What’s in a name? That which we call a rose by any other name would smell as sweet” laments Juliet in the Shakespearean tragedy, Romeo and Juliet. However, for many of us studying biology, the name may be everything.
We have all, at some point, attempted to identify a bird or some plant. Often, we end up with, “Oh, here is a Tamarind tree” or “Oh, look, there is a House Sparrow”. Scientific names such as Tamarindus indicus or Passer domesticus referring to the same species might scare people. The complexity of names stems from the combination of languages largely alien to us: Greek and Latin.
The two-name concept
Back in the day when scientists were describing the natural world, they would use a multi-name structure to describe species, having something descriptive in the name. Much of this was happening in parts of Europe. Latinising the names was a norm. This would often result in names that were too long.
In 1735, Carl Linnaeus, a Swedish Botanist, improvised a rudimentary system to put in place the system of Binomial Nomenclature. The words binomial and nomenclature stem from a combination of Greek and Latin. Nearly all species are known today in this format.
In this format, the first part refers to what is called a genus and the second part refers to the species. It makes it easy for people to know that a set of species are related to each other. For instance, Homo sapiens and Homo neandrethalensis are two species in the genus Homo.
The arrangement of species in their order of relatedness among each other was largely based on morphological features. However, these days, scientists rely on multiple lines of evidence such as DNA, vocalisation, and morphology. Relying on morphology alone could be misleading because several unrelated groups of organisms often evolve similar features. For example, both bats and birds have wings. But bats are mammals and birds are not.
Who decides names?
The researchers who study biodiversity and assign names are called Taxonomists. Studying the meaning of names is called Etymology. There is a rigorous process involved in naming the species. While they can choose names of their liking, there are broad rules governing the description of species and the assignment of names.
Two sets of bodies govern the process of nomenclature. The one for animals is called the International Code for Zoological Nomenclature. The one for plants is called the International Code for Nomenclature of algae, fungi, and plants. The researcher must collect and preserve a physical specimen or a part as a “type” in a museum that is accessible to the public. The type specimen becomes the future reference point for the species. Often, when the type specimen is lost, another specimen is designated as a type.
Botanical types are dried and preserved in herbaria. In India, the collection of specimens is governed under the National Biodiversity Act and the Wildlife Protection Act, as well as by the animal ethics committees at the researcher’s host institution. The morphology and other details of the species must be described in detail and published in a journal having either ISSNs or ISBNs which are accessible either in print or online.
Broadly, the name being given must be unique, and not already in use within that group. To eliminate duplication, there is now an online repository where the names must be formally registered with the reference number linked to the publication. The name cannot be rude to someone and people are not supposed to put their own names. There are ample examples of all of this being done, though.
Naming after ‘characters’
The international codes mandated Latinising of names, but that rule is now relaxed. Regional languages are now finding space in the list of names. For instance, we named a frog from the coastal region of Karnataka, Phrynoderma karaavali because the frog is found there. Locals know the region as “karaavali” in Kannada. The genus name, however, is Latinised. Phrynoderma means warty skin. The tamarind tree, for instance, comes from the Arabic phrase Tamar-e-hind, which transliterates to the dates from India. Names referring to the locality where the species is found, are called toponyms.
There is also a long-running practice of naming species in honour of people — patronyms, used in various contexts. Historically, Linnaeus himself named species after people to get them to open their purses or curry favours, or even insult people. He named an insect Aphanus rolandri to “honour” his student Rolander with whom he did not get along well. By calling the genus “Aphanus” which in Greek stands for ignoble or obscure, Linnaeus made his dislike clear.
But patronyms risk taking away the charm of highlighting something about the species itself. Many of the Latinised names convey a lot of meaning to someone even with a rudimentary knowledge of Greek and Latin. The common Indian bullfrog, Hoplobatrachus tigerinus comes from Greek—Hoplon (shield) and Batrachos (frog), and tigerenus (tiger-like stripes). Both characteristics are immediately visible on the large frog, measuring up to the length of our palm, with stripes on the body and legs. If the same species were to be named after someone, it won’t say anything about the animal. Researchers continue to name species after celebrities and accomplished scientists but, the use of patronyms undoubtedly comes at the risk of not highlighting the characters of the organism.
Finally, as the Nobel Prize-winning physicist, Richard Feynman, says, there is a difference between knowing the name of something and knowing something. There is profound wisdom in his words when taken into the context of biodiversity conservation. There is an urgent need to know the name of some organisms and attempt to understand their role in the fragile ecosystem to be able to conserve them.
(With inputs from Dr Harish Prakash, Post-Doc, IISc, Bengaluru)