10 ] The Classification of Lower Organisms 



A name once applied in any principal category may not be transferred to another, 

 unless it be of a form barred in the former and prescribed in the latter. The main 

 clause of this statement is a consequence of the rule of priority. The exception is a 

 concession to the practice of using names with uniform endings in certain categories. 



Names of groups not of principal categories do not have priority as against names 

 applied in principal categories. This practice, which denies to names in subordinate 

 categories the full sanction of priority, is justified by the fact that groups in these cate- 

 gories are of concern only to specialists in the groups in which they occur; one is not 

 in reason responsible for being aware of their names in groups outside of ones own 

 specialty. 



Almost all families of plants have had names with the uniform ending -aceae from 

 the point of time at which the category of families was distinguished from that of 

 orders. Such names were applied to algae, liverworts, and mosses by Rabenhorst 

 (1863) and to higher plants by Braun (in Ascherson, 1864). They are adjectives in 

 the feminine, agreeing with the name of the kingdom Plantae. It is altogether expe- 

 dient that names of this form be held obligatory throughout the kingdom of plants. 

 A uniform termination for names of families of animals has been in use for many 

 years, but these names are not equally positively sound both grammatically and by 

 priority. There has been a strong tendency to apply uniform terminations to the names 

 of groups of other categories. So far as concerns groups of subordinate categories — 

 suborders, subfamilies, and so forth — this practice appears expedient; these groups 

 being of concern only to experts in the groups in which they occur, it is as well that 

 their designations be of the nature of code designations rather than names. In at- 

 tempting to put this practice into effect, some zoologists have made the mistake of 

 applying the same adjective in different genders to different groups; they have not 

 realized that Amoebida is the same word as Amoebidae. Meanwhile, uniform termi- 

 nations for names of phyla, classes, and orders, beside involving wholesale violation 

 of priority, is something of an insult to the intelligence. 



The terminations of ordinal names in -ales and of family names in -aceae, currently 

 in use among the Mychota, are here changed to -alea and -acea to agree with the 

 neuter name of the kingdom. A change of the gender of an adjective does not create 

 a new word, and the original authorities for the names will stand. Accordingly: 



The name of an order of Mychota, if based on that of a genus, must bear the termi- 

 nation -alea. Names of this form are valid in no other category of this kingdom, and 

 may be reapplied to orders. They have priority and authority by publication explicitly 

 as orders. Such names do not supersede older ordinal names not based on names of 

 genera. 



The name of a family of Mychota is formed of the stem of a generic name (not 

 necessarily a valid name, but never a later homonym) by adding the termination 

 -acea. Names of this form are not valid in any other categor)', and may be reapplied 

 to families. They have priority and authority by publication explicitly as families. 



The names of families of Protoctista, unlike those of Mychota, of plants, and of 

 animals, do not have by priority prevalently a uniform termination. Many of the 

 oldest were first named in -ina. Those of flagellates and myxomycetes have double 

 sets of names, respectively in -aceae and -idae, in current use. It is not expedient to 

 impose uniform terminations on the names of these groups, at least not in the present 

 work. Accordingly: 



Each group of Protoctista is called by its oldest name of tenable form in the cor- 

 rect category, barring any previously used in other principal categories, irrespective 



