Confusion has afflicted the definition of symbiosis for over 130 years. Despite the lack of discussion in recent times, the usage of symbiosis has evolved and appears to be stabilizing to broader interpretations. Current usage of symbiosis and its associated terminology in 10 current general biology (GB) and 10 general ecology (GE) textbooks is presented. The restrictive definition (i.e. symbiosis = mutualism) has essentially disappeared. All GB textbooks (100%) surveyed used an explicit or implicit "de Bary" definition of symbiosis (i.e. mutualism, commensalism, and parasitism), while only 40% of GE textbooks did the same. General ecology textbooks also included 30% defining symbiosis to constitute all species interactions and 30% that completely avoided usage of the term. When combining GB and GE textbooks to analyze symbiotic usage, 85% defined mutualism, commensalism, and parasitism as symbiotic interactions. Also, 70% considered a symbiosis to be a species interaction that is "intimate," with 45% of those both "intimate and constant." Unfortunately, only 5% used the terms ecto-/endosymbiosis, which help discern intimacy and constancy in species interactions. Usage of symbiont (55%) was preferred over symbiote (0%). Predator and prey were defined as organisms (vs. animals) in 90% of GB and GE textbooks, while 55% and 75% described carnivores and herbivores as organisms, respectively. Only 25% discussed predation, parasitism, parasitoidism, and grazing/herbivory, with only one (5%) integrating these +/-agonistic interactions in relation to intimacy and lethality. Data reveals trend of biologists/ecologists using broader definitions.

It has been 10 years since the Federative Committee on Anatomical Terminology (FCAT) published Terminologia Anatomica (TA), the current authority on anatomical nomenclature. There exists a perceived lack of unity among anatomists to adopt many FCAT recommended anatomical terms in TA. An e-mail survey was sent to members of the American Association of Anatomists (AAA) to determine the frequency of FCAT term usage by North American anatomists. The survey consisted of 29 questions, including 25 different sets of synonymic names for selected gross anatomical structures or related terms. Overall results indicate that the FCAT preferred term had the highest frequency of usage in only 44.0% of the survey questions. As frequency of use of FCAT terms decreased, the corresponding frequency of use of non-FCAT terms increased. Some questions showed almost complete compliance with the FCAT preferred terms (highest = 98.4% usage) to almost complete disregard for the FCAT terms (lowest = 0.8% usage). A slight association (P = 0.06) may exist between FCAT familiarity and concern for usage of synonymic terms. The more familiar anatomists were with the FCAT, the more concerned they were with anatomic synonyms.

Almost 12 years since the publishing of Terminologia Anatomica (TA) by the Federative Committee on Anatomical Terminology (FCAT), there has yet to be a unified adoption of FCAT-recommended anatomical terms by North American anatomists. A survey was sent to members of the Human Anatomy & Physiology Society (HAPS) to compare the frequency of FCAT term usage with a previous study involving the American Association of Anatomists (AAA). The HAPS differed from AAA in being composed mostly of biologists (56.5%) who teach anatomy with only 18.3% of respondents having terminal degrees in anatomy. The survey included the same 25 sets of synonymic names for selected gross anatomical structures or related terms used for the AAA survey. Overall results indicate that the FCAT preferred term had the highest frequency of usage in only 40.0% of the survey questions, demonstrating 4% lower compliance than AAA respondents. Compliance with FCAT preferred terms ranged from 92.2% to 1.7% usage. When compared with AAA anatomists, there were reversals in predominant usage between FCAT and non-FCAT terms for six sets of anatomical structures: HAPS respondents predominantly used non-FCAT terms for adrenal gland (88.7%), antecubital fossa (57.4%), patellar tendon (65.2%), ligamentum capitis femoris (36.5%), while preferring the FCAT anterior circumflex humeral artery (45.2%) and anterior/posterior preferred over ventral/dorsal (41.7%). Almost 54% of HAPS anatomists were not familiar with the FCAT, nearly 21% higher than the AAA.

Almost 16 years since the publishing of Terminologia Anatomica (TA) by the Federative Committee on Anatomical Terminology (FCAT), there has yet to be a unified adoption of TA-recommended anatomical terms by anatomists. A survey was sent to members of the American Association of Clinical Anatomists (AACA) to determine the frequency of TA term usage. Most respondents (70.3%) received their terminal degrees in anatomy, with 23.4% in clinical and anthropological areas. Academically ranked, most respondents were professors (38.4%) and most were from North America (81.1%). Almost 40% of respondents were textbook authors. Overall results indicate that the TA preferred term had the highest frequency of usage in only 53% of the anatomical structures/features surveyed. Compliance with TA preferred terms ranged from 98.2% to 3.6% usage. Almost 25% of AACA anatomists were not familiar with the FCAT and over 75% were concerned about synonymity in anatomical terminology. Data demonstrates that clinical anatomists of the AACA are not consistent in how they use anatomical terminology, as well as how they conform to TA terminology.

No abstract