Nomen dubium: Difference between revisions

Content deleted Content added

Inline

Latest revision as of 01:12, 1 February 2024

In binomial nomenclature, a nomen dubium (Latin for "doubtful name", plural nomina dubia) is a scientific name that is of unknown or doubtful application.

Zoology

In case of a nomen dubium, it may be impossible to determine whether a specimen belongs to that group or not. This may happen if the original type series (i. e. holotype, isotype, syntype or paratype) is lost or destroyed. The zoological and botanical codes allow for a new type specimen, or neotype, to be chosen in this case.

A name may also be considered a nomen dubium if its name-bearing type is fragmentary or lacking important diagnostic features (this is often the case for species known only as fossils). To preserve stability of names, the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature allows a new type specimen, or neotype, to be chosen for a nomen dubium in this case.

75.5. Replacement of unidentifiable name-bearing type by a neotype. When an author considers that the taxonomic identity of a nominal species-group taxon cannot be determined from its existing name-bearing type (i.e. its name is a nomen dubium), and stability or universality are threatened thereby, the author may request the Commission to set aside under its plenary power [Art. 81] the existing name-bearing type and designate a neotype.^[1]

For example, the crocodile-like archosaurian reptile Parasuchus hislopi Lydekker, 1885 was described based on a premaxillary rostrum (part of the snout), but this is no longer sufficient to distinguish Parasuchus from its close relatives. This made the name Parasuchus hislopi a nomen dubium. In 2001 a paleontologist proposed that a new type specimen, a complete skeleton, be designated.^[2] The International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature considered the case and agreed in 2003 to replace the original type specimen with the proposed neotype.^[3]

Bacteriology

In bacteriological nomenclature, nomina dubia may be placed on the list of rejected names by the Judicial Commission. The meaning of these names is uncertain. Other categories of names that may be treated in this way (rule 56a) are:^[4]

ambiguous names, nomina ambigua, have been used with more than one meaning
names causing confusion, nomina confusa, are based on a mixed culture
perplexing names, nomina perplexa, confusingly similar names
perilous names, nomina periculosa, names that may lead to accidents endangering life or health or with potential serious economic consequences

Botany

In botanical nomenclature the phrase nomen dubium has no status, although it is informally used for names whose application has become confusing. In this regard, its synonym nomen ambiguum is of more frequent use. Such names may be proposed for rejection.

References

^ International Code of Zoological Nomenclature Archived 24 May 2009 at the Wayback Machine (4th edition, 1999)
^ Case 3165, Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 58:1 Archived 28 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine, 30 March 2001.
^ Opinion 2045, Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 60:2 Archived 28 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine, 30 June 2003.
^ SP Lapage; PHA Sneath; EF Lessel; VBD Skerman; HPR Seeliger; WA Clark, eds. (1992). "Rules of Nomenclature with Recommendations". International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria: Bacteriological Code, 1990 Revision. ASM Press.

[1] International Code of Zoological Nomenclature Archived 24 May 2009 at the Wayback Machine (4th edition, 1999)

[2] Case 3165, Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 58:1 Archived 28 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine, 30 March 2001.

[3] Opinion 2045, Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 60:2 Archived 28 September 2007 at the Wayback Machine, 30 June 2003.

[4] SP Lapage; PHA Sneath; EF Lessel; VBD Skerman; HPR Seeliger; WA Clark, eds. (1992). "Rules of Nomenclature with Recommendations". International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria: Bacteriological Code, 1990 Revision. ASM Press.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[4]

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
+{{short description|Doubtful name in taxonomy}}
 {{italic title}}
-In [[International Code of Zoological Nomenclature|zoological nomenclature]], a '''''nomen dubium''''' ([[Latin]] for "doubtful name", plural '''''nomina dubia''''') is a scientific name that is of unknown or doubtful application.
+In [[binomial nomenclature]], a '''''nomen dubium''''' ([[Latin]] for "doubtful name", plural '''''nomina dubia''''') is a scientific name that is of unknown or doubtful application.
+==Zoology==
-In the [[International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants|botanical nomenclature]] the phrase ''nomen dubium'' has no status, although it is informally used for names whose application has become confusing. In this regard however, its synonym '''''nomen ambiguum''''' is of more frequent use. In botany, such names may be proposed for [[Conserved name|rejection]].
+In case of a ''nomen dubium,'' it may be impossible to determine whether a specimen belongs to that group or not. This may happen if the original type series (i. e. [[holotype]], [[Isotype (biology)|isotype]], [[syntype]] or [[paratype]]) is lost or destroyed. The zoological and botanical codes allow for a new type specimen, or [[neotype]], to be chosen in this case.
+[[File:Tritonellium barthi (MNHN-IM-2000-6508).jpeg|thumb|preserved specimen of ''[[Tritonellium barthi]]'' <small>Valenciennes, 1858</small> (''nomen dubium'')]]
+A name may also be considered a ''nomen dubium'' if its [[name-bearing type]] is fragmentary or lacking important diagnostic features (this is often the case for species known only as fossils). To preserve stability of names, the ''[[International Code of Zoological Nomenclature]]'' allows a new type specimen, or neotype, to be chosen for a ''nomen dubium'' in this case.
+<blockquote>75.5. Replacement of unidentifiable name-bearing type by a neotype. When an author considers that the taxonomic identity of a nominal species-group taxon cannot be determined from its existing name-bearing type (i.e. its name is a ''nomen dubium''), and stability or universality are threatened thereby, the author may request the Commission to set aside under its plenary power [Art. 81] the existing name-bearing type and designate a neotype.<ref>[http://www.iczn.org/iczn/index.jsp International Code of Zoological Nomenclature] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090524144249/http://www.iczn.org/iczn/index.jsp |date=24 May 2009 }} (4th edition, 1999)</ref></blockquote>
-In case of a ''nomen dubium'' it may be impossible to determine whether a specimen belongs to that group or not. This may happen if the original type series (i. e. [[holotype]], [[Isotype (biology)|isotype]]s, [[syntype]]s, and [[paratype]]s) is lost or destroyed. The zoological and botanical codes allow for a new type specimen, or [[neotype]], to be chosen in this case.
+For example, the [[crocodile]]-like [[archosaur]]ian reptile ''Parasuchus hislopi'' [[Richard Lydekker|Lydekker]], 1885 was described based on a [[premaxilla]]ry [[rostrum (anatomy)|rostrum]] (part of the snout), but this is no longer sufficient to distinguish ''[[Parasuchus]]'' from its close relatives. This made the name ''Parasuchus hislopi'' a ''nomen dubium''. In 2001 a paleontologist proposed that a new type specimen, a complete skeleton, be designated.<ref>Case 3165, [http://www.iczn.org/BZNMar2001cases.htm#case3165 ''Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature'' 58:1] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070928063845/http://www.iczn.org/BZNMar2001cases.htm |date=28 September 2007 }}, 30 March 2001.</ref> The [[International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature]] considered the case and agreed in 2003 to replace the original type specimen with the proposed neotype.<ref>Opinion 2045, [http://www.iczn.org/BZNJune2003opinions.htm#opinion2045 ''Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature'' 60:2] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070928063853/http://www.iczn.org/BZNJune2003opinions.htm |date=28 September 2007 }}, 30 June 2003.</ref>
-A name may also be considered a ''nomen dubium'' if its [[name-bearing type]] is fragmentary or lacking important diagnostic features (this is often the case for species known only as fossils). To preserve stability of names, the ''[[International Code of Zoological Nomenclature]]'' allows a new type specimen, or [[neotype]], to be chosen for a ''nomen dubium'' in this case.
+== Bacteriology ==
-<blockquote>75.5. Replacement of unidentifiable name-bearing type by a neotype. When an author considers that the taxonomic identity of a nominal species-group taxon cannot be determined from its existing name-bearing type (i.e. its name is a ''nomen dubium''), and stability or universality are threatened thereby, the author may request the Commission to set aside under its plenary power [Art. 81] the existing name-bearing type and designate a neotype.<ref>[http://www.iczn.org/iczn/index.jsp International Code of Zoological Nomenclature] (4th edition, 1999)</ref></blockquote>
+{{Anchor|in-bacteriology}}
+In [[International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria|bacteriological nomenclature]], ''nomina dubia'' may be placed on the list of rejected names by the Judicial Commission. The meaning of these names is uncertain. Other categories of names that may be treated in this way (rule 56a) are:<ref>{{cite book |url=https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK8808/ |title=International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria: Bacteriological Code, 1990 Revision |chapter=Rules of Nomenclature with Recommendations |editor1=SP Lapage |editor2=PHA Sneath |editor3=EF Lessel |editor4=VBD Skerman |editor5=HPR Seeliger |editor6=WA Clark |publisher=ASM Press |year=1992}}</ref>
+*ambiguous names, '''''nomina ambigua''''', have been used with more than one meaning
+*names causing confusion, '''''nomina confusa''''', are based on a mixed culture
+*perplexing names, '''''nomina perplexa''''', confusingly similar names
+*perilous names, '''''nomina periculosa''''', names that may lead to accidents endangering life or health or with potential serious economic consequences
+== Botany ==
-For example, the [[crocodile]]-like [[archosaur]]ian reptile ''Parasuchus hislopi'' [[Richard Lydekker|Lydekker]], 1885 was described based on a [[premaxilla]]ry [[rostrum (anatomy)|rostrum]] (part of the snout), but this is no longer sufficient to distinguish ''[[Parasuchus]]'' from its close relatives. This made the name ''Parasuchus hislopi'' a ''nomen dubium''. Texan paleontologist Sankar Chatterjee proposed that a new type specimen, a complete skeleton, be designated.<ref>Case 3165, [http://www.iczn.org/BZNMar2001cases.htm#case3165 ''Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature'' 58:1], 30 March 2001.</ref> The [[International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature]] considered the case and agreed in 2003 to replace the original type specimen with the proposed neotype.<ref>Opinion 2045, [http://www.iczn.org/BZNJune2003opinions.htm#opinion2045 ''Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature'' 60:2], 30 June 2003.</ref>
+{{Unreferenced section|date=December 2021}}
+In [[International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants|botanical nomenclature]] the phrase ''nomen dubium'' has no status, although it is informally used for names whose application has become confusing. In this regard, its synonym ''nomen ambiguum'' is of more frequent use. Such names may be proposed for [[Conserved name#Rejection|rejection]].
 ==See also==
+* [[Glossary of scientific naming]]
 * ''[[species inquirenda]]'', a species of doubtful identity requiring further investigation
 * ''[[nomen nudum]]'', a name proposed with no description (or illustration)
-* ''[[nomen oblitum]]'', a forgotten name
+* ''[[nomen oblitum]]'', an obsolete name
 ==References==
 {{reflist}}
+{{Use dmy dates|date=October 2023}}
 [[Category:Zoological nomenclature]]
 [[Category:Nomina dubia| ]]
-[[Category:Latin words and phrases]]
+[[Category:Latin biological phrases]]