IUBio Biosequences .. Software .. Molbio soft .. Network News .. FTP

Antw: [Annelida] Diacritical marks in species names

Geoff Read via annelida%40net.bio.net (by Geoffrey.Read from niwa.co.nz)
Thu May 15 17:44:37 EST 2014

Hi Ole,

Art. 5.1 The name of the author does not form part of the name of a taxon and its citation is optional ...

Rest easy. Your authorial name spellings and accents are fairly safe from any meddling by the ICZN (I think this may have come up very rarely in old BZN 'Opinions' but I can't find an example at the moment).  But the scientific community is free to do what they want with your name. Sometimes it makes sense to standardize on the best known spelling for use in a database if an author varies his/her own name. There are some famous polychaete author examples, including how to handle optional prefixes.  It's case by case decisions.

From: Ole Gorm Norden Andersen <luscus from mail.dk>
Sent: 16 May 2014 09:59
To: 'annelida from net.bio.net'; Geoff Read
Subject: RE: Antw: [Annelida] Diacritical marks in species names

Hi Geoff and all,

I have been asked, what about author names. Should they not be spelled as they are?

Kind regards,

Ole Gorm Norden Andersen, marine biologist
Luscus Nature Watch, biological consultancy
Store Rørbækvej 55
DK-3600 Frederikssund

Tel.: +4547100560
E-mail: luscus from mail.dk

>>> Geoff Read <Geoffrey.Read from niwa.co.nz> 15 Mai, 2014 >>>
Hi all,

A very quick reminder that diacritic marks (distinguishing glyphs on characters such as       etc, etc) must not be used in species names in your papers. This is the code rule since 1961, but I've noticed diacritic marks in binomens in quite a few recent polychaeta papers.  So I thought it worth a mention.

Europeans may rather resent this rule and find it unnatural, and one wonders how it came to be, but it's been around a while.  I guess the thinking was to internationalise the Latin alphabet in a neutral way. If the original name you're quoting used 'Harmotho ', then you now use Harmothoe, regardless of the possibly ancient date of the original.
It's taken for granted the two names are the same and you don't have to point out the change [unless you really, really, really want to].

A condensed summary of the transliteration rules: "Diacritic marks must be removed, ligatures must be separated, all characters must be reduced to their basic 26 Latin letters (Art. 32.5.2). Diacritic marks are always simply removed regardless of the rules applied in local languages, except that       in names derived from German are converted to ae, oe und ue (not Swedish or Turkish, and after 1985 also German is converted to a o u). Danish   is converted to a, not to aa. Ligatures are separated (  to ae, oe to oe,   to ss)." Also Upper case in epithets becomes lower case and hypens are removed.  [Quoted from: 'Guidelines for the management of digital zoological names information' by Welter-Shultes, online at GBIF].

Hartman's main catalogue has a lot of names with character glyphs, but that's fine because the rule didn't arrive until 1961. In the 1965 supplement Harmotho  becomes Harmothoe without comment.

More information about the Annelida mailing list

Send comments to us at biosci-help [At] net.bio.net