34 MISCELLANEOUS PUBLICATION 955, U.S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE 



Once the organism is conclusively identified, the record should be 

 completed with the information one has amassed, such as growth 

 conditions and measurements. The entry should give the generic 

 name, the species name, and the authority for the binomial. Thus, 

 if one cites Phy corny ces blakesleeanus Burgeff, this name indicates 

 that the genus is Phy corny ces, the species is blakesleeanus, and Burgeff 

 first described the species. 



NAMING NEW GENERA OR SPECIES 



The naming of new genera or species is generally best left to the 

 taxonomic specialist, who is familiar both with the organisms closely 

 related to the new one and with the problems and necessary procedures 

 involved in the naming of new organisms. First, it is necessary to 

 know the related organisms in order to ascertain that an organism 

 represents a new taxon. Second, since published names are practically 

 irrevocable, the name must be checked against the literature to see that 

 there is no duplication. Third, for a new name to be accepted, its 

 publication should conform to the pertinent code of international 

 nomenclature. 



Checking a proposed name is no small task. There are some 150,000 

 names of fungi, in addition to approximately 50,000 that are currently 

 accepted. A new species name must not duplicate any name of cur- 

 rently accepted species nor any name of any species, valid or not, that 

 has been ascribed to the genus since the nomenclatural starting date of 

 the particular group of fungi. Checking the name for a new fungus 

 genus is even more complex ; it must not duplicate any generic name 

 in the entire plant kingdom, including a large number of synonymous 

 or otherwise invalid names dating back to 1753. 



However difficult the assignment of names to particular strains of 

 organisms may be, correct assignment is necessary, and mention should 

 always be made of the specific organism in the publication of micro- 

 biological data. Experiments performed on a particular strain or 

 group of strains are meaningless in many instances where they were 

 reported as performed on a mold or bacterium. Even reference to 

 strains as Bacillus sp. or Fusarium sp. does not permit confirmation of 

 results in many cases or assignment of the data to the information 

 known about specific organisms. In order that such data can be con- 

 firmed, assigned to specific organisms, and correlated with other data if 

 the species is not known or cannot be determined, the strain should be 

 deposited in an accessible culture collection, where it can be per- 

 manently maintained. The number assigned to the organism in that 

 culture collection should be reported along with any data that are 

 published. 



LITERATURE CITED 



(1) AlNSWORTH, G. C. 



1961. AINSWORTH AND BISBY'S DICTIONARY OF THE FUNGI. Ed. 5, 547 pp., 



illus. Commonwealth Mycol. Inst., Kew, Surrey. 



(2) Alexopoulos, C. J. 



1962. introductory mycology. Ed. 2, 613 pp., illus. New York. 



(3) Bessey, E. A. 



1950. morphology and taxonomy of fungi. 791 pp. Philadelphia. 



