10 Infernat'lonal Code of Nomenclature 



Principle 2. Principle 3. Annot. cont. 



Principle 2. For comment on the format of a request for an Opinion, 

 see Provision 5 (p. 131) . 



Principle 3. The Botanical Code (Principle I) states: 



Botanical nomenclature is independent of zoological nomenclature 

 in the sense that the name of a plant must not be rejected merely be- 

 cause it is identical with the name of an animal. 

 Article 45 of the Botanical Code reads in part as follows: 



If a taxon is transferred from the animal to the plant kingdom, 

 its name or names valid* under the International Rules of Zoolo- 

 gical Nomenclature and validly published in the form provided in 

 the Botanical Code (except that for algae, validity under the zoologi- 

 cal rules only is required) shall be automatically accepted as having 

 been validly published under this Code at the time of its valid 

 publication as the name of an animal. 

 The corresponding Article 1 of the Zoological Rules reads: 



Zoological nomenclature is independent of botanical nomenclature 

 in the sense that the name of an animal is not to be rejected simply 

 because it is identical with the name of a plant. If, however, an 

 organism is transferred from the vegetable to the animal kingdom, 

 its botanical names are to be accepted in zoological nomenclature 

 with their original botanical status; and if an organism is trans- 

 ferred from the animal to the vegetable kingdom, its names retain 

 their zoological status for purposes of homonymy. 

 The Zoological Rules also include the following recommendation: 



Avoid introducing into zoology a generic name used in botany. 

 It would be well to avoid proposal of new names of taxa in bac- 

 teriology that have been used in zoology. 



* The word "valid" in the International Rules of Zoological Nomenclalure is 

 equivalent to "legitimate" in the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature. 



