146 GENERAL SYSTEMATIC BACTERIOLOGY 



variation in spelling which might lead to confusion. But when once introduced, 

 such names are not to be rejected on this account. Examples: Picus, Pica; 

 Polyodus, Polyodon, Polyodonta, Polyodontas, Polyodontus. 



The same recommendation applies to new specific names in any given genus. 

 Examples : necator, necatrix; furcigera, furcifera; rhopalocephala, rhopaliocephala. 



If from the radical of a geographic name two or more adjectives are derived, 

 it is not advisable to use more than one of them as specific name in the same 

 genus, but if once introduced they are not to be rejected on this account. Exam- 

 ples: hispanus, hispanicus; moluccanus molluccensis; sinensis, sinicus, chinensis; 

 ceylonicus, zeylanicus. 



The same recommendation applies also to other words derived from the same 

 radical and differing from each other only in termination or by a simple change in 

 spelling. 



D. TYPE BASIS CODE SUGGESTED BY A COMMITTEE ON BOTANICAL 

 NOMENCLATURE OF THE BOTANICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA 



For a number of years the botanists of America have been divided 

 into two groups, those who use the Vienna Code and those who use the 

 socalled "American Code." In 1918 a Committee on Botanical Nomen- 

 clature was appointed by the Botanical Society of America to consider 

 this subject and report. In 1920 the committee gave a majority report 

 signed by seven of its members and a minority report signed by two. 

 The majority report outlined a Type Basis Code of Botanical Nomen- 

 clature. The report is of so much importance that it is given below in 

 full. 



The Committee on Nomenclature of the Botanical Society of America was 

 appointed at the Baltimore meeting of the Society in 1918. A preliminary survey 

 of the situation showed that the taxonomists of the Society were about equally 

 divided in their support of the Vienna Code and the American Code. An at- 

 tempt to commit the Society to one or the other of these codes would inevitably 

 result in conflict detrimental to progress in nomenclatural matters. The policy 

 was adopted of working on nomenclature along parallel lines. Two subcom- 

 mittees were appointed, one on the Vienna Code, with J. M. Greenman as chair- 

 man, and one on the American Code, with A. S. Hitchcock as chairman. 



The subcommittee on the American Code has prepared a plan which is now 

 submitted to the Society. It is not asked that the Society commit itself to this 

 plan by adopting the report but it is hoped that the Society will receive the report 

 without prejudice. The committee will then continue to study the plan and 

 modify it if necessary to meet the wishes of its supporters. A part of the plan 

 is the establishment of a Nomenclature Commission to pass upon exceptions to 

 the Code. The Committee asks authority to organize this Commission. 



We wish especially to call attention of the Society to the fact that the new code 

 which we call the Type-basis Code is not antagonistic to the Vienna Code but is 

 based upon the same principles with certain additions. Both codes are based 

 upon the principle of priority. Both admit exceptions to the application of the 



