Abstract

Peptococcus anaerobius (Hamm) Douglas was first described under the name Staphylococcus anaerobius by A. Hamm in 1912. A study of Hamm's publication indicates that the original characterization of this organism was based primarily on published reports of anaerobic staphylococci isolated by other authors, even though Hamm did mention the isolation of an anaerobic coccus. The currently accepted descriptions of this organism were not taken from the original publication by Hamm but from the description of Staphylococcus anaerobius by A. R. Prevot in 1933. Modern data and insight strongly suggest that the original description of Staphylococcus anaerobius Hamm was based on a very small number of generally variable and nondifferentiating characteristics of strains which very probably represented several species of anaerobic cocci. Provision 3 of the International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria states that “… names applied to a group made up of two or more discordant elements, especially if these elements were erroneously supposed to form part of the same individual (nomina confusa) …” are to be placed on the list of nomina rejicienda. Therefore, it is requested that the Judicial Commission of the International Committee on Systematic Bacteriology issue an Opinion establishing the name Peptococcus anaerobius (Hamm) Douglas as a nomen confusum according to Provision 3 of the International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria and placing it on the list of rejected names.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.