1887

Abstract

Opinion 130 deals with a Request for an Opinion asking the Judicial Commission to clarify whether the genus name Zopf 1891 (Approved Lists 1980) is illegitimate. The Request is approved and an answer is given. The name Zopf 1891 (Approved Lists 1980) is illegitimate because it is a later homonym of the validly published cyanobacterial name Hansgirg 1884. The Judicial Commission also clarifies that it has the means to resolve such cases by conserving a name over an earlier homonym. It is concluded that the name Zopf 1891 (Approved Lists 1980) is significantly more important than the name Hansgirg 1884 and therefore the former is conserved over the latter. This makes the name Zopf 1891 (Approved Lists 1980) legitimate.

Funding
This study was supported by the:
  • National Biodiversity Future Center (IT) (Award CN00000033)
    • Principle Award Recipient: StefanoVentura
  • Australian Research Council (Award DP220100900)
    • Principle Award Recipient: MariaChuvochina
  • National Institute of Food and Agriculture (Award #PEN04926)
    • Principle Award Recipient: CaroleeT. Bull
  • This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. This article was made open access via a Publish and Read agreement between the Microbiology Society and the corresponding author’s institution.
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006414
2024-06-06
2024-06-14
Loading full text...

Full text loading...

/deliver/fulltext/ijsem/74/6/ijsem006414.html?itemId=/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006414&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah

References

  1. Goodfellow M, Oren A, Sangal V, Sutcliffe IC. Is the bacterial genus name Rhodococcus Zopf 1891 illegitimate? Request for an Opinion. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2024; 74:6251 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Zopf W. Über Ausscheidung von Fettfarbstoffen (Lipochromen) seitens gewisser Spaltpilze. Berichte der Deutschen Botanischen Gesellschaft 1891; 9:22–28 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Skerman VBD, McGowan V, Sneath PHA. Approved Lists of Bacterial Names. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1980; 30:225–420
    [Google Scholar]
  4. 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]
  5. Hansgirg A. Bemerkungen zur Systematik einiger Süsswasseralgen. Österr Bot Z 1884; 34:314
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Wittrock VB, Nordstedt CFO. Literatur-öfversigt. Algae aquae dulcis exsiccatae praecipue Scandinavicae quas adjectis algis marinis chlorophyllaceis et phycochromaceis…. Botaniska Notiser 1884; 1884:121–128
    [Google Scholar]
  7. Oren A. Three alternative proposals to emend the Rules of the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes to resolve the status of the Cyanobacteria in the prokaryotic nomenclature. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2020; 70:4406–4408 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  8. Oren A, Arahal DR, Rossello-Mora R, Sutcliffe IC, Moore ERB. Emendation of General Consideration 5 and Rules 18a, 24a and 30 of the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes to resolve the status of the Cyanobacteria in the prokaryotic nomenclature. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2021; 71:4939 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  9. Turland N, Wiersema J, Barrie F, Greuter W, Hawksworth D et al. International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants Königstein im Taunus: Koeltz Botanical Books; 2018 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  10. Oren A, Arahal DR, Göker M, Moore ERB, Rossello-Mora R et al. International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes. Prokaryotic Code (2022 Revision). Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2023; 73:5585 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  11. Deshmukh UB, Oren A. Proposal of Membranihabitans gen. nov. as a replacement name for the illegitimate prokaryotic generic name Membranicola Li et al. 2016. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2022; 72:5576 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  12. Deshmukh UB, Oren A. Proposal of Allomuricauda gen. nov. and Allofranklinella gen. nov. as replacement names for the illegitimate prokaryotic generic names Muricauda and Franklinella, respectively. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2023; 73:6023 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  13. Deshmukh UB, Oren A. Proposal of Thalassovita gen. nov. and Alloyangia gen. nov. as replacement names for the illegitimate prokaryotic generic names Thalassobius and Yangia, respectively. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2023; 73:6025 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  14. Deshmukh UB, Oren A. Proposal of Eoetvoesiella gen. nov., Paludihabitans gen. nov., Rivihabitans gen. nov. and Salella gen. nov. as replacement names for the illegitimate prokaryotic generic names Eoetvoesia, Paludicola, Rivicola and Sala, respectively. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2023; 73:5901
    [Google Scholar]
  15. Deshmukh UB, Oren A. Proposal of Holzapfeliella gen. nov. and Litorivicinus gen. nov. as replacement names for the illegitimate prokaryotic generic names Holzapfelia Zheng et al. 2020 and Litoricola Kim et al. 2007, respectively. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2020; 73:5688
    [Google Scholar]
  16. Deshmukh UB, Oren A. Proposal of Christiangramia gen. nov., Neomelitea gen. nov. and Nicoliella gen. nov. as replacement names for the illegitimate prokaryotic generic names Gramella Nedashkovskaya et al. 2005, Melitea Urios et al. 2008 and Nicolia Oliphant et al. 2022, respectively. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2005; 73:5806
    [Google Scholar]
  17. Li MS. Replacement of the illegitimate name Pleomorpha daqingensis (Wang et al. 2017) Montero-Calasanz et al. 2023 with the oldest legitimate name Geodermatophilus daqingensis Wang et al. 2017 and proposal to attribute this species to Petropleomorpha daqingensis (Wang et al. 2017) Li 2023 comb. nov. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2023; 73:6079 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  18. Molinari Novoa EA, Oren A. Proposal of Allopseudospirillum gen. nov. as a replacement name for the illegitimate prokaryotic generic name Pseudospirillum Satomi et al. 2002. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2023; 73:6129 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  19. Arahal DR, Busse H-J, Bull CT, Christensen H, Chuvochina M et al. Guidelines for interpreting the Code and for writing a Request for an Opinion. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2023; 73:5782 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  20. Judicial Commission Opinions 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14. Int Bullet Bacteriol Nomenclat Taxon 1954; 4:141–158 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  21. Ehrenberg CG. Die Infusionsthierchen als vollkommene Organismen Leipzig: L. Voss; 1838
    [Google Scholar]
  22. Pirie JH. The genus Listerella Pirie. Science 1940; 91:383 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  23. Hansgirg A. Ueber den Polymorphismus der Algen. Botanisches Centralblatt 1885; 22:246–406
    [Google Scholar]
  24. Nägeli C. Gattungen einzelliger Algen, physiologisch und systematisch bearbeitet. Neue Denkschriften der Allg Schweizerischen Gesellschaft für die Gesammten Naturwissenschaften 1849; 10:1–139
    [Google Scholar]
  25. Hansgirg A. Prodromus der Algenflora von Böhmen. Zweiter Theil welcher die blaugrünen Algen (Myxophyceen, Cyanophyceen), nebst Nachträgen zum ersten Theile und einer systematischen Bearbeitung der in Böhmen verbreiten saprophytischen Bacterien und Euglenen enhält. Mit dem Opitz-Preise gekrönte Arbeit. Auf Kosten des Opitz-Fondes. Archiv der naturwissenschaftl. Landesdurchforschung von Böhmen VIII. Band, Nro. 4. (Botanische Abtheilung.) Prague: F. Řivnáč; 1892
    [Google Scholar]
  26. Komárek J, Anagnostidis K. Cyanoprokaryota. 1. Teil: Chroococcales. In Ettl H, Gärtner G, Heynig H, Mollenhauer D. eds Süßwasserflora von Mitteleuropa. Begründet von A. Pascher. Band 19/1 Heidelberg; Berlin: Spektrum, Akademischer Verlag; 1999 pp 1–548
    [Google Scholar]
  27. Kützing FT. Species Algarum Lipsiae: F.A. Brockhaus; 1849
    [Google Scholar]
  28. Hirose H. Rearrangement of the systematic position of a thermal alga, Cyanidium caldarium. Bot Mag Tokyo 1958; 71:347–352 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  29. Meier-Kolthoff JP, Carbasse JS, Peinado-Olarte RL, Göker M. TYGS and LPSN: a database tandem for fast and reliable genome-based classification and nomenclature of prokaryotes. Nucleic Acids Res 2022; 50:D801–D807 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  30. Shukla AK, Upadhyay SN, Dubey SK. Current trends in trichloroethylene biodegradation: a review. Crit Rev Biotechnol 2014; 34:101–114 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  31. Srivastva N, Singh A, Bhardwaj Y, Dubey SK. Biotechnological potential for degradation of isoprene: A review. Crit Rev Biotechnol 2018; 38:587–599 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  32. Kuhl T, Chowdhury SP, Uhl J, Rothballer M. Genome-based characterization of plant-associated Rhodococcus qingshengii RL1 reveals stress tolerance and plant-microbe interaction traits. Front Microbiol 2021; 12:708605 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  33. Savory EA, Fuller SL, Weisberg AJ, Thomas WJ, Gordon MI et al. Evolutionary transitions between beneficial and phytopathogenic Rhodococcus challenge disease management. Elife 2017; 6:e30925 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  34. Bell K, Philp J, Aw D, Christofi N. The genus Rhodococcus. J Appl Microbiol 1998; 85:195–210 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  35. Stes E, Vandeputte OM, El Jaziri M, Holsters M, Vereecke D. A successful bacterial coup d’état: how Rhodococcus fascians redirects plant development. Annu Rev Phytopathol 2011; 49:69–86 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  36. Anonymous TRBA 466: Classification of Bacteria and Archaea in Risk Groups Berlin: Bundesanstalt für Arbeitsschutz und Arbeitsmedizin (BAuA); 2010
    [Google Scholar]
  37. Tsukamura M. Numerical analysis of the taxonomy of Nocardiae and Rhodococci. Microbiol Immunol 1982; 26:1101–1119 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  38. Associate Editor Validation List no.12. Int J Syst Bacteriol 1983; 33:896–897 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  39. Jones AL, Brown JM, Mishra V, Perry JD, Steigerwalt AG et al. Rhodococcus gordoniae sp. nov., an actinomycete isolated from clinical material and phenol-contaminated soil. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2004; 54:407–411 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  40. List Editors Notification that new names and new combinations have appeared in volume 54, part 2, of the IJSEM. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2004; 54:1007–1009 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  41. Goodfellow M, Alderson G. The actinomycete-genus Rhodococcus: a home for the “rhodochrous” complex. J Gen Microbiol 1977; 100:99–122 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  42. Sangal V, Goodfellow M, Jones AL, Sutcliffe IC. A stable home for an equine pathogen: valid publication of the binomial Prescottella equi gen. nov., comb. nov., and reclassification of four rhodococcal species into the genus Prescottella. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2022; 72:5551 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  43. Oren A, Göker M. Notification that new names of prokaryotes, new combinations, and new taxonomic opinions have appeared in volume 72, part 9 of the IJSEM. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2022; 72:5681
    [Google Scholar]
  44. 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]
  45. 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] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  46. 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]
    [Google Scholar]
  47. Oren A, Garrity GM. Notification that new names of prokaryotes, new combinations and new taxonomic opinions have appeared in volume 64, part 3, of the IJSEM. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2014; 64:1827–1829 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  48. Eberson F. A bacteriologic study of the diphtheroid organisms with special reference to Hodgkin’s disease. J Infect Dis 1918; 23:1–42 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  49. Arahal DR, Busse H-J, Bull CT, Christensen H, Chuvochina M et al. Judicial Opinions 103-111. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2022; 72:5197 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  50. Goodfellow M. Reclassification of Corynebacterium fascians (Tilford) Dowson in the genus Rhodococcus, as Rhodococcus fascians comb. nov. Syst Appl Microbiol 1984; 5:225–229 [View Article]
    [Google Scholar]
  51. Associate Editor Validation List no.16. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 1984; 34:503–504
    [Google Scholar]
  52. Val-Calvo J, Vázquez-Boland JA. Mycobacteriales taxonomy using network analysis-aided, context-uniform phylogenomic approach for non-subjective genus demarcation. mBio 2023; 14:e0220723 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
  53. Oren A, Göker M. Validation List no. 216. Valid publication of new names and new combinations effectively published outside the IJSEM. Int J Syst Evol Microbiol 2024; 74:006229 [View Article] [PubMed]
    [Google Scholar]
http://instance.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journal/ijsem/10.1099/ijsem.0.006414
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