Nomen oblitum

In zoological nomenclature, a ''nomen oblitum'' (plural: ''nomina oblita''; Latin for "forgotten name") is a disused scientific name which has been declared to be obsolete (figuratively "forgotten") in favor of another "protected" name.

In its present meaning, the ''nomen oblitum'' came into being with the fourth edition (1999) of the ''International Code of Zoological Nomenclature''. After 1 January 2000, a scientific name may be formally declared to be a ''nomen oblitum'' when it satisfy the following conditions:

# No uses as a valid name in a scientific publication are known after 1899 (this criterion is taken on faith).
# It is either a senior synonym (there is also a more recent name which applies to the same taxon, and which is in common use) or a senior homonym (it is spelled the same as another name, which is also in valid use).
# The preferred junior synonym or homonym is shown to be in wide use, defined as appearing in 25 or more publications in the past 50 years (must cover a period of at least 10) and by at least 10 distinct individual authors.

Once a name has formally been declared to be a ''nomen oblitum'', the now obsolete name is to be "forgotten". By the same act, the other available name must be declared to be protected under the title ''nomen protectum''. Thereafter it takes precedence. This procedure as a whole is termed a reversal of precedence.ICZN 1999, art. 23.9 (International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, 1999 Ed.).
An example is the case of the scientific name for the leopard shark. Despite the name ''Mustelus felis'' being the senior synonym, an error in recording the dates of publication resulted in the widespread use of ''Triakis semifasciata'' as the leopard shark's scientific name. After this long-standing error was discovered, ''T. semifasciata'' was made the valid name (as a ''nomen protectum'') and ''Mustelus felis'' was declared invalid (as a ''nomen oblitum'').

Use in taxonomy

The designation ''nomen oblitum'' has been used relatively frequently to keep the priority of old, sometimes disused names, and, controversially, often without establishing that a name actually meets the criteria for the designation. Some taxonomists have regarded the failure to properly establish the ''nomen oblitum'' designation as a way to avoid doing taxonomic research or to retain a preferred name regardless of priority. When discussing the taxonomy of North American birds, Rea (1983) stated that "...Swainson's lder but disusedname must stand unless it can be demonstrated conclusively to be a ''nomen oblitum'' (a game some taxonomists play to avoid their supposed fundamental principle, priority)."REA, A.M. (1983). ''Once A River''. Tucson: University of Arizona Press.

Banks and Browning (1995) responded directly to Rea's strict application of ICZN rules for determining ''nomina oblita'', stating: "We believe that the fundamental obligation of taxonomists is to promote stability, and that the principle of priority is but one way in which this can be effected. We see no stability in resurrecting a name of uncertain basis that has been used in several different ways to replace a name that has been used uniformly for most of a century."Banks, R.C., & Browning, M.R. (1995). "Comments on the status of revived old names for some North American birds." ''The Auk'', 112(3): 633-648.

See also

* Glossary of scientific naming
* '' Nomen conservandum''
* ''Nomen dubium''
* ''Nomen novum''
* ''Nomen nudum''

References

{{reflist

Taxonomy (biology)
Zoological nomenclature
Latin biological phrases