RULES FOR NOMENCLATURE 15 



larly in various species of Neurospora, while many others have studied 

 the smuts from the genetic standpoint. Hybrids have been produced in 

 both these groups as well as in the rusts and their structure and their 

 behavior studied. So much has been published in these fields in the last 

 fifteen to twenty years that the names of the investigators cannot be 

 listed here. Of those mentioned above only a few of their earlier papers 

 are noted, though in many cases they produced many later contributions. 



The present day finds systematic mycologists active all over the 

 world. Life histories are being studied in all groups. The sexual relations 

 are being scrutinized from the lowest to the highest fungi and genetic 

 studies are revealing results somewhat parallel, but on a smaller scale as 

 yet, to those attained by the study of Zea mays and Drosophila. Now, as 

 never before, a knowledge of the fungi themselves is necessary. 



The discovery of the production of antibiotic substances by various 

 fungi has encouraged intense research in that field, the results of which 

 have only recently become of great importance in the medical field. 



Rules for Nomenclature 



The rules for botanical nomenclature, especially as applicable to fungi, 

 have been given an extended discussion by Bisby (1945). Only the more 

 fundamental points will be taken up here. These rules have been formu- 

 lated and added to and modified at a series of International Botanical 

 Congresses in 1867, 1905, 1910, 1930, and 1935. The aims are expressed in 

 Articles 2 and 4 of the Rules, from which the following sentences are 

 quoted : 



The object of the rules is to put the nomenclature of the past into order and 

 to provide for that of the future. They are always retroactive: names and forms 

 of nomenclature contrary to a rule {illegitimale names or forms) cannot be main- 

 tained. . . . The essential points in nomenclature are: (1) to aim at fixity of 

 names; (2) to avoid or to reject the use of forms and names which may cause 

 error or ambiguity or throw science into confusion. . . . Next in importance 

 is the avoidance of all useless creation of names. 



Art. 7. Scientific names of all groups are usually taken from Latin or Greek. 

 When taken from any language other than Latin, or formed in an arbitrary 

 manner, they are treated as if they were Latin. Latin terminations should be 

 used so far as possible for new names. 



The earliest name properly applied to a plant shall be retained, pro- 

 vided it is a binomial, i.e., consists of the generic name and specific 

 epithet. Since, however, it is impractical to go back to the classical 

 authors or those of the Middle Ages it has been agreed that names applied 

 before the appearance of Linnaeus' "Species Plantarum" (1753) shall 

 not be considered, nor those subsequent to that date which do not use 

 the binomial nomenclature. Because many of the fungi were not well 

 known to Linnaeus the basic dates for the earliest authoritative names 



