Impact of e-publication changes in the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi and plants (Melbourne Code, 2012) - did we need to “run for our lives”?

BMC Evolutionary Biology

Research Article

Nicky Nicolson¹  Allan Tucker²  Sandra Knapp³  Katherine Challis⁴ 

[1] Biodiversity Informatics & Spatial Analysis, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, TW9 3AA, Richmond Surrey, UK;Department of Computer Science, Brunel University London, UB8 3PH, Uxbridge, UK;Department of Computer Science, Brunel University London, UB8 3PH, Uxbridge, UK;Department of Life Sciences, Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, SW7 5BD, London, UK;IPNI, Royal Botanic Gardens, Kew, TW9 3AA, Richmond Surrey, UK;

关键词: Publishing;    On-line;    Botany;    Nomenclature;    Taxonomy;   

DOI  :  10.1186/s12862-017-0961-8

 received in 2017-03-24, accepted in 2017-05-09,  发布年份 2017

来源: Springer

【 摘 要 】

BackgroundAt the Nomenclature Section of the XVIII International Botanical Congress in Melbourne, Australia (IBC), the botanical community voted to allow electronic publication of nomenclatural acts for algae, fungi and plants, and to abolish the rule requiring Latin descriptions or diagnoses for new taxa. Since the 1st January 2012, botanists have been able to publish new names in electronic journals and may use Latin or English as the language of description or diagnosis.ResultsUsing data on vascular plants from the International Plant Names Index (IPNI) spanning the time period in which these changes occurred, we analysed trajectories in publication trends and assessed the impact of these new rules for descriptions of new species and nomenclatural acts. The data show that the ability to publish electronically has not “opened the floodgates” to an avalanche of sloppy nomenclature, but concomitantly neither has there been a massive expansion in the number of names published, nor of new authors and titles participating in publication of botanical nomenclature.ConclusionsThe e-publication changes introduced in the Melbourne Code have gained acceptance, and botanists are using these new techniques to describe and publish their work. They have not, however, accelerated the rate of plant species description or participation in biodiversity discovery as was hoped.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© The Author(s). 2017