Summary auto-generated
This article addresses nomenclatural inconsistencies in bacterial taxonomy according to the Bacteriological Code (1990 Revision). The authors identify twelve bacterial orders that were incorrectly designated with families rather than genera as their nomenclatural types, violating Rule 21a which states that the nomenclatural type of an order must be the genus on which the order name is based. The authors propose corrections for orders including Acholeplasmatales, Halanaerobiales, Halobacteriales, and seven methane-metabolizing orders, among others. Additionally, they highlight that several bacterial classes, including Proteobacteria, were published without designating nomenclatural types, which may render them illegitimate under Rules 22 and 27. The authors request that the Judicial Commission rule on the validity status of these class and subclass names and designate appropriate nomenclatural types where necessary to ensure compliance with the Bacteriological Code.
Key findings
- Twelve bacterial orders were incorrectly published with families rather than genera as nomenclatural types, violating Rule 21a of the Bacteriological Code
- Specific corrections are proposed for orders such as Methanobacteriales, Sulfolobales, and Thermococcales to designate the correct genus as the nomenclatural type
- Several bacterial classes, including Proteobacteria, lack designated nomenclatural types, potentially rendering them illegitimate under current Code rules
- The authors request Judicial Commission intervention to establish nomenclatural types for classes and subclasses published in violation of the Bacteriological Code
This summary was generated automatically from the article PDF and is not part of the original publication. Refer to the PDF for the authoritative text.
Abstract
An important aspect of the Bacteriological Code (1990 Revision) is the designation of nomenclatural types to the various taxonomic ranks to provide a suitable reference point for the unambiguous identification of the taxon. Although the nomenclatural type of the species is the designated strain, and the nomenclatural type of the genus is the type species, the nomenclatural type of both the family and the order is the 'genus on whose name the name of the relevant taxon is based'. However, in some cases a genus has not been designated as the nomenclatural type of an order. Twelve cases that are contrary to the Rules listed and appropriate corrections are proposed. In addition, several classes have been named for which no nomenclatural type has been designated; this brings into question whether they can be considered to have been validly published, as well as highlighting the fact that they would be/are illegitimate.