International Code of Botanical Nomenclature

International Code of Botanical Nomenclature
Andreas Trepte · CC BY-SA 2.5 · source
Name	International Code of Botanical Nomenclature
Author	International Association for Plant Taxonomy
Country	International
Language	English
Subject	Botanical nomenclature
Publisher	International Association for Plant Taxonomy
Pub date	various editions

International Code of Botanical Nomenclature is the historic codified set of rules governing the scientific names of plants, algae, and fungi. Developed and maintained by international botanical organizations, the Code provided a standardized framework for taxonomists working across institutions such as the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, the Smithsonian Institution, and the Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle. Its provisions influenced nomenclatural practice in gardens, herbaria, and universities including Harvard University Herbaria, the Natural History Museum, and the University of Oxford.

History and Development

The Code originated in the late 19th and early 20th centuries amid efforts by botanists associated with institutions like the Linnean Society of London, the Botanical Congresses that met in places such as Vienna and Cambridge, and committees involving figures linked to the Royal Society and the German Botanical Society. Early contributors included taxonomists from the Swedish Museum of Natural History, the Conservatoire et Jardin botaniques de Genève, and the Royal Botanic Garden Edinburgh; their debates mirrored work by contemporaries at the University of Vienna, the University of Cambridge, and the University of Berlin. Major milestones involved international gatherings at the International Botanical Congresses in cities such as Vienna, Stockholm, and Tokyo, and later revisions coordinated by bodies like the International Association for Plant Taxonomy and the International Botanical Congresses held in Sydney and Melbourne.

Principles and Scope

The Code set out principles embraced by taxonomists at institutions such as the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, the Missouri Botanical Garden, and the Botanischer Garten und Botanisches Museum Berlin. It established principles of priority and typification widely used by botanists affiliated with the Smithsonian Institution, the New York Botanical Garden, and the University of California, Berkeley. The scope addressed taxa treated by specialists working in herbaria such as the Conservatoire et Jardin botaniques de Genève and publications produced by presses like Cambridge University Press and Oxford University Press, reflecting practice in natural history museums including the Natural History Museum, London and the Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle.

Rules and Procedures

The Code codified rules followed by editors at journals such as Taxon, Phytotaxa, Kew Bulletin, and the Journal of the Linnean Society, and by authors publishing through institutions like Springer and Elsevier. Procedures for valid publication involved criteria similar to editorial standards used at the Royal Society Publishing and the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, and incorporated requirements for Latin diagnoses once customary at universities including the University of Paris and the University of Bologna. The Code’s mechanisms for conserving names and rejecting names were adopted by committees with membership from organizations such as the International Association for Plant Taxonomy, the International Botanical Congress, and national botanical societies including the Botanical Society of America and the Deutsche Botanische Gesellschaft.

Types and Typification

Typification rules guided curators at herbaria such as Kew Herbarium, the New York Botanical Garden Herbarium, and the Harvard University Herbaria, and affected specimen stewardship in institutions like the Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle and the Naturalis Biodiversity Center. Roles of holotypes, lectotypes, neotypes, and epitypes were debated by researchers from universities including the University of Tokyo, the University of Melbourne, and Leiden University. Decisions over type designation drew on collections assembled by explorers and collectors connected with expeditions sponsored by entities like the Royal Geographical Society, the Hudson's Bay Company, and the British Museum.

Governance and Revision Processes

Governance of the Code took place through bodies centered on the International Botanical Congress and the International Association for Plant Taxonomy, with input from delegates representing organizations including the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, the Smithsonian Institution, the New York Botanical Garden, and national academies such as the Royal Society and the National Academy of Sciences. Revision proposals were presented at congresses held in cities such as Vienna, Stockholm, Tokyo, Sydney, and Melbourne, and were subject to voting procedures analogous to those used by assemblies like the League of Nations and later intergovernmental scientific meetings. Working groups and committees often included members from universities like Harvard, Oxford, and Berlin.

Adoption and Legal Status

Adoption of the Code occurred through consensus at International Botanical Congresses and through implementation by herbaria, botanical gardens, and publishers including Kew, the New York Botanical Garden, Cambridge University Press, and Springer. While not a statute enacted by national legislatures such as those of the United Kingdom, France, or the United States, the Code functioned as a professional standard recognized by bodies like the International Association for Plant Taxonomy and by major research institutions including the Smithsonian Institution and the Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle. Its authority derived from acceptance by the international community of taxonomists and curators associated with institutions such as the Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, the Natural History Museum, and leading universities worldwide.

Category:Botanical nomenclature