SUMMARY: Attention is drawn to certain requirements of the current International Botanical and Bacteriological Codes of Nomenclature, with special reference to the denoting of categories, the proposal of new species, and the changing of names; three procedures commonly encountered by authors and editors. The requirements for the proposal of new specific names of fungi and bacteria are:

. The name chosen must be in Latin binomial form and should be coined according to the practices set out in the Codes (Bact. Code, Rules, 6, 27, 28, Appendix A; Bot. Code, Art. 33, 82, Rec. 83A).

The name must be effectively published. (It is desirable that scientific journals in which new taxa are proposed should indicate the exact date of publication of the parts.)

The name must be validated by a concise description (the diagnosis) of the diagnostic features of the new taxon. (The diagnostic features should not have to be deduced from an exhaustive account of the organism possibly spread over several pages.)

The description should, whenever possible, be accompanied by illustrations of which the scale and the specimen(s) on which they are based should be stated.

All measurements should be in the metric system.

The date of collection or isolation of the type material should be given together with the precise locality and the substrate or host (the last being designated by its scientific name).

The location of the type should be stated.

The etymology of the name should be explained.

. The diagnosis must be in Latin (Bot. Code, Art. 44).

The type specimen should be deposited, if possible, in a national herbarium, and if the type is a collection and portions are deposited in several herbaria then one of these isotypes should be designated as the holotype.

. No Latin diagnosis is required but ‘in works written in a language unfamiliar to the majority of workers in bacteriology, it is recommended that the authors publish simultaneously the diagnosis in a more familiar language’ (Bact. Code, Rec. 12a).

Subcultures of the type strains should be deposited at one or more of the national culture collections.


Article metrics loading...

Loading full text...

Full text loading...



  1. Ainsworth G. C. 1948; The rules of nomenclature for micro-organisms. J. gen. Microbiol 2:97
    [Google Scholar]
  2. Cowan S. T. 1953; Consequences of official opinions on bacteriological nomenclature. J. Bact 65:111
    [Google Scholar]
  3. Hemming F. 1953; Zoological nomenclature. Amendments to the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Nature; Lond: 172830
    [Google Scholar]
  4. Lund J. W. G. 1953; Article 44 of the International Code in relation to the Algae. Taxon 2:17
    [Google Scholar]
  5. St John-Brooks R., Breed R. S. 1937; Actions taken by the second International Microbiological Congress in London 1936, regarding bacteriological nomenclature. J. Bact 33:445
    [Google Scholar]
  6. Schenk E. T., McMasters J. H. 1948 Procedure in Taxonomy, 2. Myra Keen A., Muller S. W. by pp. 93 standford California, U.S.A: Stanford University Press; London: Oxford University Press;
    [Google Scholar]
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