1887

Abstract

In Opinion 103, the request to place the name Ehrenberg 1832 (Approved Lists 1980) on the list of rejected names is denied because a neotype may be designated. Similarly, because a neotype may be designated, in Opinion 104 the request to place the name Döbereiner and Ruschel 1958 (Approved Lists 1980) on the list of rejected names is denied. In Opinion 105, it is emphasized that the name Fukuda . 2012 does not contravene the Code. The request to orthographically correct Fukuda . 2012 to corrig. Fukuda . 2012 is denied. Opinion 106 addresses two Requests for an Opinion and results in the placement of the epithet in (Morse 1912) Eberson 1918 (Approved Lists 1980) and (Morse 1912) Kämpfer . 2014 on the list of rejected specific and subspecific epithets. Since this removes all known available earlier synonyms of (Magnusson 1923) Goodfellow and Alderson 1977 (Approved Lists 1980), the request to conserve the epithet in this name is denied. In Opinion 107, Phillips and Perry 1976 (Approved Lists 1980) is placed on the list of rejected names as a . Opinion 108 denies the request to place Weiner . 2000 on the list of rejected names because the information provided to the Judicial Commission is not sufficient to draw a conclusion on this matter. In Opinion 109, which addresses three Requests for an Opinion, the Judicial Commission denies the requests to place the names Shivaji . 2006, Shivaji . 2006 and Shivaji . 2006 on the list of rejected names. Instead, it is concluded that these three names had not met the requirements for valid publication. Likewise, the Judicial Commission concludes in Opinion 110 that the name corrig. Greub and Raoult 2006 had not met the requirements for valid publication. The Judicial Commission reaffirms in Opinion 111 that Zellner . 1988 is the nomenclatural type of Zellner . 1988 and further emphasizes that the species was not in danger of losing this status. These Opinions were ratified by the voting members of the International Committee on Systematics of Prokaryotes.

Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.005197
2022-01-31
2024-07-25
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/ijsem/72/1/ijsem005197.html?itemId=/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.005197&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Podkopaeva D, Grabovich M, Kuever J, Lysenko AM, Tourova TP et al. Proposal of Spirillum winogradskyi sp. nov., a novel microaerophilic species, an emended description of the genus Spirillum and request for an opinion regarding the status of the species Spirillum volutans Ehrenberg 1832. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2009; 59:2916–2920 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Lessel EF. Judicial Commission of the International Committee on Systematic Bacteriology. Minutes of Meeting, 29 August 1973. Jerusalem, Israel. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1974; 24:379–380 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Hylemon PB, Wells JS, Bowdre JH, Macadoo TO, Krieg NR. Designation of Spirillum volutans Ehrenberg 1832 as type species of the genus Spirillum Ehrenberg 1832 and designation of the neotype strain of S. volutans: Request for an Opinion. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1973; 23:20–27 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Sneath PHA, McGowan V, Skerman VBD. Approved lists of bacterial names. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1980; 30:225–420 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  5. Holt JG. International Committee on Systematic Bacteriology Judicial Commission: Minutes of the Meeting, 3 September 1978. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1979; 29:267–269 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Lapage SP, Sneath PHA, Lessel EF, Skerman VBD, Seeliger HPR et al. International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria (1990 Revision). Bacteriological Code Washington, DC: American Society for Microbiology; 1992
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Parker CT, Tindall BJ, Garrity GM. International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2019; 69:S1–S111 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Tindall BJ. What does Rule 18c of the International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria really say?. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2016; 66:3622–3624 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Oggerin M, Rubio V, Marín I, Arahal DR. The status of the species Beijerinckia fluminensis Döbereiner and Ruschel 1958. Request for an Opinion. In J Syst Evol Microbiol 2011; 61:1757–1759 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Oggerin M, Arahal DR, Rubio V, Marin I. Identification of Beijerinckia fluminensis strains CIP 106281T and UQM 1685T as Rhizobium radiobacter strains, and proposal of Beijerinckia doebereinerae sp. nov. to accommodate Beijerinckia fluminensis LMG 2819. In J Syst Evol Microbiol 2009; 59:2323–2328 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Tindall BJ, Schumann P, Stackebrandt E. The status of the genus pelczaria (poston 1994) and the species pelczaria aurantia (poston 1994). request for an opinion. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2000; 50:1695–1696 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Judicial Commission Rejection of the genus name Pelczaria with the species Pelczaria aurantia Poston 1994. Opinion 78. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2005; 55:515 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Döbereiner J, Ruschel AP. Uma nova espécie de Beijerinckia . Revista de Biologia 1958; 1:261–272
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Thompson JP, Skerman VBD. Azotobacteraceae: the Taxonomy and Ecology of the Aerobic Nitrogen-Fixing Bacteria London: Academic Press; 1979
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Oren A, Garrity GM, Schink B. Proposal to change the name Rhodoligotrophos Fukuda et al. 2012, 1947 to Rhodoligotrophus. Request for an Opinion. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2013; 63:3545 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Fukuda W, Yamada K, Miyoshi Y, Okuno H, Atomi H et al. Rhodoligotrophos appendicifer gen. nov., sp. nov., an appendaged bacterium isolated from a freshwater Antarctic lake. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2012; 62:1945–1950 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Oren A, Vandamme P, Schink B. Notes on the use of Greek word roots in genus and species names of prokaryotes. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2016; 66:2129–2140 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  18. MacAdoo TO. Nomenclatural literacy. In Goodfellow M, O’Donnell AG. eds Handbook of New Bacterial Systematics London: Academic Press; 1993 pp 339–358
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Euzéby JP. Proposal to amend rule 61 of the International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria (1990 revision). Int J Syst Bacteriol 1998; 48 Pt 2:611–612 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  20. De Vos P, Truper H. Judicial Commission of the International Committee on Systematic Bacteriology; IXth International (IUMS) Congress of Bacteriology and Applied Microbiology. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2000; 50:2239–2244 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Tindall BJ. The correct name of the taxon that contains the type strain of Rhodococcus equi . Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2014; 64:302–308 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Sangal V, Goodfellow M, Jones AL, Schwalbe EC, Blom J et al. Next-generation systematics: An innovative approach to resolve the structure of complex prokaryotic taxa. Sci Rep 2016; 6:38392 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Nouioui I, Carro L, García-López M, Meier-Kolthoff JP, Woyke T et al. Genome-based taxonomic classification of the phylum Actinobacteria . Front Microbiol 2018; 9:2007 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Tindall BJ. A note on the genus name Rhodococcus Zopf 1891 and its homonyms. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2014; 64:1062–1064 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Garrity GM. Conservation of Rhodococcus equi (Magnusson 1923) Goodfellow and Alderson 1977 and rejection of Corynebacterium hoagii (Morse 1912) Eberson 1918. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2014; 64:311–312 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Vázquez-Boland JA, Scortti M, Meijer WG. Conservation of Rhodococcus equi (Magnusson 1923) Goodfellow and Alderson 1977 and rejection of Rhodococcus hoagii (Morse 1912) Kämpfer et al. 2014. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2020; 70:3572–3576 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Kämpfer P, Dott W, Martin K, Glaeser SP. Rhodococcus defluvii sp. nov., isolated from wastewater of a bioreactor and formal proposal to reclassify [Corynebacterium hoagii] and Rhodococcus equi as Rhodococcus hoagii comb. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2014; 64:755–761 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Vázquez-Boland JA, Meijer WG. The pathogenic actinobacterium Rhodococcus equi: what’s in a name?. Mol Microbiol 2019; 112:1–15 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Commission J. The type species of the genus Salmonella lignieres 1900 is Salmonella enterica (ex Kauffmann and Edwards 1952) Le Minor and Popoff 1987, with the type strain lt2t, and conservation of the epithet enterica in Salmonella enterica over all earlier epithets that may be applied to this species. opinion 80. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2005; 55:519–520
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Judicial Commission Opinion 56. rejection of the species name Peptococcus anaerobius (Hamm) Douglas 1957. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1982; 32:468 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Judicial Commission Rejection of the name Citrobacter diversus Werkman and Gillen 1932. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1993; 43:392 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Judicial Commission Opinion 63: rejection of the type specirejection of the type species Methanosarcina methanica (Approved lists, 1980) and conservation of the genus Methanosarcina (approved lists, 1980) emend. Mah and Kuhn 1984 with Methanosarcina barkeri (Approved Lists, 1980) as the type species. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1986; 36:492 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Judicial Commission Rejection of the species name Mycobacterium aquae Jenkins et al. 1972. Int J Syst Bacteriol 198232–467 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Tindall BJ. What ever happened to Thermomicrobium fosteri Phillips and Perry 1976?. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2014; 64:1065–1067 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Zarilla KA, Perry JJ. Deoxyribonucleic acid homology and other comparisons among obligately thermophilic hydrocarbonoclastic bacteria, with a proposal for Thermoleophilum minutum sp. nov. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1986; 36:13–16 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Perry JJ. The genus Thermomicrobium. In Balows A, Trüper HG, Dworkin M, Harder W, Schleifer KH. eds The Prokaryotes, 2nd edn. New York: Springer; 1992 pp 3775–3779
    [Google Scholar]
  37. International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 1966; 16:459–490 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Yakimov MM, Lunsdorf H, Golyshin PN. Thermoleophilum album and Thermoleophilum minutum are culturable representatives of group 2 of the Rubrobacteridae (Actinobacteria). Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2003; 53:377–380 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Lai Q, Li C, Shao Z. The status of the species Hyphomonas rosenbergii Weiner et al. 2000. Request for an Opinion. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2015; 65:321 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  40. Weiner RM, Melick M, O’Neill K, Quintero E. Hyphomonas adhaerens sp. nov., hyphomonas johnsonii sp. nov. and hyphomonas rosenbergii sp. nov., marine budding and prosthecate bacteria. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2000; 50:459–469 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Arahal DR. Opinions 97, 98 and 99. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2020; 70:1439–1440 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Li C, Lai Q, Li G, Liu Y, Sun F et al. Multilocus sequence analysis for the assessment of phylogenetic diversity and biogeography in hyphomonas bacteria from diverse marine environments. PLoS ONE 2014; 9:e101394 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Quan Z-X, Zeng D-N, Xiao Y-P, Roh SW, Nam Y-D et al. Henriciella marina gen. nov., sp. nov., a novel member of the family Hyphomonadaceae isolated from the East Sea. J Microbiol 2009; 47:156–161 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  44. Branquinho R, Sousa C, Osório H, Meirinhos-Soares L, Lopes J et al. Bacillus invictae sp. nov., isolated from a health product. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2014; 64:3867–3876 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  45. Branquinho R, Klein G, Kämpfer P, Peixe LV. The status of the species Bacillus aerophilus and Bacillus stratosphericus. Request for an Opinion. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2015; 65:1101 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  46. Shivaji S, Chaturvedi P, Suresh K, Reddy GSN, Dutt CBS et al. Bacillus aerius sp. nov., Bacillus aerophilus sp. nov., Bacillus stratosphericus sp. nov. and Bacillus altitudinis sp. nov., isolated from cryogenic tubes used for collecting air samples from high altitudes. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2006; 56:1465–1473 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Dunlap CA. The status of the species Bacillus aerius. Request for an opinion. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2015; 65:2341
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Lai Q, Liu Y, Shao Z. Bacillus xiamenensis sp. nov., isolated from intestinal tract contents of a flathead mullet (Mugil cephalus). Antonie van Leeuwenhoek 2014; 105:99–107 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Liu Y, Ramesh Kumar N, Lai Q, Du J, Dobritsa AP et al. Identification of strains Bacillus aerophilus MTCC 7304T as Bacillus altitudinis and Bacillus stratosphericus MTCC 7305T as a Proteus sp. and the status of the species Bacillus aeriusShivaji et al. 2006. Request for an Opinion. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2015; 65:3228–3231 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Yassin AF, Spröer C, Pukall R, Schumann P. The status of the species Actinobaculum massiliense (Greub and Raoult 2006). Request for an Opinion. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2015; 65:1102–1103 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Greub G, Raoult D. Actinobaculum massiliae,” a new species causing chronic urinary tract infection. J Clin Microbiol 2002; 40:3938–3941 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Euzéby JP. Validation list no. 111: list of new names and new combinations previously effectively, but not validly, published. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2006; 56:2025–2027 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Yassin AF, Spröer C, Pukall R, Sylvester M, Siering C. Dissection of the genus Actinobaculum: reclassification of Actinobaculum schaalii Lawson et al. 1997 and Actinobaculum urinale Hall et al. 2003 as Actinotignum schaalii gen. nov., comb. nov. and Actinotignum urinale comb. nov., description of Actinotignum sanguinis sp. nov. and emended descriptions of the genus Actinobaculum and Actinobaculum suis; and re-examination of the culture deposited as Actinobaculum massiliense CCUG 47753T (=DSM 19118T), revealing that it does not represent a strain of this species. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2015; 65:615–624 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  54. Bakour S, Beye M, Raoult D, Fournier PE. Description of strain FC3T as the neotype strain of Actinobaculum massiliense . Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2016; 66:2702–2703 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  55. Oren A, Garrity GM. The correct name of the type species of the genus Methanocorpusculum. Request for an Opinion. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2015; 65:2013–2014 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  56. Tindall BJ. The nomenclatural type of the genus Methanocorpusculum Zellner et al. 1988 and the selection of the correct name. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2016; 66:4900–4904 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.005197
Loading
This is a required field
Please enter a valid email address
Approval was a Success
Invalid data
An Error Occurred
Approval was partially successful, following selected items could not be processed due to error