of the
Code in this respect, it appears justified to develop a set of simple
‘guidelines’ which could be adopted consensually by
the taxonomists who wish so. They could include: (1) the convention that
the ‘same name’ given to different higher taxa
results in the existence (and therefore availability) of different
homonymous nomina, having different authors and dates;
(2) the convention that a nomen of higher taxon first introduced clearly as
a scientific, not vernacular, name but in a non-
Latin form, and that was latinised subsequently in the literature, should
be credited to the author of the original work; (3)
the need to ‘protect’ the best known and most often used higher zoological
nomina (sozonyms and sozodiaphonyms),
with the dominant meanings and spellings that they have had for decades or
centuries in the biological literature,
irrespective of being or not the first ones to have been proposed for the
taxa at stake or among homonyms; (4) the
implementation of the Principles of Homonymy and of Priority among all the
other nomina of higher taxa. These
proposals are illustrated by examples in amphibian higher nomenclature,
concerning the well-known nomina AMPHIBIA
and BATRACHIA, which have been the matter of recent controversies. An
unexpected finding is reported here: that a
similar debate on this same question developed in the years 1889–1910,
mostly in the journal *Science*, and was closed by
a clear and simple solution, which has fallen into complete oblivion since
then. This suggests that our databases are
incomplete and that we should be more humble in our debates than we often
are, as we are still missing important pieces
of information on the past literature.
*Key words*: higher nomenclature, Rules, sozonymy, homonymy, priority,
non-Latin scientific names, well-known
names, ancient literature, journal Science, controversies, databases.

Alain Dubois. Zoological nomina in the century of extinctions: new
proposals.
doi: 10.11646/bionomina.8.1.2
*Abstract*: The taxonomic urgency, caused by the combination of the
taxonomic gap (wide incompleteness of the taxonomic
inventory of living beings on earth) and the biodiversity crisis (major
threats of extinction on a large part of the current
biodiversity) imposes heavy responsibilities on the scientific community of
biologists and particularly of taxonomists. In
order to become more efficient in the work of description and naming of the
species and other taxa, some changes in
traditional working practices should be implemented. Among them, a
simplification and standardisation of some
nomenclatural Rules and practices, and in particular of the way of writing
the scientific names of taxa (nomina) should
be considered. Although traditionally considered important, authorship
plays no role in the implementation of the
nomenclatural Rules concerning availability, allocation and validity of
nomina, and the traditional emphasis put on
authorship in nomenclature plays in fact a negative role in taxonomy.
Removing the names of authors, but not the date,
from the nominal-complex by which each taxon is designated would
de-emphasise the role of authorship in
nomenclature. It would reduce the burden of nomenclatural taxonomic
inflation and synonymy load due to
nomenclatural mihilim and unwarranted descriptions of new taxa that will
later have to be treated as synonyms. Other
proposals regarding the standards and length of writing nominal-complexes
in publications are offered, which should be
beneficial not only to scientific publications using nomina of taxa, but
also to the computerisation of nomenclatural
information and its electronic diffusion. These proposed changes, some of
which are drastic, should not be implemented
at once, but in several steps, in order to be progressively adopted by the
community of taxonomists.
*Keywords*: nomenclature; nominal-complex; scientific name; authorship;
date; standard formats.

Ivan Löbl. On inconsistency in, and undesirable side effects of the
International Code of Zoological Nomenclature.
doi: 10.11646/bionomina.8.1.3.
Miscellaneous comments on the Code.

Let me remind you that the journal *Bionomina,* published by Magnolia Press
(also publisher of *Zootaxa* and *Phytotaxa*) welcomes manuscripts dealing
with all aspect of biological nomenclature and terminology.

Best wishes,

Alain Dubois
____________________________________

Professeur Alain Dubois
Muséum National d'Histoire Naturelle
Institut Systématique, Evolution, Biodiversité (ISYEB) - UMR 7205
Reptiles & Amphibiens
CP 30
25 rue Cuvier
75005 Paris
France

emails: <adbionomina at gmail.com>, <adpeerj at gmail.com>, <adubois at mnhn.fr>

Chief Editor, Bionomina
<http://www.mapress.com/bionomina>

Nomenclature Editor, Zootaxa
<http://www.mapress.com/zootaxa/>

Academic Editor, PeerJ
<https://peerj.com>
____________________________________

“La culture ce n’est pas avoir le cerveau farci de dates, de noms ou de
chiffres, c’est la qualité du jugement, l’exigence logique, l’appétit de la
preuve, la notion de la complexité des choses et de l’arduité des
problèmes. C’est l’habitude du doute, le discernement dans la méfiance, la
modestie d’opinion, la patience d’ignorer, la certitude qu’on n’a jamais
tout le vrai en partage; c’est avoir l’esprit ferme sans l’avoir rigide,
c’est être armé contre le flou et aussi contre la fausse précision, c’est
refuser tous les fanatismes et jusqu’à ceux qui s’autorisent de la raison;
c’est suspecter les dogmatismes officiels mais sans profit pour les
charlatans, c’est révérer le génie mais sans en faire une idole, c’est
toujours préférer ce qui est à ce qu’on préférerait qui fût.”
(Jean Rostand, Le droit d’être naturaliste, 1963).
____________________________________