Development of botanical code, the type method and Author citation 

Development of botanical code

For several centuries the names of plants appeared as polynomials – which may be difficult to remember. Casper Bauhin at first in 1653 introduced Binomial Nomenclature, in which the scientific name of species consists of two parts, firstly the generic epithet and secondly the specific epithet. 

     Ex – Scientific name of onion, Allium cepa where Allium for generic epithet and cepa for specific epithet. 

Later, Carolus Linnaeus established this naming system more firmly in his writing the Species Plantarum (1753). The early rules of nomenclature described by Linnaeus in his Critica botanica (1737) and further amplified in Philosophica Botanica (1751). 

Alphonse de Candolle, who first organized a seminar for the development of uniform botanical nomenclature and there he circulated a copy of his manuscript Lois de la nomenclature Botanique. 

• After deliberations of the first international botanical congress in Paris (1867) the Paris code, also known as ‘de Candolle rules‘ was adopted. 
• Not satisfied with the Paris code American botanists adopted a separate Rochester code (1892). 
• Paris code was replaced by Vienna code (1905) where Latin diagnosis was made essential for new species. 
• Not satisfied with the Vienna code, adherents of Rochester code adopted the American code (1907). 
• After that 5th International Botanical Congress (IBC) occurred at Cambridge (1930).

There, a truly International code evolved, accepting the concept of type method, rejecting the concept of tautonyms, making Latin diagnosis mandatory for new groups.

Contents of Botanical code

Publication of botanical code based on the realization that botany requires a precise and simple system of nomenclature used by botanists in all countries. The ultimate aim of this process is the arrangement of a stable method of naming taxonomic groups, avoiding and rejecting the use of names which may cause an error. Preamble highlights the philosophy of the botanical code. 

The code is divided into 3 divisions. 

• Principles
• rules and recommendations
• Provisions for the governance of the code 

Preamble

• Botanical code requires a simple and appropriate system of nomenclature that is used by botanists in all countries. 
• The purpose of giving a name to a taxonomic group does not indicate it’s history, it indicates its taxonomic rank. 
• The detailed provision is divided into rules set out in articles and recommendations. 
• The object of rules is to put the nomenclature of the past into order and to provide for the future. 
• The provisions regulating the governance of this code from its last division. 
• These rules apply to all the organisms traditionally treated as plants, whether fossil and non- fossil, e.g. blue-green algae, Cyanobacteria, fungi etc. 
• In the absence of a relevant rule, established customs are followed. 
• This edition of the code supersedes all previous editions. 

The type method

The names of different taxonomic groups are based on the type method, by which a certain representative of this group is the source of the name for the group. This representative is called the nomenclatural type and methodology called typification. 

The botanical code recognizes several kinds of type, depending upon the way in which a type specimen is selected. These include – 

• Holotype: A particular specimen or illustration designated by the author to represent the type of species. 

• Isotype: A specimen which is A duplicate of the holotype, collected from the same place, at the same type by the same person. 

• Syntype: Any one of the two or more specimens which is also cited by the author when no holotype was designated. Duplicated of the syntype is called isosyntype. 

• Paratype: A paratype is a specimen of an organism that helps to define the actual representation of scientific names, that is neither the holotype nor an isotype, nor one of the syntypes.

• Lectotype: A lectotype is a specimen which is selected from the original material when no holotype was originally selected or when it no longer exists. 

• Neotype: This is one type of specimen or illustration which is selected to serve as the nomenclatural type when all of the material on which the name of the taxon was based is missing. 
• Epitype: An Epitype is a specimen which is selected to serve as an interpretative type when no holotype, lectotype, neotype or all original material associated with the validly published name can not be identified for appropriate application of a taxonomic name. 

Author citation

For a name to be complete, accurate it should be accompanied by the name of the author or authors who first published the name validly. The names of the are commonly abbreviated.       

     e.g.     L. for Carolus Linnaeus, 

                Benth. for H. Bentham, 

                Hook. for William Hooker,

               Br. for Robert Brown, 

                Lam. for Lamarck, 

                DC. for A. P. de Candolle, 

                BWall. for Wallich, 

                Pers. for C. H. Persoon, 

                Scop. for G. A. Scopoli, 

Single Author

The name of a single author follows the name of a species when a single proposed a new name. 

       e.g.  Solanum nigrum L. 

Multiple Authors 

When two or more author’s names may be associated with a scientific name for a variety of reasons. These different situations are exhibited by citing the name of the authors differently:

• Use of et: when the scientific name of a new species is published or proposed by two or more authors jointly then their names are linked by et. 

    e.g.  Delphinium viscosum Hook.f. et Thomson. 

• Use of Parentheses: whenever the name of a taxon is changed one genus to another the original epithet should be retained. The name of the taxon providing the epithet is termed as basionym. The name of the original author or authors placed within parentheses, and the author or authors who made the name change placed outside the parentheses. 

   e.g.  Cynodon dactylon (Linn.) Pers. based on the basionym Panicum dactylon Linn., the original name of the species. 

• Use of ex: The names of two authors are linked by an ‘ex’ when the first author had proposed a name but was validly published only by the second author. 

    e.g.  Cerasus cornuta Wall. ex Royle. 

• Use of in: The names of authors are linked using in when the first author published a new species or name in the publication of another author. 

    e.g.  Carex kashmirensis Clarke in Hook.f. This scientific name was published in the Flora of British India, by Clarke but this book’s author was Sir J. D. Hooker. 

• Use of emend: When the second author makes some changes in the circumstances of a taxon without altering the type, then the names of two authors are linked by using emend. 

    e.g.  Phyllanthus Linn. emend.  Mull.

• use of square brackets: Square brackets are used to indicate pre-starting point author. 

    e.g.  For this scientific name, Lupinus [Tourne] L., generic name Lupinus was effectively published in 1719 means earlier than 1753, the starting date for botanical nomenclature based on Species Plantarum of Linnaeus.