August 13, 1920] 



SCIENCE 



143 



Code,2 and ia introduced in the following 

 language : 



B. It is recommended that the assemblages of 

 genera termed families should be uniformly named 

 by adding the termination idw to the name of the 

 earliest known, or most typically characterized 

 genus in them; and that their subdivisions, termed 

 subfamilies, should be similarly constructed, with 

 the termination ina. 



The next epoch-making code of nomencla- 

 ture, the A. O. U. Code of 1886, Canon V., 

 adds to this only the proviso : 



When a generic name becomes a synonym, a cur- 

 rent family or subfamily name based on such 

 generic name becomes untenable. 



The revised A. 0. U. Code of 1908 made no 

 change in this. 



The International Code of 1913 has only 

 the following provisions regarding family and 

 subfamily names : 



Article 4. The name of a family is formed by 

 adding the ending idee, the name of a subfamily by 

 adding ince, to the root of the name of its type 

 genus. 



Article 5. The name of a family or subfamily is 

 to be changed when the name of its type genus is 

 changed. 



The Entomological Code,^ prepared chiefly 

 by Messrs. ISTathan Banks and A. IST. Caudell, 

 contains so many additional provisions re- 

 garding family and subfamily names that it 

 seems worth while to quote entire the por- 

 tions pertinent to the present discussion : 



108. The name of a family shall be formed by 

 changing the last syllable of the genitive ease of 

 an included generic name (preferably the oldest) 

 into idee. 



109. The name of a sutifamily shall be formed 

 by using "inm" in place of the idee. One of the 

 subfamily names shall be based on the same generic 

 onym, or is removed from the family or subfamily, 

 is a part. 



113. The name of a family or subfamily ia to 

 be changed when the basic generic name is a hom- 



2 Beport Brit. Association Adv. Sci. for 1842 

 (1843), pp. 105-121. 



8 ' ' The Entomological Code, a Code of Nomen- 

 clature for use in Entomology," May, 1912. 



onym, or is removed from the family or subfamily, 

 or iDeeomes a synonym. 



114. If there are two or more names proposed 

 for the same family or subfamily ending in id(Z or 

 iinee, the earlier name shall be adopted. 



15. If there are two family or subfamily names 

 of the same spelling, the more recent shall be re- 

 placed, or so modified as not to conflict. 



Recent multiplication of family and sub- 

 family names in zoology and their depend- 

 ence on g'eneric desigTiations make very 

 desirable, in fact, almost necessary, definite 

 rules for their selection and use. In any 

 such rules, families and subfamilies should be 

 treated alike (except, of course, for their 

 difl'erence in termination) just as are genera 

 and subgenera. 



The above-quoted codes of nomenclature 

 fail to provide a perfectly satisfactory rule 

 for the stabilization of family and subfamily 

 names, as is fully realized by those who have 

 had to deal with such designations. This is 

 principally because these codes neglect par- 

 ticularly to define the term "type genus," 

 i. e., the genus on which the family name is 

 based, and to specify the method of its 

 selection. There are three methods that have 

 heretofore been depended on for the deter- 

 mination of type genera and the consquent 

 formation of family names; use of (1) the 

 most characteristic genus; (2) the genus 

 whose name is the oldest in the group; and 

 (3) the genus which first formed the basis 

 of a family name. 



The first of these methods apparently was 

 the consideration influencing most of the 

 early writers, though there are indications 

 that in many cases the genus for the family 

 name was chosen at random. The objections 

 to this first method are that it is not definite 

 enough; that it depends on too many zoolog- 

 ical conditions; and that it is open to con- 

 tinual alteration as the limits of the group 

 change by the admission of other genera which 

 might by some authors be considered more 

 difi^erentiated. In other words, this method 

 of selecting the type genus is too much a 

 matter of personal opinion in its zoological 

 aspect to be of value as a nomenclatural 

 rule. 



