Science Vision www.sciencevision.org Science Vision www.sciencevision.org Science Vision www.sciencevision.org Science Vision www.sciencevision.org Science Vision 14(4), 221-233 2014 October-December General Article ISSN (print) 0975-6175 ISSN (online) 2229-6026 Taxonomic (r)evolution, or is it that zoologists just want to have fun?† K. Lalchhandama Department of Zoology, Pachhunga University College. Aizawl 796001, India Received 3 October 2014 | Accepted 1 November 2014 ABSTRACT Zoologists do not lack a sense of humour. There are discreet and indiscreet evidences. Key words: Binominal nomenclature; ICZN; generic name; specific name; taxonomy. IN THE BEGINNING poster on his office door even reads “Look at This!” To my optimistic and positivistic view, Aha ha! Yes, you are allowed to laugh from zoology will answer all the important questions the very beginning, because it is fittingly a laugh- of life. You can now precisely answer, with de- ing matter, but not in a way you would antici- tail scientific description, to the common ques- pate. For a start, Aha ha (mind the italics, and tion, “What is this?” This is a genus of Austra- capitalisation) is no ordinary interjection, it is lian kelp fly belonging to the family Coelopidae. the scientific name of an Australian wasp dis- It has two species This canus is its type species. covered in 1977.1 The discoverer Arnold S. These flies are posing serious problems in sea- Menke must be quite proud of his exclamatory side recreations in New South Wales; and so on. publication titled “Aha, a new genus of Austra- And you are not joking. lian Sphecidae...” that he changed his car regis- If that is the response they did not expect, tration plate into “AHAHA”, so that everyone just say Oops! And resume your zoological chat can laugh it all the way. line: Oops is a genus created by Louis Agassiz in This is quite interesting. I told you to mind the italics, This is a genus created by David K. †Disclaimer. The latter part of the title is not to be McAlpine of the Australian Museum in 1991 for confused with Cindy Lauper’s unforgettable song new species of flies.2 The caption for the fly “Girls Just Want to Have Fun”, or a 1985 movie by that title, or a soundtrack “Princesses Just Want to Have Corresponding author: Lalchhandama Fun” from the movie Barbie: The Princess and the Pop- Phone: +91-9436198718 star, or Borat’s arrogant statement in the Da Ali G E-mail: [email protected] Show, “In Kazakhstan... Girls just want to have fuck.” 221 Science Vision © 2014 MAS. All rights reserved Lalchhandama 1846 for an arachnid, and by Ernst Friedrich branches of biology, such as International Code Germar in 1848 for a beetle.3 You may also add of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants, your linguistic facetiousness by saying that oops which govern naming of plants including vegeta- was not an interjection before then. (But I genu- bles and weeds that we find annoying; and Inter- inely don‟t know what it was – perhaps, a pre- national Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria, for cursor to boops! Sorry! Boops is a genus of fish microscopic things that give us diarrhoea, dys- already created by Georges Cuvier in 1814, and entery and all the bad stuffs.) With due respect Linnaeus even had Boops boops in 1858, and he to Linnaeus, people who prefer creepy-crawly- was not desperately crying for mammary glands, things had christened “binominal nomencla- he used them from a Greek word meaning “cow ture” as the name of the system;6 and it is only -eye” for the large eyes of the fish.) the vegetarians – I mean botanists – who still As you shall see zoologists through ages have cling to the old rugged, but not necessarily out- the tendency to “Always Look on the Bright dated (to give them a little bit of sympathy), Side of Life”, to borrow a song title from The “binomial nomenclature”. Life of Brian and Not the Messiah (He’s a Very To meander into Biblical musing, one of Lin- Naughty Boy), and oftentimes trespassing beyond naeus‟ major pioneer works was on banana. A the very peculiar (I mean here Verae peculya) to staunch creationist by then, he posited that the absolutely Notoreas. (Verae peculya is a braconid forbidden fruit which Adam and Eve ate was wasp discovered by Paul M. Marsh in 1993;4 nothing but a banana, contrary to the legendary whereas Notoreas is a generic name of New Zea- fable that it was apple. And he baptised it Musa land butterfly discovered by Edward Meyrick in paradisiaca as a reminiscence of the Garden of 1886.5) Eden.7 Preference to apple is only a whimsical choice; the Bible is ostensibly vague it its de- CODEX TAXONOMIA scription of the fruit of “the tree of the knowl- edge of good and evil”. This is one of the old The first Homo sapiens Adam (not to be taken Adam‟s failures. In contrast, Linnaeus could literally, he is a myth) was a total loser in his have been right, as a theory also complemented historic assignment; being charged with the her- that Adam and Eve most certainly used banana culean task of identifying all creatures, he pro- leaves to hide their nakedness. Popular notion duced none. Don‟t get me wrong, no one has holds that it was fig leaves, but anyone who has had an experience of actually touching fig leaves ever heard of Adam‟s taxonomy. It had to pass 8 several millennia until a Swedish naturalist hit would amen to Linnaeus‟ line of thought. On the ground running, and actually put an effort to the practical point of view, banana leaves and it. Since the baptism of binomial nomenclature stems are favourite fabrics in many tribal cos- by Carl von Linné, or Carolus Linnaeus, which- tumes for their pliant and smooth nature. Fig ever way you lean (pun intended) to, (honoured leaves, on the other hand, are small, hard, sharp, with the sobriquet “The Second Adam” and coarse and dreadfully uncomfortable to cover up utterly fared far better than the first) in the 18th one‟s tender genitalia, compounded by the origi- century CE in his magnum opus Systema nal sin and an eternal curse. To support the claim further, theologically speaking, banana is Naturae, biological names are rendered in strict 9 language, so as to make them universally accept- called the “fig of Eve” in Hebrew. Linnaeus in able. Following suit, earthlings of zoological fact wrote to the Royal Swedish Bible Commis- persuasion had established a law, less ambigu- sion that it was definitely the banana leaves which were the first ever costume, as the fig ous that those carved in stone at Mt. Sinai, 10 named International Code of Zoological No- leaves are just inadequate for an apron. menclature. (There are counterparts in other Fantasy aside, whatever part of the universe one is from, these are the binding rules one must Science Vision © 2014 MAS. All rights reserved 222 Taxonomic (r)evolution adhere to in scientific names. For zoological validity of the name. Later it was revised as Pelo- names ICZN has specific decrees, some of myxa carolinensis (being described from North which are worth mentioning here. Carolina) in the early 1900s to differentiate it Article 25C. Responsibility of authors forming from a closely related species Amoeba proteus.11 new names. Authors should exercise reasonable Thorough analyses revealed that it was a unique care and consideration in forming new names to species, and to credit both taxonomy but giving ensure that they are chosen with their subse- a slanted weight to Linnaeus, it is formally ac- quent users in mind and that, as far as possible, cepted as Chaos carolinensis, as proposed by they are appropriate, compact, euphonious, Robert L. King and Theodore L. Jahn in 1948.12 memorable, and do not cause offence. But molecular taxonomy still reserve the contro- Article 11A. Use of vernacular names. An un- versy since Amoeba and Chaos appear to be mo- modified vernacular word should not be used as nophyletic. Thus Chaos is still in chaos. a scientific name. Appropriate latinization is the Moreover, we do not know for certain to preferred means of formation of names from what degree he was disappointed by his disciple vernacular words. Daniel Rolander that he named a tiny black bee- Appendix A. Code of Ethics 4. No author should tle Aphanus rolandri. The Greek word aphanus propose a name that, to his or her knowledge or means ignoble or dishonest. Their falling-out reasonable belief, would be likely to give offence was so intense that Rolander never could find an on any grounds. academic position he thrived for, thwarted by As is made obvious, some zoologists find the looming influence of Linnaeus in the entire every possible means to sidestep from these scientific academia. It can be construed that Lin- commandments. It could well be due to their naeus must have been really pissed off to lose a alertness of a rather pusillanimous standpoint to temper to conceive such a name. dodge any action upon breach of the code, as It did not escape him some degrees of ob- the code ends: “The observation of these princi- scenity either (but in a more vegetable – Oop! I ples is a matter for the proper feelings and con- did it again – botanical purview but definitely science of individual zoologists, and the Com- with a zoological imaginations). He named a mission is not empowered to investigate or rule butterfly pea Clitoria for its obvious resemblance upon alleged breaches of them.” Some zoologi- to certain organ of females (imagine his roving cal names are upshot of instantaneous brain mind and eyes while naming), and a stinkhorn wave, even gags, and some are deliberately de- species Phallus, a lookalike of male urinary de- rogatory, insipid and offensive.