March IT, IDOrj.J 



SCIENCE. 



429 



botanists issued a new ' Code of Botanical 

 Nomenclature,'* they having found the Paris 

 Code of 1867 out of date and unsatisfactory. 

 This code does not depart essentially from the 

 A. O. U. Code, but on some points it is fuller 

 and more explicit, and at the same time more 

 concise. As said in another connection : 



The A. 0. U. Code was a pioneer in innovations 

 which have now become very generally accepted, 

 but which then (1886) required argument and ex- 

 tended illustration. * * » Provision is made for 

 a few points not covered by the A. 0. U. Code, 

 but the spirit and principles of this code are 

 * * * closely followed. * * * j 



In the Ichthyological Code the new rulings 

 principally relate: (1) To competitive specific 

 names published simultaneously; (2) to com- 

 petitive generic names published simul- 

 taneously; (3) to the determination of a 

 generic type in cases where no type has been 

 indicated by the author; (4) to the admissi- 

 bility of orthographic variants of generic 

 names. 



The primary purpose of all codes of nomen- 

 clature is stability of names; how best to ac- 

 complish this under complicated conditions is 

 still an open question. The points on which 

 leading authorities still differ are mainly those 

 above stated, and respecting which a new de- 

 parture is proposed. • These may be taken up 

 briefly in sequence. 



1. Specific Names Published Simultane- 

 ously. — " Canon VI. Of competitive names 

 otherwise tenable, given by the same J author, 

 that one is to be preferred which stands first 

 in the text. In case of competitive names 

 otherwise tenable, given by different authors 

 of the same actual date, so far as ascertain- 

 able, the one standing on the earlier page of 

 its puhlication must be chosen." 



To this ruling there is no objection, pro- 

 vided authors will uniformly adhere to it. 

 This method was considered in framing the 

 A. O. IT. Code, but was deemed too arbitrary, 



* Bulletin Torrcy Botanical Club, Vol. XXXI., 

 No. 5, May, 1904, pp. 249-290. 



t Aul; Vol. XXI., July, 1904, pp. 404. 405. 



I The italics in these quotations are not in the 

 original, but are used here to draw attention to 

 special points. 



as the author publishing a large book, with 

 new names introduced in the middle portion 

 or toward the end, would have no chance 

 against the man publishing new names in a 

 small book or in a short pamphlet, however 

 superior his accompanying diagnoses might be. 

 For this reason the A. O. U. Code (Canon 

 XVII.) proposed alternatives, perhaps better 

 applicable in ornithology than in some other 

 branches of zoology. Thus preference is to be 

 given, first, to the name founded on the male 

 to that founded on the female; second, to 

 that founded on the adult to that founded on 

 the young; third, to that founded on the nup- 

 tial condition to that on the pre- or post- 

 nuptial condition. 



2. Generic Names Published Simultane- 

 ously. — " Canon VII. In case of competitive 

 generic names otherwise tenable, published in 

 the same work, preference shall be given to 

 the one standing first in the work. Of com- 

 petitive generic names of the same actual or 

 ostensible date (no exact date being ascertain- 

 able) given by different authors, that one is 

 to be taken which is proposed on the earlier 

 prif/e of the volume in which it appears. When 

 the same generic name is given to two distinct 

 genera of animals at the same date (as far as 

 ascertainable), the name appearing on the 

 earlier page shall be deemed to have pre- 

 cedence." 



Here again the ruling is rigidly arbitrary 

 as between earlier and later pagination in 

 different publications. The A. O. IT. Code 

 (Canon XVIII.) provides, under such con- 

 tingencies, that: "1. A name accompanied 

 by the specification of a type takes precedence 

 over a name unaccompanied by such specifica- 

 tion. 2. If all, or none, of the genera have 

 types indicated, that generic name takes pre- 

 cedence the diagnosis of which is most perti- 

 nent." Here comes in the element of personal 

 decision as against arbitrary rule, but the 

 cases are extremely few where the jjroper 

 course of action is not evident. 



3. The Determinution of Generic Types. — 

 Canon X. of the Ichthyological Code relates to 

 the fixing of the type of a genus, when no 

 type has been indicated by the author. On 

 no nomenclatorial question is there greater 



