we had a thread here a couple weeks ago about naming. Both common and scientific names were discussed, and the methodologies for same. I thought this was interesting today from CNAH (italics mine).
CNAH ANNOUNCEMENT
The Center for North American Herpetology
Lawrence, Kansas
http://www.cnah.org
15 October 2009
ZOOBANK: DEVELOPING A NOMENCLATURAL TOOL FOR UNIFYING 250 YEARS OF
BIOLOGICAL INFORMATION
Richard L. Pyle & Ellinor Michel
2008. Zootaxa 1950: 39-50
Abstract: Nomenclature represents the backbone upon which virtually all biological
information is organized. However, the practice of zoological nomenclature has changed
relatively little since its start in 1758. As modern technology changes the paradigm under
which modern scientists exchange information, there is increasing need to capitalize on
these same technologies to fortify nomenclature. ZooBank has been proposed as the
official registry of names and nomenclatural acts, in zoology, as well as associated
published works and their authors, and type specimens. Having a coordinated registry of
zoological names, integrated with the existing Code of Zoological Nomenclature, will allow
increased efficiency of communication among biologists, and enhanced stability of names.
Such a registry would encompass two distinct realms, each with their own set of
challenges. Retrospective registration involves the monumental task of aggregating and
validating two and a half centuries of existing names, whereas prospective registration
must be tightly integrated with the future paradigm in which scientific names are created
and managed under new models of publication. The prototype of ZooBank has been
hosted at Bishop Museum during its initial development phase. Following the lead of
standard-setting bodies in biodiversity informatics, Life Science Identifiers (LSIDs) have
been selected for use as the globally unique identifiers for ZooBank registration entries.
The first ZooBank LSIDs were issued on January 1st, 2008, and included five new fish
species described in a work published that same day, as well as all 4,819 names
established in the 10th Edition of Linnaeus’ Systema Naturae. Three alternate scenarios for
implementing mandatory registration in ZooBank have been
articulated, each incorporating different degrees of coordination between published works
and registration events. A robust discussion involving a broad spectrum of practicing
zoological taxonomists is required over the next several years to define the specific
implementation aspects of ZooBank.
*****
A pdf of this article is available from the CNAH PDF Library at
http://www.cnah.org/cnah_pdf.asp
