Species with ‘objectionable’ scientific names: The naming process, the debate around it
- June 15, 2023
- Posted by: OptimizeIAS Team
- Category: DPN Topics
No Comments
Species with ‘objectionable’ scientific names: The naming process, the debate around it
Subject : Environment
Section: Species in news
Context:
- There is a debate raging over taxonomy: the classifying and naming of all living being.
Details:
- Some names are largely taken from problematic people, such as those linked to slavery and racism, or are linked to derogatory terms and racial slurs.
- Moreover, many want to entirely do away with the practice of naming animals and plants after a person.
What are some of the species with problematic names?
- Anophthalmus hitleri:
- Named after the former German Führer, Adolf Hitler, this rare blind beetle, popularly known as the Hitler beetle, was discovered in 1933 by “Oscar Scheibel, a German amateur entomologist and ardent Hitler fan, and is found in only around 15 caves in central Slovenia.
- common small-blotched lizard:
- Scientific name: Uta stansburiana
- The reptile, in 1852, was named after Howard Stansbury, who led a famous expedition to study the flora and fauna in the USA’s Utah region and collected this lizard’s type specimens.
- He was a vocal supporter of and played a key role in a locally-infamous massacre of Timpanogos Native Americans in which more than 100 were killed.
- flowering shrub Hibbertia scandens:
- The plant has the moniker after George Hibbert, an English amateur botanist, who was one of the leading members of the pro-slavery and anti-abolition lobby during the late 1700s.
- Hottentotta tamulus scorpion:
- Colonialists in the 17th century used “Hottentot” as a derogatory term for Indigenous Black people in Africa.
- Rauvolfia caffra, commonly known as the quinine tree:
- Gets its moniker from another offensive term regarded as hate speech against Black communities in South Africa.
How are species given their scientific names?
- Every species of animal or plant has two scientific names.
- The first name denotes the genus to which the species belongs. It is a generic name and is always capitalised.
- The second name identifies the species within the genus and is never capitalised. Both names are italicised.
- A genus may comprise several closely related species.
- These names are usually of Latin or Greek origin.
- Often, species are named based on their distinctive features.
- the Sonoran mountain kingsnake, a beautiful red-, white-, and black-ringed creature, is called Lampropeltis pyromelana. The genus name means “beautiful shield” in Greek, and the species epithet means “black fire”.
Who makes the rules regarding giving scientific names to organisms?
- Although anybody can propose a name for a type of organism they think hasn’t been formally identified by anyone else, there are certain rules, or nomenclature codes, that they have to follow.
- A new name is considered to be valid only when it is published in an “openly distributed publication, and it must be accompanied by a detailed description of the specimens the author claims are typical for the group.”
- These nomenclature codes are governed by international bodies such as the
- International Commission of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN) which governs the naming of animals,
- The International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (ICNafp) that sees the naming of plants (including cyanobacteria), and
- The International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria (ICNB) that governs the naming of bacteria (including Archaea) and
- The International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV) that governs virus names.
Can a species’ offensive scientific name be changed?
- Doing away with a species’ offensive scientific name is unlikely.
- The primary reason is that “international committees show little appetite to be drawn into debates on what is and isn’t potentially offensive”.
- According to the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature (ICBN), “The only proper reasons for changing a name are either a more profound knowledge of the facts resulting from adequate taxonomic study or the necessity of giving up a nomenclature that is contrary to the rules.”