Rejection and Replacement of Names 



RULE 23. A legitimate name or epithet must not be rejected merely because 

 it is inappropriate, or disagreeable, or because another is preferable or 

 better known, or because it has lost its original meaning. 



ANNOTATIONS 

 Rule 23. Neglect or misunderstanding of this rule has led in bac- 

 teriology to much nomenclatural confusion. It has been assumed by 

 some bacteriologists that all names given to taxa should be appropri- 

 ate or agreeable. But there is no rule sanctioning this interpretation 

 in botany, bacteriology or zoology. This is in line with the principle 

 that all three Codes aim at fixity of names. A name of any taxon is 

 basically an arbitrary symbol. The Codes do, however, offer guidance 

 on how best to coin appropriate names for new taxa. Bacteriological 

 Rules governing the formation of names of taxa higher than genus 

 require that the names be Latin or Latinized and in the plural num- 

 ber. Little use is made in bacteriology of names of taxa higher than 

 order. It is recommended (Recommendation 2a) that the names of 

 new orders and suborders be based upon the name of the type genus 

 of the type family. The names of other taxa between suborder and 

 genus must be formed (Rule 3) by the addition of the appropriate 

 suffix to the stem of the correct name of the type genus. The name 

 of a higher taxon based upon the name of its type genus cannot be 

 inappropriate. Nevertheless, there have been many objections raised 

 to the use of certain properly constructed family and other names 

 because they are allegedly inappropriate. These objections are based 

 upon fallacious reasoning. For example, an author concludes that the 

 genera Lactobacillus and Streptococcus are so closely related (have 

 so many characters in common) that they should be placed together 

 in a family. Under the rules the family name must be based upon 

 the name of the type genus. If the author chooses Lactobacillus as 

 the type genus, the family name under the rules becomes Lactobacil- 

 laceae, including the two genera Streptococcus and Lactobacillus. The 

 objection to this family name has been raised that the name Lacto- 

 bacillaceae means "resembling milk rodlets" and is inappropriate be- 

 cause the other genus. Streptococcus, of the family does not include 

 ix>ds. The fallacy of this reasoning is evident if consideration is given 

 to the true meaning of the family name Lactobacillaceae (Lacto- 

 bacillus-\ike) . It does not mean or imply that organisms belonging 

 to the family Lactobacillaceae must be rod-shaped or related to milk. 

 The genus Streptococcus has enough characters in common with the 

 genus Lactobacillus so that it may well be included in the same 

 family. The morphology is different, but in certain other significant 

 characteristics Streptococcus resembles Lactobacillus. 



[89] 



