INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SYSTEMATIC BACTERIOLOGY

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF
SYSTEMATIC BACTERIOLOGY
Vol. 19, No. 2
April 1969
pp. 173-181
Copyright 1969, Iowa State University P r e s s
REGARDING NOMENCLATURAL TYPES (NOMENIFERS):
A PROPOSAL FOR AMENDING PRINCIPLE 11 AND
RULE 9 O F THE INTERNATIONAL CODE OF
NOMENCLATURE OF BACTERIA
Mortimer P. S t a r r and Helen Heise
Department of Bacteriology, University of California;
Davis, California 9 5616, and Department of Philosophy,
University of California, Santa Barbara, California 9 3106
ABSTRACT. A m e n d m e n t s a r e p r o p o s e d t o P r i n c i p l e 1 1 a n d R u l e 9 of t h e I n t e r n a t i o n a l C o d e
o f N o m e n c l a t u r e of B a c t e r i a w h i c h s h o u l d
serve t o c o r r e c t the present ambiguous, misleading, and e r r o n e o u s language regarding
nomenclatural types (nomenifers).
We have set down elsewhere (Heise and Starr 1968) our
analysis of the logical status and epistemological role of
nomenclatural types.
Our findings a r e that the present
language regarding nomenclatural types in Principle 11 and
Rule9 of the International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria
(1966; hereinafter, Code) i s ambiguous, erroneous, and m i s leadbg. The purposes of the present proposal are (a) t o
request the Judicial Commission of the International Committee on Nomznclature of Bacteria to consider altering the
language; (b) to offer possible amendments which we believe
to be improvedversions of Principle 11, Rule 9a, Rule 9 c ( l ) ,
and Rule 9d(l); and (c) t o recommend thorough review of
other parts of the Code to insure conformity with these proposed amendment s,
Principle 11 of the Code (p. 463) presently states:
The application of the names of taxa i s determined by
means of norfienclatural types (nominifer s) , A nomenclatural type i s that constituent element of a taxon to which the
name of the taxon i s permanently attached, whether a s the
accepted name or a s a synonym. Note. The phrase "constituent element of a taxonlyfor a species or a subspecies of
bacteria is the type specimen, usually a type strain o r cultur e
.
Downloaded from www.microbiologyresearch.org by
IP: 78.47.27.170
On: Sat, 01 Oct 2016 03:28:45
174
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL
Explicating P r i n c i p l e 11, Rule 9a (Code, p. 467) presently
s t a t e s (in part):
F o r each taxon covered by this r u l e t h e r e shall be d e s i g nated a type. The nomenclatural type (nominifer) i s that
constituent element of the taxon to which the name of the
taxon i s permanently attached. The type of a species of
(sic! o r ) subspecies i s p r e f e r a b l y a designated type s t r a i n
o r i n special c a s e s i t may be a description, a p r e s e r v e d
specimen o r preparation, o r a n illustration. The type of
a genus i s a s p e c i e s within the genus designated in conformity with Rule 9c. The type of a n o r d e r o r s u b o r d e r , f a m i l y
o r subfamily, t r i b e o r subtribe, i s the genus on whose name
the name of the higher taxon i s based. The type of a taxon
higher than o r d e r i s one of the contained o r d e r s . The type
of a taxon should be fixed a t the t i m e of i t s proposal by i t s
author.
Rule 9c(1) (Code, p. 467) presently states:
The nomenclatural type (type species) of a genus o r subgenus i s the name of the single s p e c i e s o r of one of the
species included when the name of the genus o r subgenus
was originally validly published. Note.
The e x p r e s s i o n
“type s p e c i e s t 1i s t o be used r a t h e r than Ilgenotype” o r
other e x p r e s s i o n s when r e f e r r i n g to the type s p e c i e s of a
genus.
Rule 9 d ( l ) (Code, pp. 468-9) presently s t a t e s (in part):
The type of a s p e c i e s o r subspecies is p r e f e r a b l y a living s t r a i n maintained i n a bacteriological laboratory, m o r e
p a r t i c u l a r l y i n one of the permanently established culture
collections f r o m which i t would be available f o r study.
Note 1. F o r a species which cannot be maintained in
laboratory c u l t u r e s o r f o r which neither type s t r a i n s nor
neotype s t r a i n s exist, the type i s the original description,
preparation o r i 1lus tration.
The a r g u m e n t s relating to the ambiguities o r e r r o r s of
P r i n c i p l e 11 and Rule 9 of the C o d e a r e laid out i n g r e a t e r
detail elsewhere (Heise and S t a r r , 1968); h e r e we point out
m o r e briefly what we find wrong with the p a r t s of the Code
which we suggest be amended. In some c a s e s , we have
added points not t r e a t e d in the other a r t i c l e .
First.
-- A
lexicographical point: llNomeniferlli s the word
Downloaded from www.microbiologyresearch.org by
IP: 78.47.27.170
On: Sat, 01 Oct 2016 03:28:45
SYSTEMATIC
BACTERIOLOGY
175
which a p p e a r s i n the original a r t i c l e by Schopf (1960), i n
which that word i s o f f e r e d instead of "type specimenI1.
The Code shows llnominiferll, though a l l other w r i t e r s u s e
Schopf's original spelling. "N omenifer" comes f r o m the
Latin f o r IlnamelI (nominative singular: 11nomen11, , genitive singular: Itnominislt) and lotobear" ("ferre I ! ) . Since
is a possible root by analogy with "nomenclature",
"nomen
and since the t e r m was f o r m e d with this root by Schopf and
h i s word i s not totally inconsistent with r u l e s governing the
formation of words f r o m the Latin (according to a c l a s s i c i s t we consulted), and since subsequent w r i t e r s u s e Ilnomenifer", i t s e e m s p r e f e r a b l e to r e t a i n the original published
neologism r a t h e r than devising s t i l l another t e r m . Hence,
nomenifer.
Second. - - Schopf (1960), i n introducing the t e r m I8nomenifer", s e e m s to be using it a s equivalent to "type specimen'l.
The Code apparently extends the meaning of the t e r m to
nomenclatural types of higher c a t e g o r i e s ; Schopf's language
may allow such extension of the t e r m . The explicit t e r m i nology suggested by Heise and S t a r r (1968) might a l s o be
used to indicate c l e a r l y a p a r t i c u l a r c a t e g o r e a l level of
nomenifer; e . g . , specific nomenifer (= type specimen =
n a m e - b e a r e r of a s p e c i e s o r subspecies), g e n e r i c nomenif e r (= type s p e c i e s = n a m e - b e a r e r of a genus o r eubgenus),
f a m i l i a l nomenifer (= type genus = n a m e - b e a r e r of a family
o r subfamily), e t c . However, a s pointed out e l s e w h e r e
(Heise and S t a r r , 1968), the s t a t u s of nomenclatural types
above the type specimen s e e m s to be significantly different
i n s o m e r e s p e c t s f r o m that of type specimens themselves.
All n o m e n i f e r s b a v e a common purpose, namely, to d i r e c t
o u r attention to a n entity of n a r r o w e r compass than the
c l a s s of which the nomenifer i s the nomenifer (monotypic
c l a s s e s excepted). The way i n which this purpose i s s e r v e d
at c a t e g o r e a l levels above the s p e c i e s i s different f r o m the
way i n which t h i s i s done a t the s p e c i e s o r subspecies level.
The specific nomenifer i s s o m t h i n g concrete, h e r e meaning
Localized i n space and t i m e . Nomenifers above the specific
nomenifer a r e open c l a s s e s , in the logicians' s e n s e . A
family, genus, o r s p e c i e s i s a n open c l a s s , that is, a c l a s s
admitting of indefinitely many m e m b e r s of a c e r t a i n kind.
Such a n open c l a s s cannot be had i n hand; i t is not localized
i n t i m e and space. A nomenifer above the specific nomenif e r does s e r v e the purpose of making c l e a r which lower
taxon i s definitely included in the taxon being d e s c r i b e d .
Downloaded from www.microbiologyresearch.org by
IP: 78.47.27.170
On: Sat, 01 Oct 2016 03:28:45
176
INT ERNAT IONAL JOURNAL
But such lower taxa cannot be held i n hand to give one f i r s t hand perceptual acquaintance, a s can specific nomenifers.
The point is that ideally nomenifers s e r v e two purposes:
to give a n unequivocal instance of the c l a s s whose name i s
being defined (which nomenifers of taxa a t any rank can do),
and to give a n unequivocal concrete instance of a taxon
(which only nomenifers of the lowest rank can do). We
might, therefore, conclude that the ostensive definition of
the name of any higher taxon (i.e., above the s p e c i e s o r
subspecies level) must, ultimately, be the s e t of a l l the
specific nomenifers which a r e included i n that higher taxon.
We m u s t again c l e a r l y distinguish between the ostensivedefining function of the nomenifer and the name -bearing
function of the nomenifer. Any higher taxon would have a
number of ostensively-defining type specimens (the s e t of
a l l the specific nomenifers which a r e included i n that higher
taxon), but that higher taxon would have at t h e next lower
c a t e g o r e a l l e v e l only one
-name-bearing nomenifer.
Third. - - The application of the name of the taxon cannot be
solely by m e a n s of nomenifers. By itself, the nomenifer
cannot show what t r a i t s a r e to count a s class-determining.
It cannot, on the one hand, because the nomenclatural type
need not be typical of the taxon being d e s c r i b e d ; on the
other hand, the nomenclatural type i s not unequivocal i n
r e s p e c t to (a) the significant p r o p e r t i e s being exemplified,
o r (b) the p e r m i s s i b l e variation i n the significant p r o p e r ties.
These difficulties can be m o s t perspicuously d i s c u s s e d
i n relation to the type specimen. The type specimen is, a s
h a s been said, a concrete example of the lowest taxon o r ,
equivalently, the type specimen i s a n ostensive definition
of the taxon's name (what one may point to i n o r d e r t o d e fine the name). The p r o b l e m s a r i s i n g with the u s e of ostensive definition (see Heise and S t a r r 1968) can be s e e n with
a simple, everyday example. Someone, probably a child,
a s k s what 81red1s
m e a n s . "Redi1 is ostensively defined by
his being shown a r e d object (the difficulties obtain no m a t t e r what object is chosen, so i t d o e s not m a t t e r what we
choose); suppose i t i s a n apple, and the p e r s o n is told
IIThat's red". What the p e r s o n working out the meaning of
the word h a s t o do i s pick out which p r o p e r t y o r p r o p e r t i e s
of the object a r e being pointed a t . He might think i t was
the shape, o r the smoothness, o r the kind of fruit, r a t h e r
Downloaded from www.microbiologyresearch.org by
IP: 78.47.27.170
On: Sat, 01 Oct 2016 03:28:45
SYSTEMATIC
BACTERIOLOGY
177
than the color. That i s the f i r s t p r o b l e m with any instance
of ostensive definition. The second difficulty with any c a s e
of ostensive definition can a l s o be shown with the I'redAt
example. Suppose the learning p e r s o n somehow picks out
the color of the apple a s the p r o p e r t y being pointed to,
then the question m u s t a r i s e concerning the range of c o l o r s
which can be covered by this word, "redIt. Let's s a y the
r e d of the apple i s a c l e a r blue-red,; should he o r should he
not include pink, red-orange, orange, magenta, red-violet,
purple? What about variations of saturation and b r i l l i a n c e ?
The p e r s o n learning the meaning of IIred" can a s k f o r many
examples of what will count a s red, s o that comparisons
and c o r r e c t i o n s will eventually i n m o s t c a s e s get him to the
right concept, but the biologist trying to l e a r n f r o m the
nomenifer the meaning of a species' name h a s only one
example and, even i f he had m o r e , he would s t i l l need a n
intensional definition, a s will now be shown.
It might s e e m that a n indefinite number of ostensive d e finitions of the name of a m i c r o b i a l taxon could be gotten
because the type specimen i s (a) p l u r a l ( i . e . , t h e r e i s m o r e
than one o r g a n i s m i n a m i c r o b i a l culture, unlike s a y a z o o logical type specimen which i s a single organism), and (b)
live. Because t h e r e a r e many o r g a n i s m s i n a m i c r o b i a l
culture and we can i n addition get a n indefinite number of
f u r t h e r o r g a n i s m s , we can indeed have whatever number of
ostensive definitions of the name of the m i c r o b i a l taxon i s
d e s i r e d ; so i t might be thought that a n intensional definition
(that is, definition i n t e r m s of p r o p e r t i e s ) of the name i s not
needed. But this is not the c a s e . The v e r y fact that the
microbial type specimen i s p l u r a l and live r e q u i r e s that
t h e r e be a n intensional definition a s well a s a n ostensive
definition. This conclusion i s supported by the following
considerations.
If one subdivides the m i c r o b i a l culture which is the type
specimen i n o r d e r to p r o l i f e r a t e c u l t u r e s to s e r v e as o s t e n sive definitions, t h e r e m a y be variations among these now
p l u r a l c u l t u r e s . The variations may be due to the genetic
heterogeneity of the original culture. Then which of the
possible t r a i t s was intended a s belonging to the original
taxon d e s c r i b e d by the naming investigator can be determined
only by r e f e r e n c e to the description of the taxon, not f r o m
the p r o p e r t i e s of the proliferated type specimen. Even i n
the unlikely event that the original m i c r o b i a l culture w e r e
Downloaded from www.microbiologyresearch.org by
IP: 78.47.27.170
On: Sat, 01 Oct 2016 03:28:45
178
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL
genetically homogeneous, the liveness of the culture and
the large populations mean that t h e r e will be mutations i n
significant n u m b e r s . And again, one m u s t be able to decide
which t r a i t s belonged to the taxon investigated by the m i c r o biologist who named the taxon. This decision can be made
only by r e f e r e n c e to the list of p r o p e r t i e s given a s n e c e s s a r y by the original investigator. In sum, ostensive definition even, o r should we say especially, i n the c a s e of n a m e s
of m i c r o b e s i s by itself not enough; intensional definition is
a l s o n e c e s s a r y . So, ideally, the investigator would s t a t e - i n the original, naming publication- -the o r g a n i s m ' s c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s and a n a p p r a i s a l of the ones which he took to be
important (including the p e r m i s sib le ranges of their v a r i a tions), a s well a s putting a type specimen on file. Such
description and evaluation a r e offered by the original i n v e s tigator, and may be added to and amended by subsequent
investigators
.
F o u r t h . - - In the second sentence of Principle 11, the u s e
of the word I1attach1l to indicate the relation between the
name of the taxon and the nomenclatural type m a y be m i s leading. It may be i n t e r p r e t e d to mean that the name belongs only to the nomenclatural type, i n which c a s e the
name would be a p r o p e r name ( s e e Heise and S t a r r 1968).
A p r o p e r name i s the name of a n entity which, a t that logic a l level, i s a n individual. F o r example, New York City
i s a n individual city though i t c o n s i s t s of many entities
(boroughs, postal zones, neighborhoods, p e r s o n s , buildings, e t c . ) of lower logical o r d e r s . A p r o p e r name does
not entail, i n a s t r i c t sense, any p a r t i c u l a r qualities - - a
p r o p e r name h a s no intension i s another way of saying this.
So i f the name w e r e attached only to the nomenclatural type,
i t would be scientifically u s e l e s s because that name, being
the p r o p e r name of a n individual, could not be attached to
any other o r g a n i s m s ; i f somehow we t r i e d to extend the name
to other o r g a n i s m s , we would not have any c r i t e r i a on the
b a s i s of which to do so, Therefore, to show that the name
applied to the nomenclatural type can be applied to other
o r g a n i s m s of that taxon, the connection between the name
and the nomenclatural type should be a different one;
"associated'l and "re1atedl1 s e e m p r e f e r a b l e to 'Iattachedll.
F i f t h . - - P r i n c i p l e 11 i s in e r r o r when i t s a y s i n the Note:
Itthe p h r a s e
i s the type specimenll. What was probably
intended was that the p h r a s e mean the type specimen. This
...
Downloaded from www.microbiologyresearch.org by
IP: 78.47.27.170
On: Sat, 01 Oct 2016 03:28:45
SYSTEMATIC
BACTERIOLOGY
179
misleading locution may be c o r r e c t e d by using s o m e word
like lmmeansl1i n place of lmislm
(which i n the Code s e e m s to
be a sign of equivalence).
Sixth. - - To avoid the possibility that the type specimen
might be i n t e r p r e t e d a s having s o m e specia L Logica 1 status
i n relation to a l l the other m e m b e r s of the taxon (which the
type specimen does not have), l1thatlm
preceding "coxistituent
element" should be replaced by 18a11i n P r i n c i p l e 11 and
Rule 9a.
Seventh. - - If the type specimen i s a n element of the taxon,
neither a name nor a description nor a n i l l u s t r a t i o n can be
a type specimen. Neither a name nor a s e r i e s of words nor
a drawing (or photograph) can b e a n element of a biological
taxon, though a description o r illustration can s e r v e i n
place of a type specimen. This objection applies to Rule
9a, Rule 9c ( l ) , and Rule 9d(l).
In light of these a r g u m e n t s and the detailed a n a l y s i s we
have p r e s e n t e d elsewhere (Heise and Starr 1968), we
respectfully submit to the Judicial Commission of the I n t e r national Committee on Nomenclature of B a c t e r i a the following statements a s possible r e p l a c e m e n t s f o r the language of
the p r e s e n t P r i n c i p l e 11 and p a r t s of Rule 9a, Rule 9c(l),
and Rule 9 d ( l ) of the Code:
Principle 11
The application of the n a m e s of taxa i s d e t e r m i n e d i n
p a r t by m e a n s of nomenclatural types (nomenifers). A
nomenclatural type i s a constituent element of a taxon with
which the name of the taxon i s permanently a s s o c i a t e d ,
whether a s the accepted name o r a s a synonym. That is, a
taxon b e a r s that name, o r a synonym, only if the nomenifer
i s included i n the taxon. Note. The "constituent element
of a taxon" r e f e r r e d to above, f o r a s p e c i e s o r subspecies,
i s the type specimen (the specific nomenifer), that i s , a
type s t r a i n o r culture. The specific nomenifer (the nomenif e r of the taxon of lowest rank) i s a concrete example of
that taxon o r , equivalently, s e r v e s a s a n ostensive definition of the name of that taxon. In a h i e r a r c h i c a l c l a s s i f i c a tion, the ostensive definition of the name of a higher taxon
(i.e . , above the species o r subspecies level) is, ultimately,
the s e t of a l l the specific nomenifers which a r e included i n
Downloaded from www.microbiologyresearch.org by
IP: 78.47.27.170
On: Sat, 01 Oct 2016 03:28:45
180
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL
that higher taxon; but that higher taxon would have a t the
next lower c a t e g o re a l leve 1 only one name -bearing nomenifer.
Rule 9a.
F o r each taxon covered by this Rule, t her e shall be
designated a nomenclatura 1 type. The nomenclatural type
(nomenifer) i s a constituent element of the taxon with which
the name i s permanently a s s o c i a t e d . The nomenifer s e r v e s
to r e l a t e the name of that taxon to the or gani s m s which that
name designates. The nomenclatural type of a s peci es o r
subspecies (the specific nomenifer) is pr ef er abl y a desig nated type s t r a i n . In those c a s e s where a type s t r a i n i s
lacking, the ro l e of the specific nomenifer m a y be s er ved
by a description, a p r e s e r v e d specimen o r preparation, o r
a n illustration. The c a t e g o re a l level of the nomenclatural
type i s the next lower c a t e g o re a l level below the taxon of
which i t is the nomenclatural type. Thus, the nomenclatural
type of a genus (the g e n e ri c nomenifer) is a species, and
the ostensive definition of the name of the genus is, ultimately, the s e t of a l l the specific nomenifers which a r e
included i n that genus; the nomenclatural type of a f ami l y
(the familial nomenifer) is a genus, and the ostensive definition of the name of the family is, ultimately, the set of a l l
the specific nomenifers which a r e included i n that family;
the nomenclatural type of a n o r d e r (the ordinal nomenifer)
i s a family, and the ostensive definition of the name of the
o r d e r is, ultimately, the s e t of a l l the specific nomenifers
which a r e included i n that o r d e r . The nomenclatural type
of a taxon should be fixed a t the t i m e the author pr opos es
the name of the taxon.
Rule 9c. Designation of the nomenclatural type of a genus
o r subgenus.
(1) The nomenclatural type of a genus o r subgenus (the
type s p e c i es o r g e n e ri c nomenifer) i s the single s peci es o r
one of the s p e c i e s included when the name of the genus o r
subgenus was originally validly published.
Rule 9d(l).
The nomenclatural type of a s p e c i e s o r subspecies is
p r e f e r a b l y a living s t r a i n maintained i n a bacteriological
laboratory, m o r e p a rt i c u l a rl y i n one of the permanently
established culture collections f r o m which i t would be avai l able f o r study.
Downloaded from www.microbiologyresearch.org by
IP: 78.47.27.170
On: Sat, 01 Oct 2016 03:28:45
SYSTEMATIC BACTERIOLOGY
181
Note 1. F o r a s p e c i e s which cannot be maintained i n
Laboratory culture o r f o r which neither type s t r a i n s nor
neotype s t r a i n s exist, the ro l e of the type specimen i s
s e r v e d by the original description, p repar at i on o r i l l u s t r a tion.
LITERATURE CITED
Heise, H. and M. P. S t a r r . 1968. Nomenifers: a r e they
christened o r c l a s s i fi e d ? Systematic zoology, E : 4 5 8 467.
International Code of Nomenclature of Bact er i a. 1966.
Internationa 1 Journal of Systematic Bacteriology, 16:
459 -490.
Schopf, J. M. 1960. Emphasis on holotype(?). Science,
131 :1043.
-
~
Supported by r e s e a r c h g r a n t AI-08426 f r o m the National
Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, United States
Public Health Service, and by a Fellowship (to M. P. S.) f r o m
the John Simon Guggenheim Memorial Foundation.
Downloaded from www.microbiologyresearch.org by
IP: 78.47.27.170
On: Sat, 01 Oct 2016 03:28:45