Winston Judith E
Smithsonian Marine Station, 701 Seaway Drive, Fort Pierce, FL 34949, USA.
Integr Comp Biol. 2018 Dec 1;58(6):1122-1131. doi: 10.1093/icb/icy060.
Nomenclature and taxonomy are complementary and distinct aspects of the study of biodiversity, but the two are often confused even by biologists. Taxonomy is the part of the science of systematics that deals with identifying, describing, and categorizing organisms from species to higher taxa. Nomenclature is a system of giving names to organisms based on rules established for the process. Adoption of a system of binomial nomenclature by end of the 18th century helped standardize the process of naming the wealth of new organisms collected during the Age of Exploration, but before the middle of the 19th century, the turmoil resulting from differences in procedures and philosophies among practicing taxonomists necessitated the development of codes of nomenclature to regulate naming. By the early 20th century, codified sets of rules for the names of both plants and animals, nowadays usually abbreviated as International Code of Botanical Nomenclature (Botanical Code) and ICZN (Zoological Code), were in place internationally. These codes worked reasonably well through most of the 20th century, under the aegis of various international bodies, in part because procedures exist to bypass them when their provisions threaten nomenclatural stability. They also inspired the development of other nomenclatural codes for specific groups of organisms like bacteria, and, alternatively, the proposal of unified codes for all organisms. The rapid development of electronic communications and various means of electronic publication at the end of the 20th century, combined with what may be the advent of a new age of biological extinction, resulted in pressure to revise the codes to allow at least some degree of electronic publication and speedier description of new taxa in the 21st century. Consistent and unambiguous names are the platforms on which biological research and conservation practices are built. As we pursue the goals of documenting and conserving biodiversity, for which a stable nomenclature is essential, we must do so without restricting the freedom of the science of systematics.
命名法和分类学是生物多样性研究中相互补充且截然不同的两个方面，但即使是生物学家也常常将二者混淆。分类学是系统学的一部分，涉及识别、描述和分类从物种到更高分类单元的生物体。命名法是根据为此过程制定的规则为生物体命名的系统。18世纪末采用双名法系统有助于规范对探索时代收集的大量新生物体的命名过程，但在19世纪中叶之前，由于分类学家在程序和理念上的差异所导致的混乱，使得有必要制定命名法规来规范命名。到20世纪初，植物和动物命名的编纂规则集在国际上已经确立，如今通常简称为《国际植物命名法规》（植物法规）和《国际动物命名法规》（动物法规）。在20世纪的大部分时间里，这些法规在各种国际机构的支持下运作得相当不错，部分原因是当它们的规定威胁到命名稳定性时，存在绕过它们的程序。它们还激发了针对特定生物体群体（如细菌）的其他命名法规的制定，或者是为所有生物体制定统一法规的提议。20世纪末电子通信和各种电子出版方式的迅速发展，再加上可能是生物灭绝新时代的到来，导致了修订法规的压力，以便在21世纪允许至少一定程度的电子出版，并更快地描述新的分类单元。一致且明确的名称是生物研究和保护实践的基础平台。当我们追求记录和保护生物多样性的目标时，稳定的命名法至关重要，我们必须在不限制系统学科学自由的情况下做到这一点。
