MICROBIOLOGICAL LITERACY'

R. E. BUCHANANDepartment of Bacteriology and Agricultural Administration, Iowa State College, Ames, Iowa

CONTENTSI. Introduction .................................................................. 204

II. The Scientific Vernacular and Literacy..................................................... 205III. Names of Taxa: Their Formation and Use ............................. 205

A. Construction and Use of Singulars and Plurals.......................................... 206B. The Specific Epithet ................................................................... 208C. Influence of Modern Language on Spelling of Modern Latin Scientific Names............ 212D. Confusion of Nomenclature andClassification.. 212

IV. Formulation of Latin Descriptions and Diagnoses.......................................... 213V. Why Literary Lapses in Microbiological Literature? ........................ 214

A. Postscriptum................................................................... 215VI. References................................................................................ 215

I. INTRODUCTION and organizations, industrial utilization of micro-biology, ecology, pathology, botany, zoology,Some years ago Professor Barnett Cohen, and many more. But the acquiring of a reason-

then editor of Bacteriooal Revews, suggested able degree of literacy in a particular field orthe preparation of a summary of recent progress subdivision of microbiology is quite practicable.in the field of bacterial taxonomy. The decision Evidence of attainment is the ability accuratelyreached, after some discussion, was that the and correctly to use the vernacular, coupled withcataloguings and listings included in such a skill in constructing and using correctly thetreatise might well have reference value, but scientific names and technical terms appropriatewould be less useful than a more detailed analy- to one's field of specializationssis of a small segment of this broad subject. Aptitude and skill in use of scientific namesSuch analysis could well limit itself to a frank and of technical ter is much facilitated bydiscussion, a sampling of a few only of the no- knowledge of origins (etymologies). The namesmenclatural pitfalls of microbiology. There and terms are for the most part derived fromshould be included also some analyses of the Latin or from latinized Greek. There are threeerrors common to the literature of bacteriology categories of uses for such knowledge by theand of auxiliary fields such as biochemistry, microbiologist He should in all cases be familiarpharmacology, and zymotechnology. Such a with the first two. He should understand thereview may prove stimulating, even useful, to implications of the third if he is working withthe student (perhaps likewise to journal con- certain groups of plants such as the fungi, thetributors and journal editors) in his continued algae, or the slime molds. These three categoriesgroping for microbiological literacy. This paper may be defined and illustrated as follows:is an attempt at such a sampling. a. The microbiologist should know much aboutComplete literacy in any field Enot readily the derivation of vernacular names used as scien-

attained; in microbiology it would require the tific terms. These are words usually derived fromacquisition of a comprehensive knowledge of the Latin or Greek. He should be aware that forstatus of this science and its relationships in very some of these vernacular scientific terms theremany fields, including taxonomy, physiology, are two spellings to be found in the dictionaries;biochemistry, genetics, cytology, modern lan- some are "American English" and some areguages, classical languages (particularly Latin "British English." In many cases, where thereand Greek), history of microbiological societies is a difference, the English spelling is the better

I Journal Paper No. J-3372 of the Iowa Agri- because it shows derivation more clearly andcultural and Home Economics Experiment Station avoids certain confusions. One finds both "hema-Ames, Iowa. Project No. 151. tology" and "haematology." The English spell-

204

1958] MICROBIOLOGICAL LITERACY 205

ing retains the diphthong, the American spelling HI. THE SCIENTIFIC VERNACULAR AND

uses a single vowel. What difference does it LITERACYmake? Perhaps not much, except that one One universal attribute of literacy is gram-may be surprised to find that the literal meaning matical correctness in the use of the scientificof hematology is not "science of the blood" but vernacular in one's writing and conversation."science of spears or darts." If pedology is the Phrases of dubious ancestry and correctness arescience of the soil, should not pediatrics also avoided. The literate student never intention-relate in some way to soil? The Greek stems are ally approves the use of "the data is" or "thedifferent, but the love of simplified spelling on agenda is," even though some of our Americanthe part of some of our medical colleagues may dictionaries state that such incorrect use haslead to overemphasis. The microbiologist, when become so common that it may be tolerated,coining a new technical term, should attempt to even accepted. Provincialisms, slang, and labora-make one in which the etymology is not obscured. tory jargon may be recognized by inclusion in

b. The microbiologist should have a working these published vocabularies but such inclusionknowledge of construction of words that are to be is no adequate warrant for their use in dignifiedused as names of taxa in microbiology. Al names speech and in serious scientific writing.of species, genera, families, orders, etc., in all of Authors dislike to have manuscripts, whichbiology must be either Latin, or latinized and they have submitted for publication, com-treated as Latin. Most of these names are de- mented upon by a reviewer who apparently ques-rived from the Greek. The rules of biological tions the authors' literacy. Most of us have hadnomenclature assume that the Greek is first such experiences. May I cite a personal instancetransliterated into the Latin and the appro- Years ago, in a book dealing with bacteria thatpriate Latin endings added. A sign of microbio- eause animal diseases, in a discussion of a passivelogical literacy on the part of an author is his carrier of a contagiumes the assumed singular ofability to coin correctly formed names. Under- the word "fomites" was given as "fomite," thestandably a microbiologist may conclude that text read "fomite (plural fomites)." An Englishthe making of correct names is shrouded in mys- reviewer noted the low estate of American bac-tery and that his time will be more profitably teriological literacy in his comment that thespent in finding and describing new species that singular of fomite8 is fomes. The Latin dictionaryhe can't name. As a matter of fact, a few hours of apparently upheld the validity of his criticism.study (not more than three or four) should en- However, the sense of humiliation with referenceable any competent researcher to form satisfac- to personal nomenclatural illiteracy disappearedtory and euphonious names for the new taxa that when a little study and analysis revealed thathe describes. author and critic were both right. The formation

c. The microbiologist must have some facility in of the English singular fomite from the pluralLatin composition if he names fungi, algae, or fomites has ample precedent, e.g., we recognizeslime molds and must follow the Botanical Code of both actinomycete and actinomyces as the singu-Nomenclature. Inasmuch as the three groups lar of actinomycetes. Not only do some Latinlisted are plants, he must publish for each new (and Greek) words taken over into English havespecies named a description written in Latin. two plurals, but some Latin plurals have twoBacteria alone are excepted from this require- English singulars. Even reviewers have beenment. Some special problems are involved in known to be in error when criticizing spellingsformulating such descriptions, as many of the and grammar and etymologies.words required are not to be found in classicalLatin and many neo-Latin words must be in- III. NAMES OF TAXA: THEIR FORMATION AND USEtroduced to care for physiology, chemistry, and The most common manifestations of lack ofeven morphology. As noted later, the grammati- microbiological literacy infiltrating all micro-cal construction of Latin descriptions is not par- biology are in the field of nomenclature. To beticularly difficult. Nevertheless, some Latin literate, one must know the idiom of nomen-descriptions have appeared, particularly in de- clature, he must be able correctly to make andscriptions of new species of yeasts and molds, to use the scientific names of the organisms withwhich lack something of accuracy. which he works. Such literacy should be an

206 R. E. BUCHANAN [VOL. 22

attribute of every microbiologist. A prime requi- faced by the student in his attempt to knowsite is the ability properly to recognize, identify, and use the criteria of literacy as guides. Theand name the living organisms with which he following will be discussed: (1) constructionworks, whether he is intent upon probing their and use of singulars and plurals, (2) the specificcharacteristics as living things, or whether he epithet, (3) influence of modern language spellinguses them as tools in chemistry, genetics, bio- on spelling of scientific names, and (4) confusionphysics, bacteriology, pathology, or elsewhere. of nomenclature and classification.Many microbiologists look upon Codes of A. oction and Use of Sirgulars and Plurals

Nomenclature as necessary evils, with but littleemphasis on the "necessary." Unfortunately Teachers of microbiology are constantly be-there has been a degree of dichotomization in the deviled by the tendency of the student to ignorethinking and actions of biologists that have the fact that most words of our scientific andled to the creation of three independent Codes of technical vocabularies are taken directly from theNomenclature, one for plants, one for animals, Latin or, after latinization or romanization, fromand one for the bacteria. The microbiologist must the Greek and that they retain the Latin plural.have some knowledge of each, for in his labora- There is even some evidence that the results oftory and classroom he deals with fungi, whose this student ignorance persist into the publica-nomenclature is governed by the Botanical tions of maturer years. Errors in the use of singu-Code, with protozoa, which come under the Zoo- lar and plural of nouns are among the most com-logical Code, and with bacteria and viruses, mon of those made by teachers in the classroomwhich come under the Bacteriological Code. and by authors in their journal publications.Misunderstandings of the interrelationships of This problem proves troublesome because ofthese codes and their differences may lead to misunderstandings of the techniques encoun-real difficulty. For example, the genus Strepto- tered in the transformation of scientific names ofmyces was included by Waksman and Henrici, taxa into vernacular names, and because ofthe authors of the name, with the bacteria. In a certain complexities relating to the formationpaper published in one of our bacteriological of singulars and plurals (particularly confusionjournals not long ago, tabulating and classifying as to the correct singulars and plurals of namesmuch information on this genus, the authors ending in -a).concluded that the affinities of the genus lie Before considering specifically the problems ofwith the fungi and not with the bacteria, and that literate use of singulars and plurals of scientificthe rules of the Botanical Code, not those of the names in microbiology, it should be noted thatBacteriological Code, should be followed. How- in theory, at least, every plant or animal or mi-ever, the authors failed to note that the Botan- crobial taxon has an internationally recognizedical Code contained some provisions that if scientific name as well as one or more vernacularfollowed in the nomenclature of this genus would names, the latter frequently differing in differentlead to nomenclatural chaos. No fungus name languages. Vernacular names are common forcan be recognized botanically, if published since genera of higher plants. In English, oak =

January 1, 1935, unless a description in the Latin Quercus; violet = Viola; hawthorn = Crataegus.language is given. Names given without such Similarly, species have vernacular names: whiteLatin descriptions are not validly published and oak = Quercus alba; birdsfoot violet = Violahave no standing, must not be recognized even pedata. In microbiology we have yeast = Sac-as synonyms. Probably unwittingly the authors charomyces; vinegar bacterium = Acetobacter.recommended that practically all species names Among species one finds gonocxccus = Neisseriagiven in the genus Streptomyces as well as the gonorrhoeae; brewer's yeast = Saccharomycesgeneric name itself be discarded, which means cerevisiae. When no vernacular name has beenthat the genus and all its species must be re- applied to a plant or a microorganism, the rulenamed. Probably most microbiologists would is to coin one, when needed, by using the scien-be tempted to insist that the Streptomycetes tific name or a name readily derived from it,belong with the bacteria. Moral: Microbiologists, but not capitalized. Many of these are familiar;know your codes (if you appeal to them). rose = Rosa; rhododendron = Rhododendron;

This review must necessarily be limited to a aster = Aster. A few microorganisms havediscussion of a few only of the many problems generally recognized vernacular names such as

1958] MICROBIOLOGICAL LITERACY 207

tubercle bacillus = Mycobacterium tuberculosis. terized, among other things, by bearing acorns.However, any generic name in bacteriology may But a genus is a group of species, there is morebe converted under the rules to a vernacular than one kind of oak within the genus, there is aname, either with the same spelling or with a white oak, a burr oak, a red oak, etc. We sayminor modification. For example: correctly that all oaks, meaning all kinds of

streptomyces, streptomycete = Streptomys oaks, produce acorns. The Latins used thename quercus for oak, and said quercus omnes

cptosirynlebacterium =(yebcteprium glandes generant, all oaks produce acorns. A

rkeptospira, leptospire = Leptospiragenus always includes a group of individuals,rickettsa= rieponeme=sia eponema

usually a group of kinds of individuals. Botaniststrepdmonema,treponemenad=TrPoneudoma n

and zoologists from the time of Linnaeus haveusually not hesitated to use the generic name

Scientific names taken from the Latin (or appropriately in the plural. One may correctlylatinized Greek) may have quite appropriately say "the Salmonellae are" meaning the "speciesone or two singular forms (sometimes even of Salmonella are." Precedent rules this is per-more) and one or two plural forms when made missible both when the word is used as a scien-into vernacular names. The Latin-English word tific name (a generic name) or when convertedindex has one singular form, but two plurals, into a vernacular form. When put in the ver-one, indices, using Latin precedent, and indexes nacular, an English plural is sometimes usedthe English. The name of the bacterial genus when the result is euphonious. One may sayLeptospira when used in English vernacular has "shigellae are" or "shigellas are." Obviouslytwo singulars, leptospira and leptospire, and one would not say "bacilluses are" for "bacillithree possible plurals, leptospiras, leptospires, are."and leptospirae. The generic name Streptomyces Many Latin and Greek singular nouns end inhas two singulars and one plural, in the singular -a, there are also many Latin and Greek pluralsstreptomyces and streptomycete, in the plural which end in -a. The distinctive English endingstreptomycetes. In the last example it should be for the plural is -s, not -a. Relatively few Eng-noted that the complete stem of the name is not lish words not derived from Latin or Greek haveincluded in the nominative singular of the a singular ending in -a. There is ample oppor-generic name, but may properly be included in tunity for confusion. In our microbiologicalthe English. writings there is need for much microbiologicalOne problem of singular-plural relationship literacy to avoid using singular nouns ending in

has puzzled many students. May one correctly -a with a plural meaning. The criteria for de-employ the name of a genus in the plural? It termining correct usage are few and relativelyhas been argued that the rules of all biological simple.codes state that two genera cannot have the same 1. Latin nouns, ending in -a in the nomina-correct name. Actually the rules do not make tive, form the Latin plural by adding -e, asthis exact statement, but emphasize that a sarcina, sarcinae; forma, formae; radicicola,later homonym of a generic name is illegitimate, radicicolae.and conversely that a name can legitimately be 2. Latinized Greek nouns ending in the nomi-applied to one genus only. It is argued that the native in -a (excepting those which end in -ma)use of a generic name in the plural must indicate form the latinized plural by adding -e, as lepto-the existence of two genera of the same name, spira, leptospirae.and that such identical generic names cannot 3. Latinized Greek nouns in the nominativeboth be correct or permissible; ergo, if there can ending in -ma always form the latinized pluralbe only one its name must always be singular. by adding -ta, as plasma, plasmata; nema,This is not necessarily an exact statement. A nemata; soma, somata. There are about seventeengenus of animals and one of plants may have hundred Greek words with this ending. Notethe same name. The plural of a generic name has that in these words both singular and pluralanother and very different connotation, i.e., it is have -a as a terminal vowel.not used to designate two or more genera with 4. Latin and latinized Greek nouns which inthe same name. To illustrate, the word oak is the nominative end in -um (neuter nouns) formthe English name for a genus of trees charac- the plural by dropping the terminal -um and

208 R. E. BUCHANAN [VOL. 22

adding -a. There are thousands of such words. offensive to the ear. It is interesting to observeExamples: spirillum, spirilla; flagellum, flagella; that one does not find the expressions "thecorynebacterium, corynebacteria. Bacillus are" or "the Bacterium are," although

5. Neuter Latin nouns which in the nomina- such use would be equally logical.tive have endings other than -um also have the However, incorrect use of the generic name inplural ending in -a; as in nomen, nomina; genus, singular form as a plural is not confined whollygenera; mare, maria; animal, animalia; cornu, to names that end in -a. In a recently publishedcornua. paper one reads "fluorescent Pseudomonas were

Perhaps the major test of microbiological not encountered" and "all the Pseudomonasliteracy is the correct use of nouns which in the were denitrifiers," and in the title of a disserta-singular end in -a and of those which in the tion "the mesophilic Achromobacter." Why areplural end in -a. The teacher of bacteriology these irregularities rather common? In part,must induce his students to write "the flagellum certainly, because our editors have not insistedis, the flagella are; the sarcina is, the sarcinae that their reviewers in turn insist on use of goodare." One finds in bacteriological literature the grammar. They have been routed by the pro-correct "washed leptospirae," "Gram-negative fessors and engineers and statisticians who usebacteria, including the brucellae." It is perhaps "data is."too much to be hoped that "this datum is, thesedata are" and "the agendum is, the agenda B. The Specific Epithetare" may again prove popular. If not, we pres- A second test of aptitude in microbiologicalently will collect datas, and propel bacterias by literacy is proof of the possession of some realmeans of flagellae or flagellas and sterilize understanding of what is meant by "the scien-medias. A recent journal article includes the tific name of a species." This is evidenced bysurprising statement, "frequent septae are ability properly to use and to construct namesproduced." of species. All nomenclatural codes agree that

Several ancillary problems arise from the the scientific name of a species is made up ofgrammatical confusion caused by -a endings. two parts: it is a binary combination. All agreeOne can find many examples in our standard that the first component is a proper noun, inAmerican microbiological and biochemical the singular number, which is the name of thejournals of the use of the name of a genus in genus in which the species is included. Botaniststhe singular with a plural verb. One sees not and bacteriologists agree that the second com-infrequently such incorrect expressions as "the ponent is to be termed a specific epithet, but thesalmonella occurring in sewer rats are some- zoologists have somewhat confused other biolo-times transmitted to man," "The shigella have gists by their recent decision to call the secondmany serotypes," or "we have shown that component the specific name. Why are othercertain cytophaga." Some authors apparently biologists confused? Because in bacteriology andhave rationalized a justification for this use by botany the designations "species name" andthe claim that since a genus such as Salmonella "specific name" are synonymous. In zoologyincludes many species, the generic name, at they are not, the specific epithet of the bac-least in its vernacular form, may therefore be teriologist is the specific name of the zoologist.used in the sense of a collective noun. Such It should be clear that the specific epithet isnouns, in English usage, may be employed not the name of a species, it is an explanatoryeither with a singular or with a plural verb- The word or phrase limiting the application of thereasoning is fallacious, there is no good prec- generic name to a single species. The formationedent except that of a faulty grammar, perhaps and correct use of the specific epithet deserveprovincialism. The explanation is much more some comment.likely that this is unwitting confusion based But first, what is the meaning of epithet?upon the fact that in bacteriology there are It may be a single word which in some waymany words of Latin origin having -a in the defines or limits or modifies the meaning of theplural, and many others that end in -a in the generic name or it may be a single phrase con-singular; the sound of a singular generic name sisting of two or more words which togetherwhen spoken followed by a plural verb is not convey a single idea, but which do not sepa-

19581 MICROBIOLOGICAL LITERACY 209

rately modify the generic name. The codes of be accepted. Or, one may conclude, the namenomenclature specify clearly that a specific Pichia quercibus is illegitimate and should beepithet may be one of three types: discarded and a new specific epithet proposed.

1. An adjective (simple or compound) which Again, it may be regarded as a slip of the pen, adirectly modifies the generic name, and agrees lapsus calami, which may be corrected to Pichiawith it in gender, number, and case. As Sarcina quercorum, the Pichia of oaks.lutea, the yellow Sarcina. In formation of specific epithets one is often

2. A noun in the genitive modifying the posed with the problem of fixing upon the cor-generic name. It need not agree with the generic rect forms of the genitive of nouns to be used asname in gender or number. As Escherichia coli, specific epithets. For example, one may wish tothe Escherichia of the colon. propose a specific epithet based on the name of

3. A noun in apposition with the generic the disease with which the organism is asso-name. It agrees in case with the generic name, ciated. The answer is simple if the name of thebut need not agree in gender. As Xanthomonas disease ends in -osis or -asis. The genitive is theprunicola, Xanthonw s the plum dweller. same as the nominative, one writes with con-

These statements appear simple; it would fidence Mycobacterium tuberculosis, the Myco-seem that conformity to rules and recommenda- bacterium of tuberculosis. But the problem istions should not be too difficult. But examina- often complicated by the fact that names oftion of the literature of bacteriology shows many diseases are derived from the Greek andmany lapses. Perhaps one may establish three when latinized end in -itis. In this case the geni-grades of literacy in the coining of specific tive ending is -itidis. One should not proposeepithets. In some cases a specific epithet pro- Neisseria meningits; if proposed, it should beposed contravenes a rule, it cannot in the long corrected to N. meningitidis. Cillobacteriumrun be accepted, it is illegitimate and is even- endocarditis should become C. endocarditidis.tually expunged from the literature as incorrect. Many names of neoplasms have the endingSuch cases may be termed grade 3 literacy. In -oma, they belong with thousands of other Greekother cases the epithet does not violate any names with the ending -ma which have as theirrule, but does not conform to some recom- latinized genitive, -matis. If one does not recog-mendation. For example, we are advised that a nize the Greek stem he may easily, but incor-well-chosen specific epithet should in some way rectly, place the word in the first Latin declen-describe the organism named. In other words, sion (forma, formae). An author inadvertentlynonsense words are frowned upon, but are named an organism associated with trachomatolerated. They constitute evidence of some Rickettia trachomae. Such a lapsus calamidegree of literacy. But the highest and recom- should be and was corrected to Rickettsia tra-mended degree of literacy is evidenced by the chomatis. When such a correction is made it isperson who follows not only the rules but the not customary to cite the name of the corrector,recommendations as well; he sets an example for but only the name of the original proponent.the nomenclators who succeed him, his prece- The latter does not entirely escape unscathed,dents are good. for in any listing of synonyms his original spell-Some examples of problems in our present ing will be cited, frequently followed by "sic" to

literature relating to the making of specific indicate that the spelling given is truly that ofepithets should be cited. What should be done the original. In Bergey's Manual one may findwith the name of the yeast species, Pichia hundreds of such "sics."quercibus? It is apparent that the specific epithet What should be done with a name such asis derived from Quercus, the generic name of the Streptococcus equisimilis? The specific epithetoaks. It is not an adjective, but a noun which is ordinarily would past muster, it conforms toneither in the nominative in apposition to Pichia the legal requirements for a specific epithet.nor a noun in the genitive. Apparently it is in But what does it mean? Quite certainly thethe dative or ablative plural with the meaning author did not intend to convey the literal"to or with oaks." What should be done with meaning of "resembling a horse." He had insuch a name? If quercibus was proposed as a mind that the name Streptococcus equi had beennonsense word, a word without meaning, it may applied to a related organism and wished to

210 R. E. BUCHANAN [VOL. 22

express a relationship between the two species. incanae. The use of the specific epithet of oneHe intended to suggest, not that the new species species in coining a specific epithet for anotherresembled a horse, but that it resembled Strepto- may be hazardous.coccus equi. However, a nonsense adjective was Sometimes specific epithets are made up ofcoined. Under the rules it stands. This type of two or more words. A correctly formed, com-nomenclatural difficulty arises from the tendency pound specific epithet should have its com-in our laboratories and in the vernacular to ponents related as a principal and one or morespeak as though the specific epithet were the modifying words. Together they should expressname of the species. We use the specific epithet a single idea. A generic name, together withas a nickname. This tendency has resulted in such a compound specific epithet, is a binarythe formation of many poor derivative specific combination, and is from this point of view inepithets. For example, we often speak of the proper form. However, if two or more unrelatedcoliform bacteria or of the paracolon bacteria, words follow the generic name, each is a distinctmeaning those organisms that seem to be rather epithet and the proposed species name is a tri-closely related to Escherichia coli. Then an or- nomial or polynomial, hence illegitimate. Legiti-ganism is named Bacterium paracoli. Literally mate species names must be binary in form.this would seem to be a noun in the genitive A specific epithet composed of two or moremeaning "of the paracolon." But there is no words should be joined or united by a hyphen.anatomical structure called a paracolon. How- There have been instances in which proposedever, in giving the literal meaning of the epithet specific epithets have reached gargantuan pro-we have misinterpreted the meaning intended portions. As a hypothetical example: an authorby the author. The intended meaning is "re- proposes basing the specific epithet of a newsembling Escherichia coli" (para resembling, and species of Clostridium on the name of the dis-coli a specific epithet). Names thus formed as ease which it produces. The disease is describedspecific epithets meet the first requirement of as a gaseous edema of the udder of the cow.microbiological literacy. They may be regarded He puts the name into proper Latin form, andas nonsense words and accepted, for the in- writes Clostridium emphysematosae oederatistended meaning can often be conjectured. mastitidis bovis. He is urged by a recommenda-Another difficulty is encountered when one tion of the Code to put hyphens between these

lifts the specific epithet from the name of one separate words to indicate that the whole con-species to be used in the name of another species stitutes a single epithet, and proposes Cbos-with some resultant nomenclatural confusion. A tridium emphysematosae - oedematis - masti-bacterial parasite of the garden stock (Mat- tidis-bovis. He has followed the letter of the lawthiola incana) was named Xanthomonas incanae. and has created a legitimate specific epithetThe Latin adjective incana has the meaning of and a legitimate species name. He has passed"gray." The parasite's specific epithet has been the first test of nomenclatural literacy. But youplaced in the genitive incanae and means "of will agree that he has failed to pass the secondgray." An adjective used as a specific epithet test, for he has not followed the recommenda-must agree grammatically with the name of tion of the Code which advises that a specificthe genus. This would indicate that the name epithet should be relatively short and easilyshould be changed to Xanthomonas incana even pronounced. An author who proposes such a

though the author had no wish to tell an un- compound throws a wholly unnecessary burdentruth, to say the parasite was itself hoary. upon all those who thereafter use the name.

When corrected to "incana" we have a usable After valid publication, can such an awkwardand legitimate name, one showing a degree of name be simplified? Yes, but it requires interna-microbiological literacy, even though a meaning- tional agreement. Has such action ever beenless species name has been coined. The relation- taken? Yes, upon request of a group of workersship to the host could have been much better concerned, the problem of the species name

expressed by using either the genitive of the Streptococcus agalactiae-contagiosae was con-

generic name as in X. matthiolae or, if this was sidered by the Judicial Commission and agree-not sufficiently specific, the entire species name ment reached that the name should be shortenedof the host could be used, as in X. matthiolae- to Streptococcus agalactiae. The Code further

1958] MICROBIOLOGICAL LITERACY 211

states that the several words of a compound marinely slimy? It was intended probably tospecific epithet may be combined into a single mean the "marine, slimy Flaobacterium." As itword and the hyphens omitted. This has been stands it is a nonsense word. Streptomycesdone in some instances with rather unfortunate thermofuscus; the "hottish" brown Streptomycesresults. One would be somewhat surprised to see was probably intended to mean the "thermo-the name developed above appear as Clostridium philic brown Streptomyces," but does not.emphysematosaeoenauismastitidisbovis. Even Bergey's Manual includes a number of nonsenseBergey's Manual has fallen into the unfortunate specific epithets that have thermo- as a firsthabit of coalescing words that are separately component. Among them are Bacillus thermo-declined. The wisdom of such a practice is de- dia8ticus (hot diastatic) probably intended tobatable, they would better be separated by mean the thermophilic Bacillus producinghyphens, for in a case of this kind a true com- diastase; Bacillus thermoliquefaciens (heatpound word is not formed. liquefying) intended to mean the "thermophilicAn author may propose two different words liquefying Bacillus"; Bacillus thermotranslucens

which separately modify the generic name and (heat translucent) intended to mean the "ther-are not related one to the other. For example, he mophilic translucent Bacillus." Of course not allwishes to name a pseudomonad which is found words used as specific epithets beginning within the sea and which in the laboratory under thermo- are nonsense words. For example,appropriate environment is able to bring about Bacillus termocellulolyticus seems to meandenitrification, i.e., the reduction of nitrates. He "digesting hot cellulose," and Bacillus thermo-names the organism Pseudmwnas marina de- alimentophilus the "hot-food loving Bacillus."nitrificans, "the marine pseudomonad that A foreign worker proposed the name Actino-denitrifies." But this is an illegitimate trinomial, myces longisporus ruber. This is, of course, anmarina and denitrificans separately modify illegitimate trinomial, "the longspored redPseudomonas. The author has constructed a Actinomyces." This has been converted intrinomial by proposing two specific epithets. America into Streptomyces longoslporuber, aThen he seeks to remedy the matter by com- good example of an unnecessary nonsensebining the two words into a single specific epithet. It could well have been recognizedepithet and coins the word (specific epithet) initially as illegitimate, and a sensible legitimatemarinodenitrificans. There is no question but epithet substituted. A recent patent issued inthat he has shown the first level of microbio- the United States includes the name of a newlogical literacy by conforming to the rule that species of bacterium associated with a patentednames of species must be binary. But in this process, Clostridium amylosaccharobuylpro-coining of a specific epithet he has produced a pylicum. This meets the requirements of thenonsense word, a word without an internally rule that there shall only be a single specificconsistent meaning. He still intended it to mean epithet. But what is the meaning? Literally,(as a species name) "the marine, denitrifying perhaps the starch-saccharose-butyl-propylic or-pseudomonad." It can scarcely mean "the ganism. Possibly the epithet was intended tomarinely-denitrifying Pseudomonas." It is diffi- mean the Clostridium that from starch andcult to see how "denitrifying" can modify saccharose can produce butyl and propyl al-"marine." The author has not conformed to the cohols. Whether proposal of a name in a patentCode recommendation relative to the formation is a valid publication of the name is a questionof specific epithets. He did not pass the second apparently not decided, but the proposal oftest of microbiological literacy. Possibly he could such a name as this shows little true micro-have formed a much better species name by biological literacy on the part of the advisingcalling it Pseudomonas "the marine denitrifier," microbiologists and of the patent attorneys.i.e., P. marinidenitrifiator. Sometimes a nonsense word eventuates whenAre there many such nonsense words in the the components of the specific epithet are not

literature of bacteriology, words recognized as properly chosen. For example: Clostridiumlegitimate specific epithets? There are. Here are sartagoformum. The meaning intended seemsa few examples. Flavobacterium marnovirosum; reasonably clear: sartago frying pan, and formadoes the specific epithet mean slimily marine or shape. But there are two errors. The stem of

212 R. E. BUCHANAN [VOL. 22

sartago is sartagin- and the suffix formum does name in the name of each new derivative. Thenot mean shape, but warm. The Latin suffix nomenclatural problems of the chemist in chem-meaning shape or form is -formis, -is, -e. The istry are not at all those of the biologist inmeaning would have been clearer if the name biology. It would prove helpful if the biochemistchosen had been Clo8tridium sartaginiforne. would consistently recognize that, in the coining

of names for new species of organisms withC. Influence of Modern Langucaes on which he works, he should follow the conven-Spelling of Modern Loi S tions of biology. His deviations are sometimes

Names imitated by bacteriologists. Even the rightly

The pronunciation of scientific names in their renowned Winogradsky named one bacterialmodern Latin form is considerably influenced genus Cellvbrio, another Cellfalicula on theby the modem language (vernacular) spoken by assumption that cell could appropriately bethe pronouncer. There is also a concomitant used as an abbreviation for the modern Latintendency to modify spellings from those pre- cellulosum.scribed by the Codes, the better to adapt theirpronunciation to the language of the nomen- D. Confucin ofNcature andclator. For example, Ehrenberg in his BerlinMuseum sanctum almost exactly a hundred Bacteriologists and systematists sometimesyears ago named a diatom found in the state of wish to avoid the accurate and correct use ofIowa, U.S.A., Suriraya eiwana. He knew the words by resorting to less definite, frequentlydislike of the German for pronouncing i as a foggy, expressions. One such is the use of thelong vowel before an o. An Iowan in Germany word "group" in an apparent conscious effortquickly recognizes that his native state is not to avoid employing the conventional terminologyIowa but Yo-vah. Ehrenberg insured a nearer of nomenclature. The word "group" apparentlyapproach to correct pronunciation by use of the has a desirable aura of indefiniteness. Instead ofGerman diphthong ei. But he presented a puz- saying the "genus Shigella" there is an urge tozling situation to the unwary etymologist trying say the "Shigella group." Why? Apparently be-to determine the meaning of the adjective cause there seems to be less of definiteness aseiowanus. However, one can scarcely term an to the boundaries and circumscription of aintentional deviation of this kind illiteracy. But "Shigella group" than of a "genus Shigella." Athe tendency for the Italians to insist on spelling genus is by definition a species or a group ofGreek-derived names of taxa with an f where in species, but the use of the word genus is avoidedclassic Latin ph was used is mildly irritating to because of a quite erroneous concept that athose of many other tongues, just as is the named genus must have a clear circumscription;American tendency to replace the Latin diph- the author feels that when the accepted termi-thong ae by e, as in writing Henmphilus rather nology of taxonomy is used he is in some waythan Haemophilus, forgetting that this may hemmed in by boundaries he does not wish tocompletely obscure the etymology. Haemophilus recognize. So he uses "group" instead of "genus"means "blood lover," Hemophilus means "lance and feels freer. The word "group" does have itsor javelin lover." The American urge for "sim- place in nomenclature, but it should not be usedplified spelling" manifestly should not be car- (as it sometimes is) in an attempt to coverried into the coining of scientific names of taxa; muddled thinking or a desire to avoid frankdangers of confusion are too great. facing of facts. One evidence of nomenclaturalSome of our nomenclatural problems in bac- literacy is the correct use of the accepted vo-

teriology might be credited to the etymological cabulary of nomenclature with the understand-anarchism of the chemist, particularly the bio- ing that departures therefrom are to be clearlychemist, in the coining of names of chemical understood and defined.compounds from fragments, not stems or roots, How did this muddying of the nomenclaturalof the names of the plants or animals with waters come about? Primarily because certainwhich he works. He isolates a dozen alkaloids or microbiologists have confused two distinct con-essential oils from a single species of plant, and tributions to biology made by Linnaeus. Thisattempts to include some fragment of the plant's biologist proposed and inaugurated a system of

1958] MICROBIOLOGICAL LITERACY 213

naming of plants and animals that was a marked fortunately) are not adept at writing such Latinadvance over the systems prevailing previously, descriptions. Even one versed in classic Latinso advantageous in fact, that almost immedi- composition may well have difficulty, for theately all of biology quite consistently followed Latin dictionary lacks many words needed inthe pattern which he laid down. But he, in con- formulating such descriptions. To complicateformity with the thinking of his time, had what matters, the species of yeasts, for example, arewe now regard as a wholly erroneous concept of not distingushed exclusively by morphologicalthe origin of species, that of separate creation, criteria but also by the criteria developed firstand of the existence of distinct and permanent in bacteriological laboratories. They are grownbarriers between them. Our modern concept in media whose components have no classicof species certainly is not that of Linnaeus. Latin names, and their relationships to manyHence, some microbiologists have concluded chemical compounds unknown to the Latinthat Linnaeus' rules of nomenclature are not must be indicated. Even many terms used toappropriate for a biological world in which his describe morphology and physiology cannot beconcept of species does not hold. Also prevalent put into classic Latin. Occasionally necessaryin some microbiological circles is the assumption is the use of words from medieval Latin, morethat the complexities of classification in the often, the coining of new words to be regardedbacteria are not of the same kind, indeed are as modern Latin, frequently formed followingmuch greater, than those to be found in the the pattern of the Latin of pharmacology. Per-higher plants and animals. This concept, one haps unfortunately, no criteria have been estab-may say quite categorically, is fallacious. Sub- lished as to the adequacy of the Latin descrip-committees of the International Committee on tions published, either as to grammar or content.Bacteriological Nomenclature such as that on Perhaps the experts on yeast and mold tax-the Erderobaceriaceae have done an immense onomy and nomenclature will not object if weamount of valuable work; they have greatly glance at some of the results of this requirementenlarged our knowledge of several of the genera; for latinization. We may examine a few phrasesthey have proposed many sound ideas as to and sentences from the yeast species descriptionsclassification. However, their failure to accept of the zymologists, and illustrate some of thethe terminologies quite universally recognized types of problems by scrambling portions ofin biology has not infrequently led to misunder- descriptions of several species named by thestandings. Much needed work on the nomen- zymotechnologists.clature of genera of the enterobacteria is still to The taxonomist has not always used or coinedbe done. This is a task for the future. The sub- the most suitable modern Latin words andstitution of the word "group" for "genus" or phrases. For example, in many cases the firstfor "subgenus" may possibly have led to more phrase in the English description of a yeast isconfusion than it has obviated. "growth in malt extract" which our authors

render in modern Latin as "in musto malato."IV. FORMULATION OF LATIN The literal translation of this is "in maltatedDESCRIPTIONS AND must." The classic Latin word mustum means

DIAGNOSES freshly pressed grape juice. The brewer's Eng-The microbiologist has frequently to deal lish for this malt extract is "beer wort." In

with and to describe minute fungi or algae, Smith's English-Latin dictionary an attempt isparticularly those which are economically signifi- made to give the Latin equivalent of wort,cant. The nomenclature of the fungi, including "perhaps mustum ex hordeo," (must from barley).the yeasts and molds and the algae, is governed One wonders why there is not used the goodby rules set up in the Botanical Code of Nomen- modern Latin pharmaceutical phrase for maltclature, which rules differ in some respects from extract, "extractum malti," and why the authorsthose in the Bacteriological Code. To be re- have not written the more readily understoodgarded as legitimate (acceptable) in botany the version "in extracto malti."names of all new species (as well as other taxa) Singular verbs with plural subjects causemust be accompanied by a description written difficulty as "sedimentum et annulus formaturin Latin. Many microbiologists (perhaps un- (correctly formantur)," (sediment and a ring

214 R. E. BUCHANAN [VOL. 22

are formed); "Nitras kalicus" apparently means writings of later life of the more or less justifi-"potassic nitrate;" why not "nitras kali" (nitrate able but incorrect jargon of the laboratory. Theof potassium)? In general there is little apparent child from the home where incorrect grammar isdifficulty with the formation of modern Latin standard may have a language handicap innames of the various carbohydrates, as glu- later life.cosum, sucrosum, cellobiosum. But the com- 2. Many inaccuracies and lapses are to bemonly recognized rule that names of alcohols found in text books. Some of the "lapses"(ending in -ol) are already in acceptable modern quoted are taken from standard texts.Latin form is ignored and they appear as man- 3. There is frequently a lack of any effectivenitolum and sorbitolum. The endings appropriate training in Latin and Greek on the part of bothto the oblique cases are sometimes used for the teacher and pupil. This is by no means the in-nominative, as in "alcohole ethylicum est" for superable obstacle that it is often assumed to"alcohol ethylicum est." There may be lack of be. Some of our greatest and most literate sys-recognition that some modern Latin words are tematists have had no formal training in thebest regarded as indeclinable, such as "agar" classical languages. Some facility in the use ofrather than "agarum" (which is the generic Latin word formation in a modern language isname of a marine seaweed). "With little warts" not difficult to acquire.might be rendered as "cum verrucis parvis." 4. The lack of effective scrutiny (not censor-"Hat-shaped ascospores" is better as "asco- ship) on the part of editors of texts and particu-sporae pileiformes" rather than "peleiformae larly of scientific journals. The marked improve-ascosporae." Generic names in Latin sentences ment in recent years is due in part to suchshould be declined; "ex Querco kellogii" and not carefully worded editorial directives as are"ex Quercus kellogii." found in the Journal of Bacteriology. Part of theThis discussion on difficulties in correct use of problem of correcting deficiencies is lack of

Latin in mycology is not primarily to emphasize recognition of their existence on the part ofLatin literacy standards, but to point out the individuals and committees that review manu-essential absurdity of the botanical rule which scripts submitted for publication.requires original diagnoses of certain groups of 5. Increased literacy would be evidenced bymicroorganisms in Latin. An adequate descrip- many authors through improvement in the de-tion of a yeast requires the formulation of many scriptions of the species and other taxa of micro-new words constructed on Latin precedents and organisms that they name. As stated by Smithfrom Latin or Greek or modern stems. The (Department of Zoology, University of Illinois),Botanical Code explicitly exempts the bacteria one should give both a description and a diag-from the operation of the rule and could well nosis of the taxon. We agree with his sum-be revised to except certain other groups of mary: "the taxonomist needs to recognize hismicroorganisms. However, it must be recog- obligation so to construct his diagnosis as bothnized that such proposals have been voted down to characterize the given entity (as an indicationin recent International Botanical Congresses. If of what it is) and to differentiate it (as an indica-the rule is maintained (it shows signs of lon- tion of what it is not)." The problem of bettergevity), it should be the duty of someone com- nomenclature and of understanding of classifi-petent to prepare a brief brochure listing the cations of the bacteria would be largely solvedwords of a modern Latin microbiological vo- if authors would follow this injunction.cabulary with pertinent hints as to modern 6. The lack of an authoritative general state-Latin microbiological sentence construction ment as to what is "good form" or "literacy."useful in mycology. This lack may be met in part in the near future

V. WHY LITERARY LAPSES IN by several publications. The newly publishedMICROBIOLOGICAL Seventh Edition of Bergey's Manual of Deter-LITER&AURE? minative Bacteriology should be helpful. Dr.

Why are literary lapses common in our cur- Breed and his coeditors have performed a

rent publications? Here are some (not all) of herculean service over the years and particularlythe reasons. in this volume in bringing a remarkable degree

1. There occurs a welling up in the serious of order out of much disorder. But there was

1958] MICROBIOLOGICAL LITERACY 215

insufficient time and opportunity to complete teacher who seeks to be microbiologicallyall checking of references, synonymies, and literate. He may have difficulties in the ap-etymologies. In most cases the Seventh Edition propriate latinization of the Greek stems whichwill be a trustworthy, but not infallible, guide as he wishes to use and may employ incorrectlyto names. The revised and annotated Interna- one of many types of transliterations whichtional Code of Nomenclature of the Bacteria and romanize but do not latinize. The correct com-Viruses from the International Committee on bining forms to be used in the construction ofBacteriological Nomenclature just from the press generic names may be elusive. He discoversis authoritative. The annotations and examples evidence that the name of a taxon given in someof this Code should prove helpful. But even standard text (as Bergey's Manual) does notwith these props there is still need for an au- conform to the Rules of Nomenclature; whatthoritative brochure which would directly should he do to formulate the correct name? Aanswer many of the questions as to what con- complete, authoritative, and specific treatise hasstitutes good form; what are the essential ele- not been written, but should someday be com-ments of microbiological literacy. piled.

A. Postscriptum VI. REFERENCESThe above discussion fails to enumerate all None is cited. Each reader is referred to his own

the problems encountered by the author or lectures and publications for examples.