Page 96
I N T E ~ N A T I O N A LB U L L E T I N
STATUS OF G A L L I O N E L L A EHRENBERG AS A
GENERIC NAME IN BACTERIOLOGY
Preliminary Statement.
File No. 49
Editorial Board
G a i l l o n e l l a and G a l l i o n e l l a have been recognized as
generic names in algology and G a l l i o n e 1l a has been used
a l s o in bacteriology. The Judicial Commission has been
asked to give an OPINION relative to the legitimacy of the
use of G a 1 1 i o n e 11a in bacteriology.
G a i l l o n e l l a Bory de St. Vincent 1823 (1). B o r y i n h i s
Encyclopedia of Natural History, under the alphabetic heading C o n f e r v k e s , describedseveralgenera. Number VIII
has the following description:
-
"GAILLONELLE, G a i l 1o n e 11a , N. Gemmes inte'r
i e u r e s sphe'riques, transversalement coupkes dans
leur diamktre, de manikre B pre'senter 1' ide'e de
petites boltes h savonette.
It will be noted that no species were named. The likening
to soap boxes would indicate that the author was describing
a genus of diatoms. L a t e r Bory 1825 (2), under the alphabetic heading Gaillonelle, gave the following description:
" G a i l l o n e l l a Bot. Crypt. C o n f e r v & e s . Genre
que nous avons dkdid au laborieux Gaillon, naturaliate
de Dieppe, auquel on doit dlexcellentes observations
microscopiques s u r l e s Hydrophytes, l e s Infusoires
e t lacolorationdes Huitres. Il pre'sente des c a r a c t & r e s
f o r t remarquables, et qui tendraient a l e s e p a r e r de
l a famille naturelle oh nous l e comprenons provisoirementpour l e rapprocher des Arthrodie'es, de l a section
des Fragillaires, dont il acquiert p a r la dessiccation
la consistance micace'e, scarieuse e t brillante.
Le
plus f o r t grossissement seul peut faire apprkcier son
gle'gante organisation qui consiste en des filaments
simples, cylindriques, articule's par sections renferDownloaded from www.microbiologyresearch.org by
IP: 88.99.165.207
On: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 17:40:27
Page 97
BACTERIOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE
AND TAXONOMY
mant chacune deux corpuscules capsulaires, sphe'roides, transparens m2me quand ils sont remplis dlune
matibre colorante, .ferrugineuse, e t partage's en d e w
parties e'gales p a r un disse'piment qui a p p a r a b au profil
comme une ligne que formerait, e n la coupant e n d e w
parties e'gales, l e diamktre de chaque globule. Nous y
avons vainement cherche' des t r a c e s d'animalite'; nour
n'he'sitons pas a r e g a r d e r l e s Gaillonelles comme de
simples Ve'ge'taux. Le type du genre e s t l e C o n f e r v a
m o n i l i f o r m i s de Miiller (V. Planches de ce Dictionaire), alaquelle on ne voitpas pourquoi Lyngbye (Tent.,
p. 274), dlaprks Dillwyn, b donne' l e nom de lineata.
Cette espkce f o r m e s u r l e s Plantes marines e t lee
Ulves des rivages un duvet g r i s h r e peu remarquable.
Le C o n f e r v a n u m m u l o i d e s de Dillwynappartient
au genre G a i l l o n e l l e .
The species included and the illustrations definitelyplace this
genus among the diatoms.
Ehrenberg 1833(3) ascribed the genus to Bory 1923, and
cited M e 1o s i r a Agardh 1824 as a synonym. The l a t t e r
is a widely and currently used name f o r a genus of diatoms.
He assigned the organism t o the B a c i 11a r i a , a family of
diatoms. In his diagnosis of the genus, he states:"Lorica subglobosa
divi sione
aut oblonga bivalvis
certainly characteristic of diatoms.
species G a i l 1 o n e 1l a l i n e a t a .
He includes Boryls
Ehrenberg 1836 (4) described at some length a species which
he named G a i l l o n e l l a f e r r u g i n e a . H e r e g a r d e d i t a s
probably the s a m e as the H y g r o c r o c i s o c h r a c e a of
the botanists. He termed it the iron-ocher animalcule, and
found its fossil "shells" in abundance. He included s e v e r a l
species of diatoms in the s a m e genus. His illustration would
s e e m t o indicate that he regarded the new species as a very
minute diatom growing in chains.
In 1838(5) Ehrenberg (p. 166) changed the spelling of the
Downloaded from www.microbiologyresearch.org by
IP: 88.99.165.207
On: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 17:40:27
Page 98
INTERNATIONAL BULLETIN
generic name to G a 1 1i o n e 11a and included the epecicr
G a l l i o n e l l a f e r r u g i n e a Ehrenberg with the following
citations under synonymy:
C o n f e r v a o c h r a c e a Roth 7 1797.
L y n g b y a o c h r a c e a Leiblein 1827.
G a i l l o n e l l a f e r r u g i n e a Ehrenberg 1835.
G a 11 i o n e 11a f e r r u g i n e a E h r enberg.
Apparentlythechange of s p e l l i n g f r o m G a i 1 1 o n e 1 1 a to=l-1i o n e 11a was intentional, perhaps for the sake of euphony,
o r because the formernamewas poorly latinized. He gives
the following diagnosis of the genus (p. 166):
-
"G a 11i o n e 11 a Gaillonelle.
Character. Animal 4
familia B a c i 11a r i o r u m librum, lorica simplici,
bivalvi (silicea), cylindriacum, globosum aut disciforme, spontanea irnperfecta divisione cateniforme. I '
He stated that the genus contains 7 living and 3 fossil species,
He ascribedthename to Bory de St. Vincent 1823, and noted
that the generic name honored Gaillon. He a l s o stated that
Agardh in 1824 proposedthe name M e 1o s e i r a for a genus
(of diatoms).
The organism named G a l l i o n e l l a f e r r u g i n e a was
l a t e r found to belong with the iron bacteria and not with the
algae. The names G a i l 1 o n e 11a andG a l l i o n e 11a appear
repeatedly in the literature of algology, either for genera o r
for subgenera, and the name G a 1 1i o n e 11a has also continued to be used frequently as the name of a genus to include
certain iron bacteria.
Griffith 1853 (6) pointedout thatEhrenberg's G a l l i o n e l l a
f e r r u g i n e a is not a diatom, and that it cannot be placed
in the genus G1 o e o t i 1 a as was done by Kuetzing. F r o m
the fact that the organism usually consisted of two intertwined filaments he proposed the new generic name D i d y
mohelix.
-
Kuetzing 1865 (7) included G a l l i o n e l l a a s a subgenus of
M e 1 o s i r a , and after describing the accepted species definitelyexcluded G a l l i o n e l l a f e r r u g i n e a inthefollowing manner:
-
Downloaded from www.microbiologyresearch.org by
IP: 88.99.165.207
On: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 17:40:27
Page 99
BACTERIOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE
AND T A X O N O M Y
"Ganz ausgeschossenmuss werdenG a l l i o n e 11a f e r r u g i n e a Ehr. welche gar keine Diatomee, sondern
eine C o n f e r v a ist."
He notes that this organism does not contain silicon.
In
I'Species
his "Species Algarum" he lists the organism under
excludendae I I
.
De Toni 1891 ( 8 ) recognized G a l l i o n e l l a Bory a s a g e n u s
of diatoms.
Ellis 1907 (9)andMolisch 1910 (1O)bothregarded G a l l i o n
e 11a as a bacterial genus.
-
-
Onthe basis of the preceding discussion it would s e e m that
the name G a l l i o n e l l a is a revisedspelling of G a i l l o n e 11a , the spelling used by the author of the name. It is
an orthographic variant. It was proposed as a name for a
genus of diatoms, and i t s u s e a s a name for a genus of bacte r i a would seem to be illegitimate under Rule 24 of the International Bacteriological Code of Nomenclature which states:
Ita name must be rejected if it is illegitimate---"
and later,
!laname of a taxonomic group is illegitimate (4) if it is a l a t e r homonym of a taxonomic group (taxon)
of bacteria, of plants, or of protozoa; that is i f it duplicates a name previously and validly published for a
group of the same rank based on a different type---'!
--
The first generic name proposed definitely for the bacterial
genus was D i d y m o h e l i x by Griffith 1853 with the type
species D i d y m o h e l i x fer r u g i n e a (Ehrenberg)Griffith.
However, opinions expressed by certain algologists and
certain actions taken by them under the botanical rules r e quire examination before a decision is reached.
Hustedt (11) i n his Die Kieselalgen (pp. 221-223)
discusses the legitimacy and expediency of G a i l l o n e l l a and
G a 11i o n e 11a a s generic names of diatoms. For the name
of the genus in question he used M e 1o s i r a Agardh 1824.
He recognizes (personal communication) that the original
spelling used by Agardh was M e l o s e i r a which fails t o
Downloaded from www.microbiologyresearch.org by
IP: 88.99.165.207
On: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 17:40:27
Page 100
INTERNATIONAL BULLETIN
follow the usual transcription f r o m Greek to Latin, i. e. the
Greek ei becomes i in Latin. H e gives L y s i ~ o n i u m
Link a s an e a r l i e r synonym, with L y s i g o n i u m m o n i l i f o r m e (Mueller) Link 1820 a s the type. He believes there
is serious doubt as towhether Link actually saw this M e 1o
s i r a , leadingtothediscarding of L y s i g o n i u m as inadequately described. The generic name G a i 11o n e 11a was
given by Bory i n 1'823but without any identification of specie a.
The name M e 1o s e i r a given by Agardh in 1824 with identified species antedates the 1825 description of species of
G a i l l o n e l l a by Bory. Hustedtstates (personal communication
IIiI!
a list proposed by the subcommittee 8 (D i a t o m
a c e a e ) at the last Congress i n Sweden, the name
M e 1o s i r a is recommended a s a nomen conservandum, whereas M e l o s e i r a a n d G a i l l o n e l l a should
be regarded as nomina rejicienda. I t
This statement is confirmed by the recent action of the Committee noted above. The Advisory Board of Nomenclature
(12) throughits Gener'al Committee of Botanical Nomenclature
consisting of the Secretaries of Special Committees has
called for a vote on the several recommendations of the
Special Committee on B a c i 11a r i o p h y t a relative to conservation or rejection of various generic names of diatoms.
The following action (representing a recommendation to the
General Committee on Nomenclature) was taken:
Recommended as a nomen conservandum
M e l o s i r a Kiitz., 1833.
Type: M. n u m m u l o i d e s (Ag.) Kutz.
Recommended as nomina rejicienda
L y s i g o n i u m Link,- 1820.
T y p e : & . m o n i l i f o r m e (0.
F. Miill.) Chase
G a i l l o n e l l a Bory, 1823.
Type: 5. m o n i 1i f o r m i s (0.F. Mull.) Ehr enb.
M e l o s e i r a C. Ag., 1827.
Type:&
n u m m u l o i d e s C. Ag.
Noteworthy is the rejection of G a i 11o n e 1l.a a s a generic
name for diatoms. On the assumption that the recommendations outlined above is approved, the relationships of such
decision to possible use i n bacteriology requires examination.
The following queries should be considered.
-
-
-
-
1. What is the nomenclatural status of a generic name
Downloaded from www.microbiologyresearch.org by
IP: 88.99.165.207
On: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 17:40:27
Page 101
BACTERIOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE
AND TAXONOMY
placed i n a list of nomina rejicienda.
In the c a s e under consideration M e 1o s i r a Kiitzing (Type
M . n u m m u 1o i d e s ) is conserved as a generic name, and
m onil i f or the alternatives G a i l 1 o n g l l a Bory(type&.
m i s ) and
L y s i g o n i u m Link (type L.m o n i l i f o r m e )
are rejected. This apparently means that any genus containing the type species M. n u m m u l o i d e s must be named
M e l o s i r a r a t h e r than L y s i g o n i u m o r G a i l l o n e l l a .
But does it mean that i f the genus M e l o s i r a is divided
l a t e r , neither L y s i g o n i u m o r G a i l l o n e l l a may be
used as a generic name, even though the type species is
L . m o n i l i f o r m e o r g . m o n i l i f o r m i s ? The p e r t i nent portion of the rule in the International Bacteriological
Code of Nomenclature Rule 24 reads:A name m u s t be rejected if it is illegitimate, i..e., i f it
is contrary to a rule. - - A name of a taxonomic group is illegitimate in the following
cases:
(4). I€ it is a l a t e r homonym of a genus of bacteria,
of a genus of plants, o r of a genus of protozoa. That
is if i t duplicates a name previously and validly published for a group (taxon) of the s a m e rank based on
a different type. Even i f the eai-lier homonym is illegitimate, o r is generally treated as a synonym on
taxonomic grounds, the l a t e r homonym must be rejected.
-
- - -- --
Is i n f a c t the generic name G a1 1i o n e 11 a as applied
to a genus of bacteria a homonym of
G a i l 1o n e 11a
Bory?
2.
It s e e m s c l e a r that BoryproposedGa i 11o n e 11a as a generic
name f o r c e r t a i n diatoms. The name was derived f r o m
Ehrenberg accepted this generic
Gaillon, a patronymic.
name f o r a genus of diatoms, but l a t e r changed the spelling
to G a1 l i o n e 1 1a (perhaps for euphony). The genus was not
redefined. The name G a 11i o n e 11a s e e m s definitely to
have been applied to a genus of diatoms, with G a 11i o n e 11a
a n orthographic variant of G a i 11o n e 11a. Ehrenberg named
a n organism now included with the bacteria G a 11i o n e 11a
f e r r u g i n e a . He definitely regarded it as a diatom. As
a result of the exclusion of G a l l i o n e l l a f e r r u g i n e a
Downloaded from www.microbiologyresearch.org by
IP: 88.99.165.207
On: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 17:40:27
Page 102
INTERNATIONAL BULLETIN
f r o m the diatoms, Griffith proposed the generic name
D i d y m o h e l i x with the type species D i d y m o h e l i x
f e r r u g i n e a (Ehrenberg) Griffith. Attention should be
called to the possible bearing of the following note to Rule
24 (4) quoted above:Note. Mere orthographic variants of the s a m e name
a r e t r e a t e d as homonyms when they are based on diff e r e n t types.
When used f o r the same genus of diatoms, G a i l l o n e l l a
and G a 11i o n e 11 a may be regarded as orthographic variants
of the same generic name.
DRAFT PROPOSALS.
1. G a l l i o n e l l a Ehrenberg is ( i s n o t ) t o be r e g a r d e d
as an orthographic variant of G a i 11o n e 11a Bory.
2 - G a l l i o n e l l a Ehrenberg has (has not) as its type
species G a l l i o n e l l a m o n i l i f o r m i s and i s ( i s n o t )
available as a generic name i n bacteriology with the
type species G a l l i o n e l l a f e r r u i n e a Ehrenberg.
3. D i d y m o h e l i x G r i f f i t h m e first legitimate name f o r the genus of b a c t e r i a including the
G a l l i o n e l l a f e r r u i n e a Ehrenberg. D i d y m o m
l not) d
be designated as a
h e 1i x Griffith ~
nomen genericconservandum with the type species
D i d y m o h e 1i x f e r r u g i n e a (Ehrenberg) Griffith.
REFERENCES
Bory de St. Vincent, J. B.
Dictionnaire Classique d1
Histoire Naturelle. 4:3 93. 1823.
Dictionnaire Classique d1
Bory de St. Vincent, J. B.
Histoire Naturelle. 1:191-102. 1825.
Ehrenberg, C. G.
Dritter Beitrag zur Erkenntnisse
g r o s s e r Organisation in der Richtung d e r kleinsten
Raumes. Abhandl. Berl. Akad. pp. 145-336. 1833.
Ehrenberg, C. G.
Vorlaiifige Mittheilungen Gber das
wirkliche Vorkommen foasiler Infusorien und i h r e
grosse Verbreitung. Ann. Phys. S e r . 2. 8:218. 1833.
Ehrenberg, C. G.
Die Infusionsthierchen als vollkommene Organismen. Leipzig . 1838.
On G a l l i o n e l l a f e r r u g i n e a .
Griffith, J. W .
Ann. and Mag. Nat. Hist. Ser. 2. 12:438. 1853.
-
Downloaded from www.microbiologyresearch.org by
IP: 88.99.165.207
On: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 17:40:27
P a g e 103
BACTERIOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE
AND TAXONOMY
(7)
(8)
(9)
(10)
(11)
(12)
Kuetzing, F. T. Die Kieselschaligen Bacillarien oder
Diatomen. Nordhausen. 1865.
De Toni, J. B. Sylloge Algarum 2:1331. 1891.
E l l i s , D. A. Contribution t o Our Knowledge of the
1907.
ThreadBacteria. Zent. f. Bakt. Abt. 2. ::516.
Molisch, Hans. Die Eisenbakterien. Jena. 1910,
Hustedt, Er.DieKieselalgen Deutschlands, O e s t e r r e i c h s
und d e r Schweiz, i n Rabenhorst's Kryptogamen F l o r a .
7 (Teil 1):221-222.
1936.
Special Committee for B a c i l l a r i o p h y t a . Nomina
conservanda et nomina rejicienda propoeita.
Taxon
1(6):95-96. 1952.
-
Downloaded from www.microbiologyresearch.org by
IP: 88.99.165.207
On: Sun, 18 Jun 2017 17:40:27