OF /^ N .^' \ ^ A T !\l(>X,f;'sMf^ i. Ml J':X,,-'/l-Iv wMm u}^^^^^^i^i}(^ RK^s; "'V -'^-r:;••: •••vn »-''Wr;':%'. .•':':v;i,. , :•;.•: ill.; '>M^. T6 3 CODE INTERNATIONAL rSTFRSAilOSAL CODE de of SOMKSCLAILRE ZOOLOGICAL ZOOLOGIQUE NOMENCLATURE adopte par le adopted by the XVe CONGRES XV INTERNATIONAL INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS de of ZOOLOGIE ZOOLOGY EDITORIAL COMMITTEE N. R. STOLL {Chairman) DOLLFUS R. Pii. FOREST J. N. D. RILEY W. SABROSKY C. W. WRIGHT C. MELVILLE R. V. {Secretary) PUBLISHED FOR THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE BY THE INTERNATIONAL TRUST FOR ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE LONDON 1961 TABLE DES MATIERES Preface: J. Chester Bradley IV Introduction: Norman R. Stoll vii Dates fondamentales mentionnees dans Code le xviii LE CODE Note d'explication 1 Preambule 2 I. De la Nomenclature Zoologique 4 II. Du Nombre de Mots dans les Noms Zoologiques 6 III. Des Criteres de Publication 6 IV. Des Noms Utilisables 8 V. De la Date de Publication 18 VI. Des Noms Valides 22 VII. De la Formation et de Tfimendation des Noms 26 VIII. Des Taxa du Groupe-Famille et de Leurs Noms 36 IX. Des Taxa du Groupe-Genre et de Leurs Noms 42 X. Des Taxa du Groupe-Espece et de Leurs Noms 44 XL De FAuteur 48 XII. De FHomonymie 50 XIII. Du concept de Type 58 XIV. Des Types dans Groupe-Famille 60 le XV. Des Types dans le Groupe-Genre 60 XVI. Des Types dans Groupe-Espece 74 le XVII. De la Commission Internationale de Nomenclature Zoologique 82 XVI11. Reglements Regissant le Present Code 88 LES APPENDICES A. Ethique 92 B. Transcription et Latinisation des Mots Grecs 94 C. Latinisation des Noms Geographiques et des Noms Propres 100 D. Recommandations sur la Formation des Noms 104 E. Recommandations Generales 142 155 Glossaire Index 163 TABLE OF CONTENTS Preface: Chester Bradley IV J. Introduction: Norman R. StoU vii Basic dates in the Code xviii THE CODE Explanatory Note on the Code 1 Preamble 3 I. Zoological Nomenclature 5 II. Number of Words in Zoological Names 7 III. Criteria of Publication 7 IV. Criteria of Availability 9 V. Date of Publication 19 VI. VaUdity of Names 23 VII. Formation and Emendation of Names 27 VIII. Taxa of the Family-Group and Their Names 37 IX. Taxa of the Genus-Group and Their Names 43 X. Taxa of the Species-Group and Their Names 45 XL Authorship 49 XIL Homonym 51 j^ XIII. The Type-Concept 59 XIV. Types in the Family-Group 61 XV. Types in the Genus-Group 61 XVI. Types in the Species-Group 75 XVII. The International Commission on Zoological Nomen- clature 83 XVIII. Regulations Governing This Code 89 APPENDICES A. Code of Ethics 93 B. Transliteration and Latinization of Greek Words 95 C. Latinization of Geographical and Proper Names 101 D. Recommendations on the Formation of Names 105 E. General Recommendations 143 Glossary 148 Index 163 in PREFACE ''Nomenclature being thought so difficult, its mastery has been the object of comparatively a few.'' W. Arnold Lewis, i8y2 Like all language, zoological nomenclature reflects the history of those who have produced it, and is the result of varying and con- flicting practices. Some of our nomenclatural usage has been the result of ignorance, of vanity, obstinate insistence on following in- dividual predilections, much, like that of language in general, of national customs, prides, and prejudices. Ordinary languages grow spontaneously in innumerable direc- tions but biological nomenclature has to be an exact tool that will ; convey a precise meaning to all persons in all generations. Linnaeus originated our modern concept of biological nomencla- ture, but in that period there existed no premonition of the millions of substantives and substantive couplets that it would contribute to Neolatin within the two ensuing centuries. Men recognized no com- pelling principles to guide them in the application of names. Perhaps the earliest difficulties arose from efforts to improve upon names that had already been given, for even acknowledgment of the rights of priority was a principle that was at first bitterly contested or half- heartedly applied. The British Association for the Advancement of Science perceived that zoologists must control the growth and application of animal nomenclature by a code of laws centrally agreed upon. In 1842 they adopted what has come to be known as the ''Stricklandian Code'', product of a committee of which such great zoologists as Darwin, Shuckard, Waterhouse, Westwood, and Henslow were members. This was a simple code that laid down only broad principles, and has been the general basis of all subsequent codes. It was widely accepted, translated into French, and an Italian translation was given general approval by the Padua Scientific Congress in 1843. The present International Code derives its status from enactments of the International Congresses of Zoology, but its real authority lies in the extent to which it interprets and expresses the will of zoologists in whose consciences its enforcement lies. While based on principles, the Code recognizes none as paramount to its fundamental aim, which is to provide the m.aximum uni- versality and continuity in zoological nomenclature compatible with freedom in taxonomic practice. It seeks to provide the name which iv Preface v every zoologist, now and hereafter, under whatever circumstances may be imposed by his personal taxonomic judgment, shall apply to any given taxon. It especially seeks to provide that, under the same circumstances, that name shall remain permanently the same. The Code refrains from infringing upon taxonomic judgment, which must not be made subject to regulation or restraint. Harmony with taxonomy, however the latter fluctuates, is secured by the device of types: each name is conceived to be based on a type (individual specimen or taxon) which for nomenclatural purposes defines it objectively. Thus the meaning of each name available for a species, whether vahd, or a homonym, or a junior synonym, — is defined by the characters of an individual specimen its type, that of a genus by those of its type-species, that of a family by those of its type-genus. From the viewpoint of nomenclature each taxon consists of its type plus all the other individuals, species, or genera that any given taxonomist holds to belong to it. The limits of each are a question of taxonomy, ignored by nomenclature. The latter accepts as objective synonyms only those names that are based on the same tj^e but it is prepared to accept or to reject subjectively ; as synonyms names based on other types, in the sense that it pro- vides the proper name for the zoologist to use, whichever taxonomic course his judgment prescribes. Equally nomenclature does not determine the rank to be accorded to any group of animals, but it does provide the name that shall be applied to whatever rank any taxonomist may wish to assign it. The failure of the Code to deal with names of higher rank than superfamily or of lower rank than subspecies arises from no failure to recognize the necessity of such names. It exists because the practice of zoologists in regard to them is not sufficiently uniform to permit the formulation of rules covering them at this time. From these considerations it follows that the complete binominal name of a species can be stabihzed only for the type-species of each nominal genus, and then only to the extent that such genus is and continues to be recognized as a valid taxonomic entity. The generic placement of all other specific names is a matter of potentially fluctuating taxonomic judgment. Scarcely second to the law of priority is that of homonymy that : the same precise name may not continue to be applied to different taxa, for to do so would always be a potential source of misunder- standing. Conceiving nomenclatural rules as tools useful only to the point where they- provide the maximum stability compatible w^ith taxo- nomic freedom, certain measures have been adopted to prevent them vi Preface from becoming tyrannical, and actually destructive of their own usefulness. An International Code makes all these objectives possible. * * * It is doubtful that the zoological public will ever fully compre- hend the full extent of the labours of the members of the Editorial Committee in bringing the present revision of the Code to comple- tion. By way of illustration, after the Committee's carefully pre- pared draft was submitted to the Commission to be voted upon, in June 1960, 262 comments were received from Commissioners. These related to 63 of the 87 articles. Considering these suggestions, the Editorial Committee in turn interchanged 564 individual comments in resolving the questions raised and reaching editorial agreement. On behalf of the Commission and of all zoologists I formally ex- press our deep gratitude to the Editorial Committee of the Congress, and to its indefatigable Chairman, Commissioner Dr. Norman Rudolph StoU. Also I wish to express our gratitude to the International Union of Biological Sciences for the grant that made possible a week-long meeting of the Committee in London, and to the President of the Permanent Committee of the Congresses, Professor Jean G. Baer, who requested that the grant be made and suggested that the meet- ing be held. Without this meeting no such perfect a document could have been achieved. Finally, in addition to the words in the Introduction about our former Honorary Secretary, Mr. Francis Hemming, C.M.G., C.B.E., speaking on behalf of the Commission and of all zoologists, it gives me deep pleasure to express our profound gratitude for his long years of arduous service, for his early perception of the need of reforming the Code, and for his wise and persistent measures taken to that end. Chester Bradley J. President, The International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature