Proposal of Membranihabitans gen. nov. as a replacement name for the illegitimate prokaryotic generic name Membranicola Li et al. 2016

Deshmukh, Umakant Bhoopati; Oren, Aharon

doi:10.1099/ijsem.0.005576

Cited by 5 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 2 publications

(2 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…On the other hand, it would be necessary to ensure that the name proposed for valid publication is different from all registered Candidatus names. Again, this is good practice and is consistent with the objective of the ICNP to avoid homonyms, even homonyms of names proposed under the ICN [2] or ICZN [1], as implemented in Principle 2 [3]; validly published names that turn out to be homonyms of a botanical or zoological name are illegitimate and must be replaced [83–85]. Given the already established IJSEM Candidatus Lists [10, 11], it should be much easier for microbiologists to keep track of Candidatus names than to keep track of names proposed under the ICN or ICZN.…”

Section: The Icsp Can Have the Best Of Both Worldsmentioning

confidence: 86%

The best of both worlds: a proposal for further integration of Candidatus names into the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes

Arahal,

Bisgaard,

Christensen

et al. 2024

International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The naming of prokaryotes is governed by the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes (ICNP) and partially by the International Code of Nomenclature for Algae, Fungi and Plants (ICN). Such codes must be able to determine names of taxa in a universal and unambiguous manner, thus serving as a common language across different fields and activities. This unity is undermined when a new code of nomenclature emerges that overlaps in scope with an established, time-tested code and uses the same format of names but assigns different nomenclatural status values to the names. The resulting nomenclatural confusion is not beneficial to the wider scientific community. Such ambiguity is expected to result from the establishment of the ‘Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes Described from DNA Sequence Data’ (‘SeqCode’), which is in general and specific conflict with the ICNP and the ICN. Shortcomings in the interpretation of the ICNP may have exacerbated the incompatibility between the codes. It is reiterated as to why proposals to accept sequences as nomenclatural types of species and subspecies with validly published names, now implemented in the SeqCode, have not been implemented by the International Committee on Systematics of Prokaryotes (ICSP), which oversees the ICNP. The absence of certain regulations from the ICNP for the naming of as yet uncultivated prokaryotes is an acceptable scientific argument, although it does not justify the establishment of a separate code. Moreover, the proposals rejected by the ICSP are unnecessary to adequately regulate the naming of uncultivated prokaryotes. To provide a better service to the wider scientific community, an alternative proposal to emend the ICNP is presented, which would result in Candidatus names being regulated analogously to validly published names. This proposal is fully consistent with previous ICSP decisions, preserves the essential unity of nomenclature and avoids the expected nomenclatural confusion.

show abstract

Section: The Icsp Can Have the Best Of Both Worldsmentioning

confidence: 86%

The best of both worlds: a proposal for further integration of Candidatus names into the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes

Arahal,

Bisgaard,

Christensen

et al. 2024

International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Thus, according to Rule 54 the illegitimacy of Rhodococcus Zopf 1891 (Approved Lists 1980) [2,3] could be resolved by proposing new combinations for all species currently placed in the genus for which alternative validly published and legitimate names are not yet available [10]. There are several recently published examples of such replacements [11][12][13][14][15][16][17][18].…”

Section: Is Rhodococcus Zopf 1891 (Approved Lists 1980) Illegitimate?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Judicial Opinion 130

Arahal,

Bull,

Christensen

et al. 2024

International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Opinion 130 deals with a Request for an Opinion asking the Judicial Commission to clarify whether the genus name Rhodococcus Zopf 1891 (Approved Lists 1980) is illegitimate. The Request is approved and an answer is given. The name Rhodococcus Zopf 1891 (Approved Lists 1980) is illegitimate because it is a later homonym of the validly published cyanobacterial name Rhodococcus Hansgirg 1884. The Judicial Commission also clarifies that it has the means to resolve such cases by conserving a name over an earlier homonym. It is concluded that the name Rhodococcus Zopf 1891 (Approved Lists 1980) is significantly more important than the name Rhodococcus Hansgirg 1884 and therefore the former is conserved over the latter. This makes the name Rhodococcus Zopf 1891 (Approved Lists 1980) legitimate.

show abstract

“…The genus was first proposed by Li et al . [1] with the type and only species Membranicola marinus , but was subsequently found to be illegitimate and renamed Membranihabitans by Deshmukh and Oren [1, 2]. The family Saprospiraceae was first proposed by Krieg et al [3] with the type genus Saprospira [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Membranihabitans maritimus sp. nov., a marine bacterium isolated from deep seawater

Guo

Wang

et al. 2023

International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A Gram-stain-negative, non-motile, rod-shaped bacterial strain, designated C281T, was isolated from seawater sampled at the Marshallese seamount chain. Results of 16S rRNA gene analysis revealed that strain C281T was most closely related to Membranihabitans marinus CZ-AZ5T with 92.7 % sequence similarity. Phylogenetic analysis indicated that the new isolate represented a novel species by forming a distinctive lineage within the family Saprospiraceae . The DNA G+C content of strain C281T was 38.4 mol%. The genome sizes of strain C281T and the reference strain M. marinus CZ-AZ5T were 5 962 917 and 5 395 999 bp, respectively. The average nucleotide identity and in silico DNA–DNA hybridization values between strains C281T and M. marinus CZ-AZ5T were found to be low (69.3 and 17.6 %, respectively). Different functional genes were found in the genome of strain C281T, such as CZC CBA, polysaccharide utilization loci and linear azol(in)e-containing peptide cluster coding genes. The NaCl range for growth was 0.5–15.0 %. Positive results were obtained for hydrolysis of Tween 60 and urease. MK-7 was the sole respiratory quinone. The major fatty acids were C16 : 1 ω6c and/or C16 : 1 ω7c, iso-C15 : 0 and iso-C15 : 1 F. The major polar lipids of strain C281T were phosphatidylethanolamine, phosphatidylglycerol, two unidentified lipids and five unidentified glycolipids. On the basis of its taxonomic characteristics, the isolate represents a novel species of the genus Membranihabitans, for which the name Membranihabitans maritimus sp. nov. (type strain C281T=KCTC 92171T=MCCC M27001T) is proposed.

show abstract

Proposal of Membranihabitans gen. nov. as a replacement name for the illegitimate prokaryotic generic name Membranicola Li et al. 2016

Cited by 5 publications

References 2 publications

The best of both worlds: a proposal for further integration of Candidatus names into the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes

The best of both worlds: a proposal for further integration of Candidatus names into the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes

Judicial Opinion 130

Membranihabitans maritimus sp. nov., a marine bacterium isolated from deep seawater

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About