[Taxacom] Botanical (algal) families ending in -ataceae

Mary Barkworth Mary.Barkworth at usu.edu
Sun Oct 21 18:33:13 CDT 2012


The relevant article reads:
18.1. The name of a family is a plural adjective used as a noun; it is formed from the genitive singular of a name of an included genus by replacing the genitive singular inflection (Latin -ae, -i, -us, -is; transliterated Greek -ou, -os, -es, -as, or -ous, and its equivalent -eos) with the termination -aceae (but see Art.18.5). For generic names of non-classical origin, when analogy with classical names is insufficient to determine the genitive singular, -aceae is added to the full word. Likewise, when formation from the genitive singular of a generic name results in a homonym, -aceae may be added to the nominative singular. For generic names with alternative genitives the one implicitly used by the original author must be maintained, except that the genitive of names ending in -opsis is, in accordance with botanical tradition, always -opsidis.

Ex. 1. Family names based on a generic name of classical origin: Rosaceae (from Rosa, Rosae), Salicaceae (from Salix, Salicis), Plumbaginaceae (from Plumbago, Plumbaginis), Rhodophyllaceae (from Rhodophyllus, Rhodophylli), Rhodophyllidaceae (from Rhodophyllis, Rhodophyllidos), Sclerodermataceae (from Scleroderma, Sclerodermatos), Aextoxicaceae (from Aextoxicon, Aextoxicou), Potamogetonaceae (from Potamogeton, Potamogetonos).
Ex. 2. Family names based on a generic name of non-classical origin: Nelumbonaceae (from Nelumbo, Nelumbonis, declined by analogy with umbo, umbonis), Ginkgoaceae (from Ginkgo, indeclinable).

So the question becomes where does the ending nema come from? According to the online Etymology Dictionary:
Nematoda: a class of worms, Modern Latin compound of nemat- "thread" (from Gk. nema, gen. nematos "thread," from stem of nein "to spin;" see needle (n.)) + -odes "like, of the nature of" (see -oid). [And if you look it up as a child's name you will find that it is Arabic in origin].

So my vote would be for Skeletonemataceae - but the other names would need to be checked individually. I am open to correction. 

Mary



-----Original Message-----
From: taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Stephen Thorpe
Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2012 5:17 PM
To: Tony.Rees at csiro.au; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Botanical (algal) families ending in -ataceae

I am saying how the problem arises. Both Codes need to have some rules to handle cases of the wrong stem being used in family-group names ... I have no idea what the bot code says, and I would have to remind myself what the zoo code says. So, to see which form is correct, please consult the relevant section of the relevant code ...
 
Stephen

From: "Tony.Rees at csiro.au" <Tony.Rees at csiro.au>
To: stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu 
Sent: Monday, 22 October 2012 12:12 PM
Subject: RE: [Taxacom] Botanical (algal) families ending in -ataceae


Hi Stephen,
 
So, are you saying that in these cases the long form would be the correct usage in zoology, cf the shorter one correct in botany if my reading of the ICBN online is correct? For example quite a lot of dinoflagellates might have been initially named under the zoological Code, although probably not diatoms as in the case of Skeletonema. Or maybe there were less rules and standardization in 1930 in similar?
 
- Tony
 
From:Stephen Thorpe [mailto:stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz] 
Sent: Monday, 22 October 2012 10:08 AM
To: Rees, Tony (CMAR, Hobart); taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Botanical (algal) families ending in -ataceae
 
This is a common problem also for zoological names, "stemming" from people using the wrong stem for the type genus, e.g., Skeletonem- instead of Skeletonemat-
 
I don't know the botanical Code well enough to know how they handle it ...
 
Stephen


 
From:"Tony.Rees at csiro.au" <Tony.Rees at csiro.au>
To: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu 
Sent: Monday, 22 October 2012 11:53 AM
Subject: [Taxacom] Botanical (algal) families ending in -ataceae

Dear Taxacomers,

I am trying to reconcile variant spellings which have crept into my taxon lists from a range of print and electronic sources, and have arrived at mainly (exlusively?) algal families cited as ending in -ataceae in some sources vs. -aceae in others, for example Skeletonomataceae Lebour, 1930, cited in Round et al. "Biology of Diatoms", 1990, vs. Skeletonemaceae (present usage in AlgaeBase and elsewhere), both the same taxon based on the type genus Skeletonema. There are also some 20+ other cases including (e.g.) Acanthocerataceae, Borzinemataceae, Dicranemataceae, Gomphonemataceae, Goniodomataceae, Monostromataceae, Myrionemataceae, Nemastomataceae, Neonemataceae, Pascherinemataceae, Phragmonemataceae, Pleurosigmataceae, Pterospermataceae and more, from a range of sources, seemingly all algal families so far as I can tell.

I cannot find anything in the most recent botanical Code supporting this type of formation of family names so was wondering what the basis might be and whether there is any reason not to go with the shorter form as correct. However the "long form" is definitely still in circulation as a search of Google scholar will attest, example: 

http://scholar.google.com.au/scholar?q=skeletonemataceae+&hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5

On the other hand there are adjacent families - for example Thalassiosiraceae in diatoms, close to Skeletonem[at]ceae, seemingly never encountered in the "longer" format.

I was thinking that maybe it might depend on the original spelling as proposed, and whether mandatory corrections may then apply or not. Any advice (particularly from algologists maybe) would be appreciated.

Regards - Tony


Tony Rees
Manager, Divisional Data Centre,
CSIRO Marine and Atmospheric Research,
GPO Box 1538,
Hobart, Tasmania 7001, Australia
Ph: 0362 325318 (Int: +61 362 325318)
Fax: 0362 325000 (Int: +61 362 325000)
e-mail: Tony.Rees at csiro.au
Manager, OBIS Australia regional node, http://www.obis.org.au/
Biodiversity informatics research activities: http://www.cmar.csiro.au/datacentre/biodiversity.htm
Personal info: http://www.fishbase.org/collaborators/collaboratorsummary.cfm?id=1566
LinkedIn profile: http://www.linkedin.com/pub/tony-rees/18/770/36


nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here

_______________________________________________

Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom

The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:

(1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org/

(2) a Google search specified as:  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here
_______________________________________________

Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom

The Taxacom archive going back to 1992 may be searched with either of these methods:

(1) by visiting http://taxacom.markmail.org

(2) a Google search specified as:  site:mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom  your search terms here




More information about the Taxacom mailing list