Judicial Opinion 128

Abstract

Judicial Opinion 128 addresses nomenclatural issues related to the names of classes validly published under the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes. It is confirmed that the common ending -proteobacteria of some class names is not indicative of a joint taxonomic or phylogenetic placement; that the nomenclatural type of Mollicutes Edward and Freundt 1967 (Approved Lists 1980) is Mycoplasmatales Freundt 1955 (Approved Lists 1980); and that the placement of a name on the list of rejected names does not imply that another name with the same spelling but a distinct rank is also placed on that list. The names at the rank of class Anoxyphotobacteria (Gibbons and Murray 1978) Murray 1988, Archaeobacteria Murray 1988, Bacteria Haeckel 1894 (Approved Lists 1980), Firmibacteria Murray 1988, Microtatobiotes Philip 1956 (Approved Lists 1980), Oxyphotobacteria (ex Gibbons and Murray 1978) Murray 1988, Photobacteria Gibbons and Murray 1978 (Approved Lists 1980), Proteobacteria Stackebrandt et al. 1988, Schizomycetes Nägeli 1857 (Approved Lists 1980), Scotobacteria Gibbons and Murray 1978 (Approved Lists 1980) are placed on the list of rejected names. For three common nominative singular suffixes of genus names their genitive singular and nominative plural forms are confirmed: -bacter (-bacteris, -bacteres); -fex (-ficis, -fices); and -genes (-genis, -genes). The class names Aquificae Reysenbach 2002, Chrysiogenetes Garrity and Holt 2002, Chthonomonadetes Lee et al. 2011, Gemmatimonadetes Zhang et al. 2003, Opitutae Choo et al. 2007 and Verrucomicrobiae Hedlund et al. 1998 are orthographically corrected to Aquificia, Chrysiogenia, Chthonomonadia, Gemmatimonadia, Opitutia and Verrucomicrobiia, respectively.

Judicial Opinion 129

“…This is not overruled by the lack of a nomenclatural type for this taxon in the Approved Lists of Bacterial Names [3], since the Approved Lists did not have the intention to nullify the nomenclatural types of taxa above the rank of order but just assumed they were not necessary, stating that no 'Nomenclatural Type is required for the categories of Division, Class or Subclass. ' This point was already made in another Request for an Opinion [23], which was granted by the Judicial Commission [24]. Thus, the nomenclatural type of Firmicutes corrig.…”

“…Considering that the name is mostly known as referring to a phylum rather than to a division, it is a nomen dubium according to Rule 56 a because of its established use with two distinct categories [7, 29]. Names of classes proposed by Gibbons and Murray in 1978 [2] and included in the Approved Lists were rejected in Opinion 128 [24] because of intrinsic problems and because they formed part of a ‘misfitting megaclassification’ [23]. The term ‘misfitting megaclassification’ is not used in the ICNP [7, 29] but was accepted in Judicial Opinion 128 [24].…”

“…Names of classes proposed by Gibbons and Murray in 1978 [2] and included in the Approved Lists were rejected in Opinion 128 [24] because of intrinsic problems and because they formed part of a ‘misfitting megaclassification’ [23]. The term ‘misfitting megaclassification’ is not used in the ICNP [7, 29] but was accepted in Judicial Opinion 128 [24]. The term refers to the supplement to Opinion 79 [33], which rejected names that were part of a comprehensive prokaryotic classification scheme that contained names that contravened the ICNP [23].…”

“…Gibbons andMurray 1978 (Approved Lists 1980). Apart from the already rejected names of classes [24], two other names from the same 'misfitting megaclassification' [2] were included in the Approved Lists [3]. In addition to having a wrong category, the name of the division Gracilicutes Gibbons and Murray 1978 (Approved Lists 1980) suffers from having as nomenclatural type the class Photobacteria Gibbons and Murray 1978 (Approved Lists 1980), whose name was rejected [24].…”

“…Apart from the already rejected names of classes [24], two other names from the same 'misfitting megaclassification' [2] were included in the Approved Lists [3]. In addition to having a wrong category, the name of the division Gracilicutes Gibbons and Murray 1978 (Approved Lists 1980) suffers from having as nomenclatural type the class Photobacteria Gibbons and Murray 1978 (Approved Lists 1980), whose name was rejected [24]. The name of the subclass Anoxyphotobacteriae Gibbons and Murray 1978 (Approved Lists 1980) contravenes Rule 8 of the ICNP [7,29] because is not derived from the name of the type genus of its type order, Rhodospirillales Pfennig andTrüper 1971 (Approved Lists 1980) [3,34], and does not have the ending -idae that is mandatory for the subclass category.…”