GENERAL SYSTEMATIC BACTERIOLOGY 115 



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 to a 

 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 nomen- 

 clature with the original botanical status; and, if an organism is transferred from 

 the animal to the vegetable kingdom its names retain their zoological status. 



The following recommendation is also added: "It is well to avoid 

 introducing into zoology as generic names, such names as are in use in 

 botany." These points are of interest to the bacteriologist because 

 until the suggestion was made in 1857 by Naegeli that bacteria are 

 plants and not animals, most of the forms up to that time described 

 which we now classify with the bacteria, had been included with the 

 protozoa. This means that such names as Bacterium, Spirillum, 

 Spirodiscus, Spirochaeta, and Vibrio were included. In the classifica- 

 tion of Cohn (1872) these forms were definitely transferred to the plant 

 kingdom. Thej- have been used in both zoological and botanical tenni- 

 nolog}', and, therefore, they prevent subsequent use of these names 

 for other forms among either plants or animals. However, the fact 

 that Coccus is the name of a genus of insects would not interfere with 

 its use as a genus in bacteriology. Neither does the fact that Spirillum 

 was used in 1815 as the name of a worm prevent its acceptance as a 

 valid genus of bacteria. Numerous examples might be cited of generic 

 names which are identical in zoology and botany. It is well, however, 

 to avoid the introduction of names used as genera of animals into 

 botany when possible. This is particularly true in bacteriology, for 

 many of the types have an uncertain position. The group of spiro- 

 chetes, for example, is treated both by bacteriologists and protozoolo- 

 gists. To introduce a generic name into this group under the impres- 

 sion that it belongs w^th plants when such a name has previously been 

 used in zoology, is to cause unnecessary confusion and may very possibly 

 invalidate the name. In a few instances organisms have been named as 

 plants and later found to be animals. Stiles (1905, p. 10) states: 



In these cases zoologists accept the botanical names, thus Plasmodium malariae 

 was originally (1881) classified in a plant genus as Oscillaria malariae. Now that 

 this organism is classified as an animal the original specific name malariae (1881) 

 is accepted in zoology with its original botanical date. The generic name 

 Oscillaria is not taken over with the specific name because it was not proposed for 

 this organism. Oscillaria remains as it was prior to 1881, a plant genus. 



Article 7. Scientific names are in Latin for all groups. When taken from 

 another language, a Latin termination is given them, except in cases sanctioned by 

 custom. If translated into a modern language, it is desirable that they should 

 preserve as great a resemblance as possible to the original Latin names. 



