Zoological vs. botanical nomenclature: a forgotten BioCode experiment from the times of the Strickland Code

  title={Zoological vs. botanical nomenclature: a forgotten BioCode experiment from the times of the Strickland Code},
  author={A. Minelli},
A code intended to apply to both zoological and botanical nomenclature was drafted in 1842–43 by a commission appointed by the fourth Congress of Italian Scientists on request of the zoologist Carlo Luciano Bonaparte, as a reaction to the recently published Strickland Code (1842). Large excerpts from the latter document and an English translation of documents related to the Italian initiative are presented in appendices. 
Zoological nomenclature in the digital era
  • A. Minelli
  • Biology, Medicine
  • Frontiers in Zoology
  • 2012
An long awaited amendment to the Code issued in September 2012 now allows publication of new names in online-only works, provided that the latter are registered with ZooBank, the Official Register of Animal Names. Expand
Open Nomenclature in the biodiversity era
The use of ON qualifiers has been reviewed to provide a guide for taxonomists and ecologists currently involved in biomonitoring and biodiversity programmes, as well as for researchers dealing with biodiversity data infrastructures and tools, offering a starting point for a methodological harmonization. Expand
BioCode: Third time lucky?
Fifteen year ago a draft BioCode was presented to the taxonomic community (Greuter et al. 1996). There is now a new version, published in Taxon (Greuter et al. 2011) and available online on theExpand
Taxonomy versus evolution
It is argued that distinction between diachronous and synchronous classification schemes is of primary importance in taxonomy and introduced new terms, monoclady, paraclady and polyclady, all referring to the respective conditions of groups of organisms in a cladogram. Expand


The Linnean foundations of zoological and botanical nomenclature
In contrast to primary taxonomic research, nomenclature is a tool to be used in information retrieval and with the aim of ensuring world-wide understanding. Radical changes to its guiding principlesExpand
International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature
THE undersigned has the honour to invite the attention of the zoological profession to the fact that Opinions 98 to 104 have been published by the Smithsonian Institution (Smithsonian MiscellaneousExpand
Draft Biocode: Prospective International Rules For The Scientific Names Of Organisms
The typographical layout of the present Draft conforms to that of the International code of botanical nomenclature (Tokyo Code) (Greuter & al. in Regnum Veg. 131. 1994, abbreviated ICBN hereafter)Expand
International Code of Zoological Nomenclature
DURING this year I have so often been asked how this Code could be obtained that I hasten, with your permission, to announce that the Washington Biological Society has just published a reprint at theExpand
Règles internationales de la Nomenclature zoologique
IT has frequently been remarked that it is not of much use making laws and regulations unless you have the power to enforce their observation; and this trite saying applies, in our opinion, veryExpand
The emperor of nature: Charles-Lucien Bonaparte and his world. [Review of: Stroud, P.T. The emperor of nature: Charles-Lucien Bonaparte and his world. Philadelphia: U. of Pennsylvania Pr., 2000].
In spite of my caveats, especially the idiosyncratic presentation of the species list, anyone interested in the history of ornithology in Nebraska will find much of interest in this inexpensive book. Expand
Phylogenetic hypotheses and nomina of taxa
  • About Animals and Plants. Zootaxa,
  • 2008
Biological nomenclature in the electronic era: chances, challenges, risks
  • 2003
The New Bionomenclature: The BioCode Debate. (Biology International, Special Issue 34)
  • International Union of Biological Sciences, Paris,
  • 1997