Gigliotti Francis
Department of Pediatrics, Division of Pediatric Infectious Diseases, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry, Rochester, New York 14642, USA.
Clin Infect Dis. 2005 Dec 15;41(12):1752-5. doi: 10.1086/498150. Epub 2005 Nov 4.
The proposed renaming of Pneumocystis carinii has caused much confusion and controversy among authors, peer reviewers, editors, and interested readers. Proponents of the new nomenclature emphasize the fact that the new names are judged to be "valid" by the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature. What is generally not appreciated is the fact that the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature does not make any determination as to the scientific correctness of proposed names; rather, it mandates the process of naming an organism. Thus, acknowledgement by the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature that new names for P. carinii have been validly published does not mandate their use. Rather, the scientific community interested in P. carinii needs to be aware of the issues involved in changing the name and then decide for themselves as to the correctness of the newly proposed names. Use of the newly proposed names for P. carinii should not be mandated by journal reviewers or editors.
卡氏肺孢子虫拟重新命名一事在作者、同行评审人员、编辑及感兴趣的读者中引发了诸多困惑与争议。新命名法的支持者强调，新名称被《国际植物命名法规》判定为“有效”这一事实。然而，人们普遍未认识到的是，《国际植物命名法规》并未对拟用名称的科学正确性做出任何判定；相反，它规定了生物体命名的流程。因此，《国际植物命名法规》认可卡氏肺孢子虫的新名称已有效发表，并不意味着必须使用这些名称。相反，关注卡氏肺孢子虫的科学界需要了解名称变更所涉及的问题，然后自行判断新拟名称的正确性。期刊评审人员或编辑不应强制要求使用卡氏肺孢子虫的新拟名称。
