Module – 15; Content writer: AvishekBhattacharjee Module 15: Botanical Nomenclature: Concept, history of botanical nomenclature (local and scientific) and its advantages, formation of code. Content writer: Dr.AvishekBhattacharjee, Central National Herbarium, Botanical Survey of India, P.O. – B. Garden, Howrah – 711 103. Module – 15; Content writer: AvishekBhattacharjee Botanical Nomenclature:Concept – A name is a handle by which a mental image is passed. Names are just labels we use to ensure we are understood when we communicate. Nomenclature is a mechanism for unambiguous communication about the elements of taxonomy. Botanical Nomenclature, i.e. naming of plants is that part of plant systematics dealing with application of scientific names to plants according to some set rules. It is related to, but distinct from taxonomy. A botanical name is a unique identifier to which information of a taxon can be attached, thus enabling the movement of data across languages, scientific disciplines, and electronic retrieval systems. A plant’s name permits ready summarization of information content of the taxon in a nested framework. A systemofnamingplantsforscientificcommunicationmustbe international inscope,andmustprovideconsistencyintheapplicationof names.Itmustalsobeacceptedbymost,ifnotall,membersofthe scientific community. These criteria led, almost inevitably, to International Botanical Congresses (IBCs) being the venue at which agreement on a system of scientific nomenclature for plants was sought. The IBCs led to publication of different ‘Codes’ which embodied the rules and regulations of botanical nomenclature and the decisions taken during these Congresses. Advantages ofBotanical Nomenclature: Though a common name may be much easier to remember, there are several good reasons to use botanical names for plant identification. Common names are not unique to a specific plant. Different species of plants (might not even be related) may have the same common name or vice-versa. Gardeners of different countries have different set of common names for the plants. Due to the difference in language and culture, it could be very difficult for an Indian gardener to share her horticulture experience of some particular species with a gardener in China. Further, the plants which are less Module – 15; Content writer: AvishekBhattacharjee common,do not have any common name. Therefore, every plant must have only one correct botanical name, the earliest that is in accordance with the rules(except in specified cases). The purpose of giving a botanical name to a taxonomic group is not to indicate its characters or history, but to supply a means of referring to it and to indicate its taxonomic rank.For this purpose there is need a precise and simple system of nomenclature that is used in all countries, dealing on the one hand with the terms that denote the ranks of taxonomic groups or units, and on the other hand with the scientific names that are applied to the individual taxonomic groups. The Botanical Nomenclature aims at the provision of a stable method of naming taxonomic groups, avoiding and rejecting the use of names that may cause error or ambiguity or throw science into confusion. Next in importance is the avoidance of the useless creation of names. Other considerations, such as absolute grammatical correctness, regularity or euphony of names, more or less prevailing custom, regard for persons, etc., notwithstanding their undeniable importance, are relatively accessory. History of botanical nomenclature and formation of Code: The early Egyptians and Greeks named many food plants and others with medicinal properties. One of the most important early works was by the Greek, Theophrastus, who recognized the difference between what we now call monocotyledons and dicotyledons. There was, then, not a lot of botanical progress until about the 16thcentury, when a number of useful works were printed, mainly 'herbals', which were among the first literature produced in Ancient Egypt, China, India, and Europe as the medical wisdom of the day accumulated by herbalists, apothecaries and physicians.For several centuries the plant-names appeared as polynomial – long descriptive phases, often difficult to remember. For example, the humble tomato was given the long Latin polynomial Solanumcauleinermiherbaceofoliispinnatisincisis which means the 'Solanum Module – 15; Content writer: AvishekBhattacharjee with the smooth stem which is herbaceous and has incised pinnate leaves'. In 1620, Swiss Caspar Bauhin introduced the concept of binomial nomenclature under which the name of a species consists of two parts – the first is the name of the genus, i.e. generic name and the second is the specific epithet. Bauhin, however, did not use binomial nomenclature for all the species and it was Linnaeus who firmly established this system of naming in his ‘Species Plantarum’(Linnaeus, 1753). The early rules of nomenclature were set forth By Linnaeus in his ‘Criticabotanica’ (1737) and further amplified in ‘Philosohiabotanica’ (1751). Even after Linnaeus’s Species Plantarum’ some significant works in botany were published where the plants were named but without following binomial nomenclature. Van Rheede, the Dutch Governor of Cochin (Kerala, India), a soldier who had no training in botany, became fascinated by the flora of Malabar, compiled and published a unique 12-volume work -‘HortusMalabaricus’ between 1678 and 1693 where he provided brief descriptions of plants, their illustrations, their smell, taste and practical values under their Malayalam names.AugustinPyramus de Candolle in his ‘Théorieélémentaire de la botanique’ (Candolle, 1813)introduced a new classification system and the word ‘taxonomy’. He gavea nice discussion of nomenclature of what might be termed good practices with examplesand favored priority except in the few cases. Steudel in his ‘Nomenclatorbotanicus’ (1821) provided Latin names for all flowering plants known to him together with their synonyms. But theschisms began with the 1843 British Association for the Advancement of Science approval of Zoological rules and became manifest with the1867 Paris Congress approval of Alphonse de Candolle's botanical "laws".On 1August1867 Alphonse de Candolle finished the cornerstone work of botanicalnomenclature for the meeting of the International Botanical Congress of 16 August 1867 in Paris. This 60-page paper (‘Lois de la nomenclature botanique’) has 11 pages ofintroduction, 19 pages of Module – 15; Content writer: AvishekBhattacharjee "laws" in 68 articles, and 28 pages of commentary. Year of publication (1753) of Linnaeus’s ‘Species Plantarum’was made the starting point for plant nomenclature and the rule of priority was made fundamental. The modern successor to Candolle’s ‘Lois’ is the ‘International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants’ (ICN), the most recent published editionof which appeared in 2012 and was based on the decisions taken at the XVIII International Botanical Congress held in Melbourne in 2011.It is worth noting that the 1867-Rules or Candolle’s laws (Candolle, 1867) was not enforced like the current Code(s). It was "adopted by the assembly as the best guide to followfor botanical nomenclature". Since 1867, there have been three main phases in the history of the rules governing the nomenclature of plants. 1) 1867-1905: during this time it became clear that, whereas many of the broad principles of Candolle’s ‘Lois’(e.g. a single correct name and priority of publication in choice between names) were generally accepted, their application in practice was unclear leading to major differences of interpretation and hence disagreement; 2) 1905-1947: the consequent establishment of more detailed ‘International Rules of Botanical Nomenclature’, the ‘American Code’ schism, and its resolution; 3) 1947-present: successive editions (12 to date) of the Code, revised to a relatively minor degree at each International Botanical Congress. 1867-1905: Candolle’s Lois to International Rules – The application, and some of the principles of the Lois formulated by Alphonse de Candolle in 1867 and endorsed as “le meilleur guide a suivre pour la nomenclature botanique” (the best guide to follow for botanical nomenclature), proved controversial, leading both to divergent practice and to the desire for more definitive rules. Module – 15; Content writer: AvishekBhattacharjee For example, the Lois said that botanical nomenclature started with Linnaeus, it did not specify a particular date - not a problem for species names, but Linnaeus had been publishing generic names since 1737, and often changed his view between 1737 and 1753. The contemporary rise of "Darwinism" added to the divisiveness. By the late 1800s, various botanical centres had or were evolving modified or different rules/Codes from the Candolle’s laws. The first mention of what will be known as the "Kew Rule" was by Henry Trimen in 1877 which was against the strict application of the Principle of Priority. According to the Kew Rule: "Our practice is to take the name under which any given plant is first placed in its true genus as the name to be kept up, even though the author of it may have ignored the proper rule of retaining the specific name [epithet], when transferring it from its old genus to the new." The Kew Rule was opposed by Alphonse de Candolle, but supporters perceived it asapplying the Principle of Priority by maintaining the oldest applicable (binomial) name. In the meantime a botanical club (with N.L. Britton) held a meeting