THE NOMENCLATURE OF THE ACTINOMYCETACEAE 



(ADDENDA) 



R. S. BREED and H. J. CONN 



Neiv York Agricultural Experiment Station, Geneva, New York- 

 Received for publication April 13, 1920 



Almost simultaneously with the publication of our previous 

 paper with this title (Breed and Conn, 1919) our attention was 

 called to the publication of an article by Merrill and Wade (1919). 

 discussing the identical subject from a somewhat different view- 

 point. The facts as given in the two papers supplement ach 

 other, and both papers point out the fact that students of the 

 group face a- puzzling problem in regard to the proper name for 

 the group. This arises because the general use of Streptothrix 

 Corda, 1839 renders the term Streptothrix Cohn, 1875 invalid. 

 This would make Actinomyces Harz, 1877 the valid name for 

 the genus in question were it not for the fact that some hold that 

 the use of Actinomyce by Meyen in 1828 invalidates Actino- 

 myces Harz. In this case it appears that Discomyces Rivolta, 

 1878 becomes the correct name for the genus, although some 

 argue that this name is also invalid. 



Merrill and Wade have frankly accepted the principle of pri- 

 ority as final, and contend that Discomyces Rivolta is the only 

 correct term to use, while we have quoted the International Bo- 

 tanical Code (Chap. Ill, Sect. 2, Art, 20 and Sect. 6, Art. 50) to 

 show that under these rules it is necessary to regard general usage 

 rather than priority in this case, and have suggested the adoption 

 of Actinomyces Harz as a genus conservandum. After our paper 

 was written, the Society of American Bacteriologists accepted this 

 suggestion and have included Actinomyces Harz in their list of 

 approved genera. 



Since the publication of our paper, our attention has been 

 called to the fact that the difference in spelling and derivation 



489 



