DOCSLIB.ORG

Nannoplankton Taxonomy and the International Code of Nomenclature for Algae, Fungi, and Plants (ICN)

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Nannoplankton Taxonomy and the International Code of Nomenclature for Algae, Fungi, and Plants (ICN) Proc. 14th INA Conf., Reston VA, USA (Guest Ed. J. Self-Trail) J. Nannoplankton Res. 35 (2), 2015, pp.141-154 © 2015 International Nannoplankton Association 141 ISSN 1210-8049 Printed by The Sheridan Press, USA Nannoplankton taxonomy and the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (ICN) Richard W. Jordan Department of Earth & Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Science, Yamagata University, 1-4-12 Kojirakawa-machi, Yamagata 990-8560, Japan; [email protected] Manuscript received 2nd June, 2015; revised manuscript accepted 1st July, 2015 Abstract In 2012, the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants was published, which has ramifications for nannoplankton workers. The main changes that are relevant to us are: 1) certain forms of electronic publication are now acceptable, 2) English instead of Latin may now be used in descriptions and diagnoses of extant organisms, and 3) the morphotaxon concept for fossil plants and algae has been abandoned. Furthermore, names of genera based on extant types now have priority over those based on fossil types. This may cause a potential problem in the future for at least four genera with fossil types: Cruciplacolithus and Reticulofenestra (nannoplankton) and Dictyocha and Stephanocha (silicoflagellates). Herein, some of the rules and recommendations are explained, with nannoplankton and silicoflagellate examples. Keywords nannoplankton, nannofossils, silicoflagellates, taxonomy, ICBN, ICN 1. Introduction name, all names for which it is the basionym Explanatory notes on the rules and recommendations of are similarly rejected, and none is to be used previous versions of the International Code of Botanical (see Rec. 50E.2). Nomenclature (ICBN), and how they relate to nannoplank- 56.2. The list of nomina utique rejicienda (sup- International Nanno- ton research, were published in the pressed names) will remain permanently open plankton Association (INA) Newsletter and its successor, for additions and changes. Any proposal for re- the Journal of Nannoplankton Research (JNR), as a series jection of a name must be accompanied by a de- of fourteen papers (van Heck, 1990-1996) that were in- tailed statement of the cases both for and against dexed by Burnett (1997). Since then, numerous changes to its rejection, including considerations of typifica- these rules have been made at subsequent meetings of the tion. Such proposals must be submitted to the International Botanical Congress. In this paper, the most General Committee (see Div. III), which will relevant articles and recommendations that affect nanno- refer them for examination to the committees plankton nomenclature are shown below ad verbatim from for the various taxonomic groups (see also Art. 14.12 and 34.1). McNeill et al. (2012), and are annotated with examples of nannoplankton nomenclatural problems. Some of the 56.4. When a proposal for the rejection of a more important parts of the ICN articles and recommenda- name under Art. 56 has been approved by the tions have been enboldened, in order to emphasise the key General Committee after study by the Com- points – i.e. the bold type does not appear in the original mittee for the taxonomic group concerned, text. In addition, it should be noted that not all of the ar- rejection of that name is authorized subject to ticles and recommendations cited in the copied text are the decision of a later International Botanical reproduced here, so where necessary, please consult the Congress (see also Art. 14.16 and 34.2). ICN. Unlike the ICN and the van Heck papers, the articles Recommendation 56A.1. When a proposal for and recommendations have been organised under similar the rejection of a name under Art. 56 has been themes, in the hope of making the rules easier to under- referred to the appropriate Committee for study, stand. authors should follow existing usage of names as far as possible pending the General Com- 2.1 General mittee’s recommendation on the proposal (see also Rec. 14A and 34A). Preface. Like other international codes of no- menclature the ICN has no legal status and is Proposals for changes to the Code are first considered dependent on the voluntary acceptance of its by a number of nomenclature committees, established by rules by authors, editors, and other users of the International Association for Plant Taxonomy (in our names that it governs. case, the one for algae or the one for fossils). Modifications to the rulings and wordings of the ICN, as with previous Art. 56.1. Any name that would cause a disad- vantageous nomenclatural change (Art. 14.1) ICBN editions, can only be decided upon at the plenary may be proposed for rejection. A name thus re- session of an International Botanical Congress, which is jected, or its basionym if it has one, is placed held every four years. Few nannoplankton workers have on a list of nomina utique rejicienda (sup- ever sat on a nomenclature committee. This means that, if pressed names, App. V). Along with each listed we want to change a ruling or reject/conserve a name, we 142 Jordan must publish our proposal in a journal such as Taxon, and 4.2. If a greater number of ranks of taxa is ask the relevant committee to consider it at the next Con- desired, the terms for these are made by add- gress. There is no guarantee of success. This is emphasised ing the prefi x “sub-” to the terms denoting by the case where a proposal submitted by Hay (1967) the principal or secondary ranks. An organ- ism may thus be assigned to taxa of the follow- was rejected by the Committee for Algae (Silva, 1975). ing ranks (in descending sequence): kingdom Although we could ignore this set of rules and do as we (regnum), subkingdom (subregnum), division please, the result will ultimately be nomenclatural chaos. or phylum (divisio or phylum), subdivision or It should be noted that there also have been some suc- subphylum (subdivisio or subphylum), class cesses in the past. Notably, there was the conservation of (classis), subclass (subclassis), order (ordo), Isochrysidaceae Bourrelly and the rejection of Ruttnerace- suborder (subordo), family (familia), subfamily ae Geitler in the ICBN (see Nicolson, 1993a). In the Inter- (subfamilia), tribe (tribus), subtribe (subtribus), national Code of Zoological Nomenclature, Braarud et al. genus (genus), subgenus (subgenus), section (1964) proposed the conservation of Coccolithidae Poche (sectio), subsection (subsectio), series (series), subseries (subseries), species (species), subspe- Coccolithus (now written as Coccolithaceae Poche) and cies (subspecies), variety (varietas), subvari- Schwarz, with Coccosphaera pelagica Wallich conserved ety (subvarietas), form (forma), and subform over C. oceanicus Schwarz, and the suppression of the (subforma). genera Cyatholithus Huxley and Rhabdolithes Schmidt, the latter in favour of Rhabdosphaera. This proposal was 5.1. The relative order of the ranks specifi ed in approved three years later (Evans & China, 1967). Art. 3 and 4 must not be altered (see Art. 37.6 and 37.9). Preamble 14. This edition of the Code super- sedes all previous editions. 11.2. A name has no priority outside the rank in which it is published (but see Art. 53.4). This means we should follow the most up-to-date Code, and not use older Codes for guidance. Hence, while Article 4.2 outlines the order of the ranks, particu- most of the rules in the van Heck (1990-1996) papers are larly those of subspecifi c taxa. Although many authors still relevant today, subtle changes to the wordings have consider the ranks of subspecies, variety and form to be occurred in subsequent ICBN editions, as well as some old interchangeable, others consider that they have different rules having been replaced, and new rules having been in- meanings and priority in ranking order (see Hamilton & troduced. At the time this article was written, the current Reichard, 1992, for a discussion). This seemingly chaotic Code is the Melbourne Code (McNeill et al., 2012). For situation is not just restricted to higher plants, but is also the fi rst time, algae, fungi and plants were included in the evident in nannoplankton taxonomy. However, it could be title of the Code. Thus, there is no longer a current Inter- minimalised by adopting the following approach: national Code of Botanical Nomenclature (ICBN), rather subspecies – for those that slightly differ at the genetic the offi cial name and abbreviation is the International level (or with one life-cycle phase different from the type, Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (ICN). but with a cryptic alternate phase) variety – for those that are morphologically different (i.e. Principle I. The nomenclature of algae, fungi, not part of the natural variation of the type variety), with- and plants is independent of zoological and out evidence of life-cycle phases bacteriological nomenclature. This Code ap- form – for different phases of a life-cycle (e.g. haploid and plies equally to names of taxonomic groups diploid phases of the same species). treated as algae, fungi, or plants, whether or not Subspecies and varieties may be separated in time and these groups were originally so treated (see space, whereas forms are likely to be found in the same Pre. 8). sample or samples in different seasons, but from the same Principle VI. The rules of nomenclature are locality. In the case of fossil coccoliths, variety would be retroactive unless expressly limited. the most appropriate choice, since life-cycle phases are rarely (if ever) known. In the Code, some rules have time limitations, such as Although a species is the sum of all its subordinate the use of Latin diagnoses. However, some changes can taxa (see Art. 25.1, below), it is probably better if we do be made using the new Code that weren’t possible before not create varieties that are signifi cantly older than the with older Codes, and I will deal with these problems later type variety – to avoid something akin to the chicken and on.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Report on the Fourth Botanical Nomenclature Course Organized by the Botanical Survey of India at Shillong
    A REPORT ON THE FOURTH BOTANICAL NOMENCLATURE COURSE ORGANIZED BY THE BOTANICAL SURVEY OF INDIA AT SHILLONG P. LAKSHMINARASIMHAN,1 N. ODYUO,2 CHAYA DEORI,2 DEEPU VIJAYAN,2 DAVID L. BIATE,2 AND KANCHI N. GANDHI3 The Botanical Survey of India (BSI) held its fourth al., 2018) and a user’s guide to the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature Course on January 27–31, 2020 Nomenclature (Turland, 2019). at BSI-Eastern Regional Centre (BSI-ERC), Shillong. The Chaya Deori (BSI-ERC) anchored the inaugural activities. course drew 66 participants from across the country, including Odyuo gave a welcome speech, followed by remarks 45 from outside BSI (Fig. 1). Ashiho A. Mao, director of BSI, from Lakshminarasimhan, Gandhi, and chief guest Mao. was the convener of the course; P. Lakshminarasimhan, ex- Rajalakshmi Prasad and Anupama Jayasimha (former joint director of BSI, and Nripemo Odyuo, head, BSI-ERC, students of Gandhi’s at National College, Bengaluru) were served as the coordinator and facilitator, respectively. Kanchi the guests of honor. Uma Shankar (North-Eastern Hill N. Gandhi served as the course director. Participants were University, Shillong) also attended the inaugural function. provided with the latest International Code of Nomenclature Gandhi began the course with a historical review of for algae, fungi, and plants (Shenzhen Code; Turland et botanical nomenclature. He provided a detailed review of FIGURE 1. Fourth Botanical Nomenclature Course organized by the Botanical Survey of India at Shillong. Delegates of the course. We thank A. R. Brach (A, GH) for helpful suggestions on the text, C. M. Gallagher, and D.
    [Show full text]
  • Principles of Plant Taxonomy Bot
    PRINCIPLES OF PLANT TAXONOMY BOT 222 Dr. M. Ajmal Ali, PhD 1 What is Taxonomy / Systematics ? Animal group No. of species Amphibians 6,199 Birds 9,956 Fish 30,000 Mammals 5,416 Tundra Reptiles 8,240 Subtotal 59,811 Grassland Forest Insects 950,000 Molluscs 81,000 Q: Why we keep the stuffs of our home Crustaceans 40,000 at the fixed place or arrange into some Corals 2,175 kinds of system? Desert Others 130,200 Rain forest Total 1,203,375 • Every Human being is a Taxonomist Plants No. of species Mosses 15,000 Ferns and allies 13,025 Gymnosperms 980 Dicotyledons 199,350 Monocotyledons 59,300 Green Algae 3,715 Red Algae 5,956 Lichens 10,000 Mushrooms 16,000 Brown Algae 2,849 Subtotal 28,849 Total 1,589,361 • We have millions of different kind of plants, animals and microorganism. We need to scientifically identify, name and classify all the living organism. • Taxonomy / Systematics is the branch of science deals with classification of organism. 2 • Q. What is Plant Taxonomy / Plant systematics We study plants because: Plants convert Carbon dioxide gas into Every things we eat comes Plants produce oxygen. We breathe sugars through the process of directly or indirectly from oxygen. We cannot live without photosynthesis. plants. oxygen. Many chemicals produced by the Study of plants science helps to Study of plants science helps plants used as learn more about the natural Plants provide fibres for paper or fabric. to conserve endangered medicine. world plants. We have millions of different kind of plants, animals and microorganism.
    [Show full text]
  • My Education in Botanical Nomenclature Began at Least As Far
    EDITORIAL: THE GOVERNANCE OF THE INTERNATIONAL CODE OF NOMENCLATURE—MY SLOW LEARNING EXPERIENCE. The Code of Nomenclature for Algae, Fungi, and Plants (formerly the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature) is an important document of international law (http://www.iapt-taxon.org/nomen/main.php). It tells us how the scientific names of plants, new and old, should be applied—what the correct name of a plant is given a particular taxonomy. One might think that the Code is governed by some international institution or organization such as the United Nations or the International Association for Plant Taxonomy (IAPT), but it is not. It is loosely associated with International Botanical Congresses, a tradition over 100 years old. In between congresses, a series of committees makes decisions about nomenclature and these are then nearly always approved at the next International Botanical Congress (IBC). I did not clearly realize how the governance of nomenclature functioned until recently, about 48 years after I was first introduced to the concept of botanical nomenclature. My education in botanical nomenclature began in 1968 when I took "Plant Taxonomy" from my revered Professor John L. Morrison at the New York State College of Forestry in Syracuse, New York, USA. One lesson I was supposed to learn about botanical nomenclature in Morrison's class (but didn't really learn until after the final exam) was that in practice it is a peaceful form of international cooperation in which all the participants agree that they will follow certain rules about how plants are named, but there is no one imposing those rules.
    [Show full text]
  • Major Changes to the Code of Nomenclature—Melbourne, July 2011
    TAXON 60 (5) • October 2011: 1495–1497 McNeill & Turland • Melbourne Congress: Major changes to the Code XVIII INTERNATIONAL BOTANICAL CONGRESS Major changes to the Code of Nomenclature—Melbourne, July 2011 John McNeill1 & Nicholas J. Turland2 1 Royal Ontario Museum, Toronto, and Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh, 20A Inverleith Row, Edinburgh, EH3 5LR, Scotland, U.K. 2 Missouri Botanical Garden, P.O. Box 299, St. Louis, Missouri 63166-0299, U.S.A. Author for correspondence: John McNeill, [email protected] INTRODUCTION for new names of plants, fungi, and algae (and designations of types) to appear in printed matter in order to be effectively pub- When decisions of a Nomenclature Section of an Interna- lished—effective publication being a fundamental requirement tional Botanical Congress (IBC) are presented in Naturenews of the Code for acceptance of any nomenclatural act. As an alter- (Cressey, 2011) and prompt an editorial in the journal itself native, publication online in Portable Document Format (PDF) (Origin of species, 2011) they must be of unusual significance. in a publication with an International Standard Serial Number This was indeed the case for several of those taken at the recent (ISSN) or International Standard Book Number (ISBN) will XVIII IBC in Melbourne, Australia. be permitted. The Special Committee had proposed 1 January Changes to the International Code of Botanical Nomen- 2013 as the starting date for the new rules (the beginning of the clature (McNeill & al., 2006) require the decision of a plenary year following the expected publication of the new Code), but session of an IBC as proposed by its Nomenclature Section.
    [Show full text]
  • Ferns Robert H
    Southern Illinois University Carbondale OpenSIUC Illustrated Flora of Illinois Southern Illinois University Press 10-1999 Ferns Robert H. Mohlenbrock Southern Illinois University Carbondale Follow this and additional works at: http://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/siupress_flora_of_illinois Part of the Botany Commons Recommended Citation Mohlenbrock, Robert H., "Ferns" (1999). Illustrated Flora of Illinois. 3. http://opensiuc.lib.siu.edu/siupress_flora_of_illinois/3 This Book is brought to you for free and open access by the Southern Illinois University Press at OpenSIUC. It has been accepted for inclusion in Illustrated Flora of Illinois by an authorized administrator of OpenSIUC. For more information, please contact [email protected]. THE ILLUSTRATED FLORA OF ILLINOIS ROBERT H. MOHLENBROCK, General Editor THE ILLUSTRATED FLORA OF ILLINOIS s Second Edition Robert H. Mohlenbrock SOUTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY PRESS Carbondale and Edwardsville COPYRIGHT© 1967 by Southern Illinois University Press SECOND EDITION COPYRIGHT © 1999 by the Board of Trustees, Southern Illinois University All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America 02 01 00 99 4 3 2 1 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Mohlenbrock, Robert H., 1931- Ferns I Robert H. Mohlenbrock. - 2nd ed. p. em.- (The illustrated flora of Illinois) Includes bibliographical references and index. 1. Ferns-Illinois-Identification. 2. Ferns-Illinois-Pictorial works. 3. Ferns-Illinois-Geographical distribution-Maps. 4. Botanical illustration. I. Title. II. Series. QK525.5.I4M6 1999 587'.3'09773-dc21 99-17308 ISBN 0-8093-2255-2 (cloth: alk. paper) CIP The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Information Sciences-Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984.§ This book is dedicated to Miss E.
    [Show full text]
  • Rules of Botanical Nomenclature
    Taxonomy Prof.(Dr.) Punam Jeswal Head M.Sc semester II Botany Department Rules of Botanical Nomenclature Definition - Nomenclature is the art of naming of objects, which deals with the determination of a correct name to a known plant or to a known taxon. The names indeed correspond to the sentence, as both constitute meaningful collection of words. A name indicates a noun that helps in the quick identification, easy communication and economy of memory about the object to which it is concerned. Types of Names - The names according to their range of audience, language, territorial coverage and governance are of two types :- 1. Common or vernacular names. 2. International or scientific names. Common or Vernacular Names - These names are of the locals, by the locals, for the locals, in the local dialect. That is when a local plant is named by native people for the identification and communication to the other people of the same territory in their won local dialect, it is referred to as local or common or vernacular name. The fundamental demerits of this name are that they have limited audience, small territorial coverage and not governed under any set of principles or rules and even the same plant may have more than one name in the same locality. Another demerit of concern regarding these names is presence of synonyms in the languages therefore; the same plant may have a variety of names at different places in different languages. As for instance, mango(Mangifera indica) posses more than fifty names in Sanskrit only and lotus is known by more than two dozen names in Sanskrit and Hindi languages.
    [Show full text]
  • The Herb Society of America, Inc. Style Manual
    The Herb Society of America, Inc. Style Manual 2020 Revision 11-4-19 Final Draft Approved May 2020 The Herb Society of America (The Society or HSA) actively works to disseminate knowledge about herbs. The Society has developed its own style guide, based on such major references as The Chicago Manual of Style: The Essential Guide for Writers, Editors, and Publishers and Council of Science Editors (CSE), Scientific Style and Format: The CSE Manual for Authors, Editors, and Publishers. This manual presents a concise format of the accepted usage of terms that are often found in all official HSA publications. This guide is not intended to be an exhaustive reference for HSA authors, but it is hoped the information here will answer most questions for those writing for HSA publications. The general editorial rules that apply today favor fewer of many things than applied in the past. That means punctuation only when necessary to avoid misreading, and capitalization in many fewer instances than in the past. In addition, we request that authors use active voice rather than passive voice. If you have questions which are not answered by this guide, please contact HSA Headquarters at 440-256-0514. Authors submitting articles for a specific publication, e.g., The Herbarist, newsletters, or the blog, should consult the Guidelines for Authors under the submissions tab on the publications section of the website. 2 GENERAL FORMATTING GUIDELINES For consistency and ease of editing and processing, HSA requests that authors format their contributions utilizing the guidelines below. While manuscripts submitted to The Herbarist or lengthy herbal essential guides will benefit from all the guidelines, book reviews, newsletter articles, and brief notes may not use the entire list.
    [Show full text]
  • How Is the Age of an Anthropogenic Habitat - Calcareous Grasslands - Affecting the Occurrence
    How is the age of an anthropogenic habitat - calcareous grasslands - affecting the occurrence of plant species and vegetation composition - a historical, vegetation and habitat ecological analysis Welche Bedeutung hat das Alter eines anthropogenen Lebensraums, der Kalkmagerrasen, für das Vorkommen von Pflanzenarten und die Zusammensetzung der Vegetation - eine kulturhistorische, vegetations- und standortökologische Analyse. DISSERTATION ZUR ERLANGUNG DES DOKTORGRADES DER NATURWISSENSCHAFTEN (DR. RER. NAT.) DER FAKULTÄT FÜR BIOLOGIE UND VORKLINISCHE MEDIZIN DER UNIVERSITÄT REGENSBURG VORGELEGT VON Petr Karlík aus Prag im Jahr 2018 Promotionsgesuch eingereicht am: 13.12.2018 Die Arbeit wurde angeleitet von: Prof. Dr. Peter Poschlod Prüfungsausschuss: Vorsitzender: Prof. Dr. Christoph Reisch Erstgutachter: Prof. Dr. Peter Poschlod Zweitgutachter: Prof. Dr. Karel Prach Drittprüfer: PD Dr. Jan Oettler 2 Contents Chapter 1 General introduction 5 Chapter 2 History or abiotic filter: which is more important in determining the species composition of calcareous grasslands? 13 Chapter 3 Identifying plant and environmental indicators of ancient and recent calcareous grasslands 31 Chapter 4 Soil seed bank composition reveals the land-use history of calcareous grasslands. 59 Chapter 5 Soil seed banks and aboveground vegetation of a dry grassland in the Bohemian Karst 87 Chapter 6 Perspectives of using knowledge about the history of grasslands in the nature conservation and restoration practice 97 Summary 104 Literature 107 Danksagung 122 3 4 Chapter 1 General introduction Dry grasslands – an extraordinary habitat When we evaluate natural habitats, we often ask why they are valuable from a conservation point of view. Oftentimes we evaluate their species diversity. For individual species, we consider whether they are original or not.
    [Show full text]
  • History of Taxonomy
    History of Taxonomy The history of taxonomy dates back to the origin of human language. Western scientific taxonomy started in Greek some hundred years BC and are here divided into prelinnaean and postlinnaean. The most important works are cited and the progress of taxonomy (with the focus on botanical taxonomy) are described up to the era of the Swedish botanist Carl Linnaeus, who founded modern taxonomy. The development after Linnaeus is characterized by a taxonomy that increasingly have come to reflect the paradigm of evolution. The used characters have extended from morphological to molecular. Nomenclatural rules have developed strongly during the 19th and 20th century, and during the last decade traditional nomenclature has been challenged by advocates of the Phylocode. Mariette Manktelow Dept of Systematic Biology Evolutionary Biology Centre Uppsala University Norbyv. 18D SE-752 36 Uppsala E-mail: [email protected] 1. Pre-Linnaean taxonomy 1.1. Earliest taxonomy Taxonomy is as old as the language skill of mankind. It has always been essential to know the names of edible as well as poisonous plants in order to communicate acquired experiences to other members of the family and the tribe. Since my profession is that of a systematic botanist, I will focus my lecture on botanical taxonomy. A taxonomist should be aware of that apart from scientific taxonomy there is and has always been folk taxonomy, which is of great importance in, for example, ethnobiological studies. When we speak about ancient taxonomy we usually mean the history in the Western world, starting with Romans and Greek. However, the earliest traces are not from the West, but from the East.
    [Show full text]
  • Checklist of the Vascular Plants of Finland. Suomen Putkilokasvien Luettelo
    Symbols / Merkit spontaneous / alkuperäinen ● old, resident vanha, vakinainen × old, formerly resident, possibly extinct vanha, aiemmin vakinainen, mahdollisesti hävinnyt + old, formerly resident, extinct vanha, aiemmin vakinainen, hävinnyt ■ new, resident uusi, vakinainen ▲ new, ephemeral uusi, satunnainen ▼ new, ephemeral (no records since 1980) uusi, satunnainen (ei havaintoja v. 1979 jälkeen) alien, old / muinaistulokas ● resident vakinainen × formerly resident, possibly extinct aiemmin vakinainen, mahdollisesti hävinnyt aiemmin vakinainen, hävinnyt (ei havaintoja v. 1979 formerly resident, extinct (no records since 1980) + jälkeen) alien, new / tulokas, uusi resident vakinainen ephemeral satunnainen ephemeral (no records since 1980) satunnainen (ei havaintoja v. 1979 jälkeen) uncertain or not evaluated / epävarma tai ei arvioitu taksonin määritys ja/tai esiintyminen luonnossa ? identification and/or occurrence in the wild uncertain epävarmaa . status not evaluated statusta ei arvioitu of cultivated origin / viljelyperäinen 1 to a moderate extent, spreading in the wild jossain määrin, leviää luonnossa 2 largely, spreading in the wild laajalti, leviää luonnossa 3 completely, spreading in the wild täysin, leviää luonnossa cultivated plants occurring as soil or/and garden re- viljelykasvit, joita tavataan maa- tai puutarhajäte- fuse immigrants at landfills, rubbish dumps and other kasoilta jätemaalueilla, kaatopaikoilla ja vastaavilla M similar places, perhaps surviving for a long time but paikoilla ehkä pitkäänkin säilyvinä mutta
    [Show full text]
  • A Taxonomic Information Model for Botanical Databases: the IOPI Model
    TAXON 46 ϑ MAY 1997 283 A taxonomic information model for botanical databases: the IOPI Model Walter G. Berendsohn1 Summary Berendsohn, W. G.: A taxonomic information model for botanical databases: the IOPI Model. ϑ Taxon 46: 283-309. 1997. ϑ ISSN 0040-0262. A comprehensive information model for the recording of taxonomic data from literature and other sources is presented, which was devised for the Global Plant Checklist database project of the International Organisation of Plant Information (IOPI). The model is based on an approach using hierarchical decomposition of data areas into atomic data elements and ϑ in parallel ϑ abstraction into an entity relationship model. It encompasses taxa of all ranks, nothotaxa and hybrid formulae, "unnamed taxa", cultivars, full synonymy, misapplied names, basionyms, nomenclatural data, and differing taxonomic concepts (potential taxa) as well as alternative taxonomies to any extent desired. The model was developed together with related models using a CASE (Computer Aided Software Engineering) tool. It can help designers of biological information systems to avoid the widely made error of over-simplification of taxonomic data and the resulting loss in data accuracy and quality. Introduction Data models. ϑ A model is "a representation of something" (Homby, 1974). In the technical sense, a model is the medium to record the structure of an object in a more or less abstract way, following pre-defined and documented rules. The objecti- ve of applying modelling techniques is either to describe and document the structure of an existing object, or to prescribe the structure of one to be created. In both cases, the model can be used to test (physically, or, in most cases, intellectually) the functi- on of the object and to document it, for example for future maintenance.
    [Show full text]
  • Plant Nomenclature and Taxonomy an Horticultural and Agronomic Perspective
    3913 P-01 7/22/02 4:25 PM Page 1 1 Plant Nomenclature and Taxonomy An Horticultural and Agronomic Perspective David M. Spooner* Ronald G. van den Berg U.S. Department of Agriculture Biosystematics Group Agricultural Research Service Department of Plant Sciences Vegetable Crops Research Unit Wageningen University Department of Horticulture PO Box 8010 University of Wisconsin 6700 ED Wageningen 1575 Linden Drive The Netherlands Madison Wisconsin 53706-1590 Willem A. Brandenburg Plant Research International Wilbert L. A. Hetterscheid PO Box 16 VKC/NDS 6700 AA, Wageningen Linnaeuslaan 2a The Netherlands 1431 JV Aalsmeer The Netherlands I. INTRODUCTION A. Taxonomy and Systematics B. Wild and Cultivated Plants II. SPECIES CONCEPTS IN WILD PLANTS A. Morphological Species Concepts B. Interbreeding Species Concepts C. Ecological Species Concepts D. Cladistic Species Concepts E. Eclectic Species Concepts F. Nominalistic Species Concepts *The authors thank Paul Berry, Philip Cantino, Vicki Funk, Charles Heiser, Jules Janick, Thomas Lammers, and Jeffrey Strachan for review of parts or all of our paper. Horticultural Reviews, Volume 28, Edited by Jules Janick ISBN 0-471-21542-2 © 2003 John Wiley & Sons, Inc. 1 3913 P-01 7/22/02 4:25 PM Page 2 2 D. SPOONER, W. HETTERSCHEID, R. VAN DEN BERG, AND W. BRANDENBURG III. CLASSIFICATION PHILOSOPHIES IN WILD AND CULTIVATED PLANTS A. Wild Plants B. Cultivated Plants IV. BRIEF HISTORY OF NOMENCLATURE AND CODES V. FUNDAMENTAL DIFFERENCES IN THE CLASSIFICATION AND NOMENCLATURE OF CULTIVATED AND WILD PLANTS A. Ambiguity of the Term Variety B. Culton Versus Taxon C. Open Versus Closed Classifications VI. A COMPARISON OF THE ICBN AND ICNCP A.
    [Show full text]