90 International Code of Nomenclature 



Rule 23. Rejection and Replacement of Names 



The name of a genus may be "inappropriate" when it is de- 

 scriptive of some character of one or more species of the genus, but 

 not descriptive of all contained species. A generic name implying 

 the presence of some color may be "inappropriate" when applied to 

 certain species of the genus. This "inappropriateness" is no adequate 

 reason for replacing the generic name by another. 



In Recommendation 6b of the Bacteriological Code emphasis is 

 laid upon the desirability of naming a species by use of a specific 

 epithet "which, in general, gives some indication of the appearance, 

 the characters, the origin, the history, or the properties of the species." 

 A species name including such a specific epithet is appropriate. How- 

 ever, a Recommendation is a guide to good usage, but a name which is 

 not in accordance with the provisions of a Recommendation is not il- 

 legitimate and cannot be replaced on the basis of inappiopriateness. 



The corresponding Article of the Botanical Code is essentially 

 similar. 



The Zoological Code states that when once published, a name is 

 not to be rejected because of inappropriateness. A generic name such 

 as Apus ("that which is footless") as applied to birds with feet is 

 not to be rejected. One provision in zoology has no counterpart in 

 bacteriology or botany: no name shall have any status in nomen- 

 clature that is "reasonably" calculated to offend on "political, re- 

 ligious or personal grounds." Such a name may be suppressed if 

 upon application of any person to the International Commission it 

 is found offensive in any language. 



