LANs: Lists of Available Names a new generation for stable taxonomic

names in zoology

Anchoring Biodiversity Information: Anchoring Biodiversity Information: From Sherborn to the 21st century and beyondFrom Sherborn to the 21st century and beyond

Friday October 28th 2011

by

Daphne Gail Fautin

University of Kansasand

International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature

and

Miguel Alonso-Zarazaga

Museo Nacional de Ciencias Naturales

and International Commission on

Zoological Nomenclature

Article 79

entitled “List of Available Names in Zoology,” outlines a procedure for assembling a List of Available Names by simultaneously adding large numbers of names to the List as a Part of the List

Article 79

appeared first in the Fourth Edition of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (which took effect from 1 January 2000)

In previous editions, it dealt with the Plenary Power (Edition 3; “Powers” in Edition 2) of the Commission. In Edition 2 it was half a page long with one section; by Edition 3 it was two pages long with three sections.

Daphne Gail FautinChair, an ad hoc committee

Miguel Alonso-ZarazagaChair, a standing committee

To announce the procedure our committees propose be adopted by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature for implementing Article 79.

ICZN Article 80.5. Interpretation of Opinions. An Opinion applies only to the particular case before the Commission and is to be rigidly construed; no conclusions other than those expressly specified are to be drawn from it.

Article 79

This feature has gained importance with the development of Zoobank, because the LAN can be an important adjunct to or become a component of Zoobank.

Potentially a source of many names for Zoobank

Article 79 does not involve

To which names are added in small numbers (by contrast with the LAN).

According to Article 80.8, the LAN takes precedence over the Official List in cases of contradiction.

Article 79

• outlines a procedure that includes who may propose and the role of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (referred to as the Commission)

An international body of zoologists… in consultation with the Commission may propose that the Commission adopt for a major taxonomic field (or related fields) a Part of the List of Available Names in Zoology. The Commission will consider the proposal and may adopt the Part subject to the proposing body and the Commission meeting the requirements of this Article.

Article 79

• outlines the form of the proposal (Article 79.1)79.1.1. specify the scope of the proposal, such as the taxonomic field, ranks, and time period covered … ;79.1.2. for each name to be listed, give the bibliographic reference to the work in which it is established, its authorship, its date of publication and its status (including its precedence if this is different from its priority);79.1.3. for each name to be listed, give details of the name-bearing type of the nominal taxon it denotes; in the case of a species-group name, if the details of how the type specimen(s) may be recognized are not known, state whether the name is based on a holotype, syntypes, lectotype or neotype and the place(s) of deposition (if any) recorded in the type fixation (but no lectotype or neotype designation can be made for the purposes of listing alone …

Article 79

• outlines what the Commission is to do when a candidate Part is submitted (Article 79.2.1-79.2.2.2)

79.2.1. Upon being advised by an international body of zoologists that it intends to propose a Part of the List, the Commission shall appoint by its Council an ad hoc committee [Constitution Art. 10] to consult with the proposers.79.2.2. Upon receipt of a proposal the Commission shall79.2.2.1. publish a notice of the proposal in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature giving details of the proposing body, proposed scope of the Part and a source from which copies (on paper or otherwise) of the proposed Part may be obtained by zoologists, and inviting comments from zoologists during the following twelve months;79.2.2.2. submit the notice for publication in journals publishing taxonomic work in the taxonomic field covered by the proposal;

Article 79

• outlines what the Commission is to do with the candidate Part (Article 79.2.2.3-79.2.2.6)

79.2.2.3. refer the proposal to its ad hoc committee for it to receive comments, consult with the proposers and others and, not less than two years from the date of publication of the notice referred to in Article 79.2.2.1, consider either a revised proposal or a recommendation that the proposal be abandoned;79.2.2.4. ensure that the revised proposal does not contain any name established less than five years before the submission of the initial proposal;79.2.2.5. following receipt of the revised proposal from its ad hoc committee, publish notice of it and invite comments on the revised proposal in the same manner as for the initial proposal [Arts. 79.2.2.1, 79.2.2.2];79.2.2.6. take into account comments received (if any) and comments of the proposers thereon, and vote to adopt the Part proposed or to abandon the proposal, under procedures prescribed in the Constitution [Art. 12] and the Bylaws of the Commission for voting under its plenary power.

Article 79

• has a lot to say about timing

Once a candidate Part has been submitted to the Commission, notice is published that it is open for comment

And the community has 12 months to comment on it

Article 79

• has a lot to say about timing

Once a candidate Part has been submitted to the Commission, notice is published that it is open for comment

And the community has 12 months to comment on it

After which, at least two years after publication of the notice, the Commission must vote

To consider a revised proposal

To recommend the proposal be abandoned

OR

Article 79

• has a lot more to say about timing

Once a REVISED candidate Part has been submitted to the Commission, notice is published that it is open for comment

And the community has another 12 month comment period

OR

To adopt the Part To abandon the proposal

After at least two more years after publication of that notice, the Commission must vote

Article 79describes a type of application to the Commission

• outlines who may submit a proposal

• outlines the form of the proposal

• outlines the role of the Commission in responding to a proposal and comments concerning it

• outlines timing for consideration of a proposal

Article 79describes a type of application to the Commission

• outlines who may submit a proposal

• outlines the form of the proposal

• outlines the role of the Commission in responding to a proposal and comments concerning it

• outlines timing for consideration of a proposal

• is mute concerning the content of the submission

• 79.4.3. No unlisted name within the scope (taxonomic field, ranks, and time period covered) of an adopted Part of the List of Available Names in Zoology has any status in zoological nomenclature despite any previous availability.

This will prevent long-forgotten names from displacing accepted ones (“nomenclatural archeology”) -- but was that the sole reason for developing the elaborate procedure outlined in Article 79?

TWO POSSIBILITIES

to document every available name within the scope of the Part

to pare the inventory of names within the scope of the Part

STRICTLY NOMENCLATURAL

TAXONOMIC COMPONENT

Charles Michener is quoted by S. J. Gould in Bully for Brontosaurus

“In other sciences the work of incompetents is merely ignored; in taxonomy, because of priority,

it is preserved.”

What did the framers of Article 79 envision?

Risk a Type I error: keep a name that we will never understand or relate to something real

Risk a Type II error: discard a name that refers to something real that we will have to describe again

keep all names in case one might refer to an animal we will someday find or understandIF WE

But the name is so unclear that experts and two years of public scrutiny cannot associate it with an entity, much work will be required to circumscribe it

An entity referred to by a discarded name will have to be described again once rediscovered

discard a name that might refer to something real IF WE

We interpret the lengthy and exhaustive (not to say exhausting!) procedure outlined in Article 79 as a mechanism to1)pare away dubious names (like the Approved Lists of Bacterial Names that took effect on 1 January 1980 – taxonomically recognizable as well as nomenclaturally available), while2)ensuring a candidate Part of the LAN is thoroughly vetted.

Creates a definitive nomenclatural inventory (a new zero point) for a portion of the taxonomic spectrum

Implementation of Article 79

• The candidate PART submitted should include all names the responsible group wants to become a Part of the LAN

• The responsible group should include an inventory of nomenclaturally available names (or even unavailable names in current use) that it does notnot want to become part of the LAN

Implementation of Article 79

• The candidate PART submitted should include all names the responsible group wants to become a Part of the LAN

• If the Part is accepted for the LAN after the mandatory period of consideration (at least four years), any name not on the LAN within the parameters of the Part loses nomenclatural standing

Implementation of Article 79

• This procedure (with examples) is documented in a manual to be put before the Commission this year. Once it is approved, a body wishing to make an application under Article 79 should follow the procedures it outlines. (A copy can be obtained from the ICZN website.)