FIELD E ; Taxonomy Code 



Columns 18, 19, 20, 21, 



22, 23, 24, and 25 



contemporary attempt to establish a taxonomy code on a single existing taxonomic scheme can be 

 expected to satisfy all persons nor posterity. Prior to publication, an effort has been made to review 

 the organization of this Taxonomy Code, consulting what are believed to be authoritative sources of 

 contemporary opinion. A number of revisions have been made which have resulted, in a few instances, 

 in changed symbols for organisms already recorded at the CBCC. (When such a change in a code 

 symbol is made, all IBM punched cards and code sheets on which the old symbol is punched or written 

 must be recalled from the files and altered to conform with the new symbol. ) 



5. Indication of common names, synonyms, and intergroup names in the Taxonomy Code 



Sources of chemical-biological data, whether published or unpublished, vary widely, not only 

 in terms of investigators and geographic locations, but in temporal terms. Taxonomic identities, 

 therefore, may vary accordingly, so that a name accepted at one time or by one person may be unac- 

 ceptable at a later time or by another person, because of new information or because of differences in 

 interpretation and opinion. Further, there are frequently encountered data in which identity of the 

 organism is with only a common name. Names of intergroups (sub- and supergroups) are sometimes of 

 importance, because a test organism may be identified only as to the intergroup of which it is a 

 taxonomic member. Variations in classification permit one scheme to bestow full rank (e.g. , order or 

 class) on a group which another scheme considers as an intergroup (e. g. , superorder or subclass, 

 etc. ). For the above reasons, there have been included certain of these names in this Code, for 

 convenience in identification, as described in the following paragraphs. 



When an intergroup is listed, the taxonomic groups included in that intergroup are defined to 

 indicate their relationship, because the code symbols can not do this. For example, in the Pelecypoda 

 (Mollusca), there are listed several suborders, for some of which several families are listed; the code 

 symbols for the families can only indicate the order to which they belong, but, in each of these 

 families' definitions , the suborder to which it belongs is indicated. 



The question as to whether the groups considered here as suborders, for example, should 

 instead be given the rank of orders and the orders given the rank of subclasses may often be academic 

 or arbitrary, but proves vexing in composing code symbols because of sharp divergences of opinion 

 among taxonomists. In making code symbols, however, some decision has had to be made in such 

 cases, since the code symbols could not be constructed, according to the present method, to satisfy 

 both or all of varying taxonomic opinions and organizations. This would suggest the difficulty attending 

 any effort to invent a coding scheme for this category of information whose classification must shift with 

 changing concepts of phylogenic relationships. 



When it has been an advantage to do so, names are entered in the taxonomy lists to record 

 slightly different taxonomic schemes. This has been attempted in some detail in the case of the phylum 

 Chordata and the fishes and occasionally in other groups. For example, in the list of Protozoa, the 

 name Rhizopoda is listed twice, once as a synonym of Sarcodina, being considered as a class; however, 

 Rhizopoda appears in other schemes as a subclass of Sarcodina and is listed a second time to indicate 

 this. Subsequently, the family Vampyrellidae is listed as belonging to either of two orders, according 

 to the taxonomic scheme preferred, Amoebozoa (order of class Sarcodina) or Proteomyxa (order of 

 subclass Rhizopoda). 



Certain synonymous names are included in the list. These synonyms for a given group or a 

 given species are assigned the identical code symbol. The synonymous names might all have been 

 listed together (in series) as a single entry; they are listed separately because, when scanning the 

 list, a name is not easily found if it is not aligned with all other names in the list. 



In some instances, a name has been included which is for a group (e. g. , an order) that the 

 CBCC Code has considered as two or more separate groups (e.g. , two or more orders). In this case, 

 the name is included in the list essentially for reference purposes only; the symbols listed with the 

 name are not to be used as such for coding, except that, if an author should express the chemical 

 action as being generally on all organisms of this composite group, it must be assumed that organisms 

 of each group recognized by the CBCC code as separate groups are affected as described and, to code 

 this completely, a code line for each group would be necessary. For example, the Coelenterate order 

 Hydrocorallina is listed, but only with both Symbols 313 and 314, indicating that this term is not 



- 27 - 



