Genus

In the binomial nomenclature used worldwide, the name of an organism is composed of two parts: its genus name (always capitalized) and a species modifier (known as the "epithet"). An example is Homo sapiens sapiens, the name for the human species (Latin for "wise wise man") which belongs to the genus Homo.

Each genus must have a designated type species (see Type (zoology)). The generic name is permanently associated with the type specimen of its type species. Should this specimen turn out to be assignable to another genus, the genus name linked to it becomes a junior synonym, and the remaining taxa in the now-invalid genus need to be reassessed. See scientific classification and nomenclature Codes for more details of this system. Also see type genus.

The boundaries between genera are historically subjective, but with the advent of phylogenetics, it is increasingly common for all taxonomic ranks (at least) below the class level to be restricted to demonstrably monophyletic groupings, as has been the aim since the advent of evolutionary theory. Indeed, in the better-researched groups like birds and mammals, most genera are clades already.

Rules-of-thumb for delimiting a genus are outlined e.g. in Gill et al. (2005). According to these, a genus should fulfill 3 criteria to be descriptively useful:

• monophyly - all descendants of an ancestral taxon are grouped together;
• reasonable compactness - a genus should not be expanded needlessly; and
• distinctness - in regards of evolutionarily relevant criteria, i.e. ecology, morphology, or biogeography; note that DNA sequences are a consequence rather than a condition of diverging evolutionarily lineages except in cases where they directly inhibit gene flow (e.g. postzygotic barriers).

Neither the ICZN nor the ICBN require such criteria for extablishment of a genus; they rather cover the formalities of what makes a description valid. Therefore, there has been for long a vigorous debate about what criteria to consider relevant for generic distinctness. At present, most of the classifications based on phenetics - overall similarity - are being gradually replaced by new ones based on cladistics (e.g., use of Reptilia and Amphibia in taxonomy is discouraged), though phenetics was only of major relevance for a comparatively short time around the 1960s before it turned out to be unworkable.

The three criteria given above are almost always fulfillable for a given clade. An example where at least one is crassly violated no matter what the generic arrangement is are the dabbling ducks of the genus Anas, which are paraphyletic in regard to the extremely distinct moa-nalos. Considering them distinct genera (as is usually done) violates criterion 1, including them in Anas violates criterion 2 and 3, and splitting up Anas so that the mallard and the American black duck are in distinct genera violates criterion 3.

Many genera are divided into subgenera (singular subgenus).

A genus in one kingdom is allowed to bear a name that is in use as a genus name or other taxon name in another kingdom. Although this is discouraged by both the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature and the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature there are some five thousand such names that are in use in more than one kingdom. For instance, Anura is the name of the order of frogs but also is the name of a genus of plants (although not current: it is a synonym); and Aotus is the genus of golden peas and night monkeys; Oenanthe is the genus of wheatears and water dropworts, and Prunella is the genus of accentors and self-heal.

Obviously, within the same kingdom one generic name can apply to only one genus. This explains why the platypus genus is named Ornithorhynchus — George Shaw named it Platypus in 1799, but the name Platypus had already been given to the pinhole borer beetle by Johann Friedrich Wilhelm Herbst in 1793. Names with the same form but applying to different taxa are called homonyms. Since beetles and platypuses are both members of the kingdom Animalia, the name Platypus could not be used for both. Johann Friedrich Blumenbach published the replacement name Ornithorhynchus in 1800.

See also

• Linnaean taxonomy
• Cladistics
• Systematics

References

ISBN links support NWE through referral fees

• Gill, Frank B.; Slikas, Beth & Sheldon, Frederick H. (2005): Phylogeny of titmice (Paridae): II. Species relationships based on sequences of the mitochondrial cytochrome-b gene. Auk 122(1): 121-143. DOI: 10.1642/0004-8038(2005)122[0121:POTPIS]2.0.CO;2 HTML abstract

External links

• Nomenclator Zoologicus: Index of all genus and subgenus names in zoological nomenclature from 1758 to 2004.

Credits

New World Encyclopedia writers and editors rewrote and completed the Wikipedia article in accordance with New World Encyclopedia standards. This article abides by terms of the Creative Commons CC-by-sa 3.0 License (CC-by-sa), which may be used and disseminated with proper attribution. Credit is due under the terms of this license that can reference both the New World Encyclopedia contributors and the selfless volunteer contributors of the Wikimedia Foundation. To cite this article click here for a list of acceptable citing formats.The history of earlier contributions by wikipedians is accessible to researchers here:

• Genus  ^history

The history of this article since it was imported to New World Encyclopedia:

• History of "Genus"

Note: Some restrictions may apply to use of individual images which are separately licensed.