Kämpfer Peter, Rückert Christian, Blom Jochen, Goesmann Alexander, Wink Joachim, Kalinowski Jörn, Glaeser Stefanie P
Institut für Angewandte Mikrobiologie, Universität Giessen, Germany.
Centrum für Biotechnologie (CeBiTec), Universität Bielefeld, Germany.
Int J Syst Evol Microbiol. 2017 Aug;67(8):3111-3116. doi: 10.1099/ijsem.0.002110. Epub 2017 Aug 10.
On the basis of whole genome comparisons of Streptomyces griseorubiginosus and Streptomyces phaeopurpureus it could by shown that these two species are subjective synonyms. The names of both species have been published in the Approved Lists of Bacterial Names and, in such a case, normally Rule 24b (1) of the Prokaryotic Code applies, which reads: 'If two names compete for priority and if both names date from 1 January 1980 on an Approved List, the priority shall be determined by the date of the original publication of the name before 1 January 1980'. Streptomyces griseorubiginosus and Streptomyces phaeopurpureus were both effectively published in 1957, and for both publications, the exact date cannot be obtained. In this case a further statement of Rule 24 applies, which reads: 'If the names or epithets are of the same date, the author who first unites the taxa has the right to choose one of them, and his choice must be followed.' Hence we propose that Streptomyces phaeopurpureus is a later heterotypic subjective synonym of Streptomyces griseorubiginosus.
基于对灰红链霉菌（Streptomyces griseorubiginosus）和紫褐链霉菌（Streptomyces phaeopurpureus）的全基因组比较，可以证明这两个物种是主观同物异名。这两个物种的名称均已在《细菌名称核准名录》中公布，在这种情况下，通常适用《原核生物命名法规》第24b条（1）款，其内容为：“如果两个名称存在优先权竞争，且两个名称均源自1980年1月1日之后的《核准名录》，则优先权应由1980年1月1日之前该名称首次发表的日期确定”。灰红链霉菌和紫褐链霉菌均于1957年正式发表，且这两个发表的确切日期均无法获取。在这种情况下，适用第24条的进一步说明，其内容为：“如果名称或学名是同一日期的，则首次将分类单元合并的作者有权选择其中之一，且必须遵循其选择”。因此，我们提议紫褐链霉菌是灰红链霉菌的晚出异名主观同物异名。
