Valid publication of names of two domains and seven kingdoms of prokaryotes.

The International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes (ICNP) now includes the categories domain and kingdom. For the purpose of the valid publication of their names under the ICNP, we consider here the two known domains, 'Bacteria' and 'Archaea', as well as a number of taxa suitable for the rank of kingdom, based on previous phylogenetic and taxonomic studies. It is proposed to subdivide the domain Bacteria into the kingdoms Bacillati, Fusobacteriati, Pseudomonadati and Thermotogati. This arrangement reflects contemporary phylogenetic hypotheses as well as previous taxonomic proposals based on cell wall structure, including 'diderms' vs. 'monoderms', Gracilicutes vs. Firmicutes, 'Negibacteria' vs. 'Unibacteria', 'Hydrobacteria' vs. 'Terrabacteria', and 'Hydrobacterida' vs. 'Terrabacterida'. The domain Archaea is proposed to include the kingdoms Methanobacteriati, Nanobdellati and Thermoproteati, reflecting the previous division into 'Euryarchaeota', 'DPANN superphylum' and 'TACK superphylum'.

Proposals to revise the Statutes of the International Committee on Systematics of Prokaryotes.

The International Committee on Systematics of Prokaryotes serves to administer the rules of prokaryotic nomenclature via the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes, ensures the publication of the International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology, and works to represent the interests of the microbiological disciplines regarding prokaryotic nomenclature. The functions and mechanisms of operation of the International Committee on Systematics of Prokaryotes (ICSP) are defined in its Statutes, which were last revised in 2019. As members of the 2020-2023 and the 2023-2026 ICSP Executive Board and the Judicial Commission, we propose here some further revisions to help improve the clarity and functionality of the Statutes.

Judicial Opinion 130.

Opinion 130 deals with a Request for an Opinion asking the Judicial Commission to clarify whether the genus name Rhodococcus Zopf 1891 (Approved Lists 1980) is illegitimate. The Request is approved and an answer is given. The name Rhodococcus Zopf 1891 (Approved Lists 1980) is illegitimate because it is a later homonym of the validly published cyanobacterial name Rhodococcus Hansgirg 1884. The Judicial Commission also clarifies that it has the means to resolve such cases by conserving a name over an earlier homonym. It is concluded that the name Rhodococcus Zopf 1891 (Approved Lists 1980) is significantly more important than the name Rhodococcus Hansgirg 1884 and therefore the former is conserved over the latter. This makes the name Rhodococcus Zopf 1891 (Approved Lists 1980) legitimate.

Judicial Opinion 129.

Opinion 129 addresses the status of Firmicutes corrig. Gibbons and Murray 1978 (Approved Lists 1980). The name has the category 'division' and was included in the Approved Lists of Bacterial Names, although that category had previously been removed from the International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria (1975 revision onwards). When the category 'phylum' was introduced into the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes (ICNP) in 2021, equivalence between 'phylum' and 'division' was not stipulated. Since the definition of the taxonomic categories and their relative order is one of the principal tasks of every code of nomenclature, the inclusion of Firmicutes corrig. Gibbons and Murray 1978 in the Approved Lists was an error. The name is either not validly published or illegitimate because its category is not covered by the ICNP. If Firmicutes corrig. Gibbons and Murray 1978 (Approved Lists 1980) was a validly published phylum name, it would be illegitimate because it would contravene Rule 8, which does not permit any deviation from the requirement to derive a phylum name from the name of the type genus. Since Firmicutes corrig. Gibbons and Murray 1978 is also part of a 'misfitting megaclassification' recognized in Opinion 128, the name is rejected, without any pre-emption regarding a hypothetically validly published name Firmicutes at the rank of phylum. Gracilicutes Gibbons and Murray 1978 (Approved Lists 1980) and Anoxyphotobacteriae Gibbons and Murray 1978 (Approved Lists 1980) are also rejected. The validly published phylum names have a variety of advantages over their not validly published counterparts and cannot be replaced with ad hoc names suggested in the literature. To ease the transition, it is recommended to mention the not validly published phylum names which strongly deviate in spelling from their validly published counterparts along with the latter in publications during the next years.

The best of both worlds: a proposal for further integration of Candidatus names into the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes.

The naming of prokaryotes is governed by the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes (ICNP) and partially by the International Code of Nomenclature for Algae, Fungi and Plants (ICN). Such codes must be able to determine names of taxa in a universal and unambiguous manner, thus serving as a common language across different fields and activities. This unity is undermined when a new code of nomenclature emerges that overlaps in scope with an established, time-tested code and uses the same format of names but assigns different nomenclatural status values to the names. The resulting nomenclatural confusion is not beneficial to the wider scientific community. Such ambiguity is expected to result from the establishment of the 'Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes Described from DNA Sequence Data' ('SeqCode'), which is in general and specific conflict with the ICNP and the ICN. Shortcomings in the interpretation of the ICNP may have exacerbated the incompatibility between the codes. It is reiterated as to why proposals to accept sequences as nomenclatural types of species and subspecies with validly published names, now implemented in the SeqCode, have not been implemented by the International Committee on Systematics of Prokaryotes (ICSP), which oversees the ICNP. The absence of certain regulations from the ICNP for the naming of as yet uncultivated prokaryotes is an acceptable scientific argument, although it does not justify the establishment of a separate code. Moreover, the proposals rejected by the ICSP are unnecessary to adequately regulate the naming of uncultivated prokaryotes. To provide a better service to the wider scientific community, an alternative proposal to emend the ICNP is presented, which would result in Candidatus names being regulated analogously to validly published names. This proposal is fully consistent with previous ICSP decisions, preserves the essential unity of nomenclature and avoids the expected nomenclatural confusion.

TYGS and LPSN: a database tandem for fast and reliable genome-based classification and nomenclature of prokaryotes.

Microbial systematics is heavily influenced by genome-based methods and challenged by an ever increasing number of taxon names and associated sequences in public data repositories. This poses a challenge for database systems, particularly since it is obviously advantageous if such data are based on a globally recognized approach to manage names, such as the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes. The amount of data can only be handled if accurate and reliable high-throughput platforms are available that are able to both comply with this demand and to keep track of all changes in an efficient and flexible way. The List of Prokaryotic names with Standing in Nomenclature (LPSN) is an expert-curated authoritative resource for prokaryotic nomenclature and is available at https://lpsn.dsmz.de. The Type (Strain) Genome Server (TYGS) is a high-throughput platform for accurate genome-based taxonomy and is available at https://tygs.dsmz.de. We here present important updates of these two previously introduced, heavily interconnected platforms for taxonomic nomenclature and classification, including new high-level facilities providing access to bioinformatic algorithms, a considerable expansion of the database content, and new ways to easily access the data.

Proposal to include the categories kingdom and domain in the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes.

Observations made after introduction of the phylum category into the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes (ICNP) indicate that the addition of a category should usually be conducted before informal names at that rank become widely used. It is thus investigated whether it would be beneficial to add further categories. An extrapolation from the number of names validly published under the ICNP at the distinct principal categories was conducted. This extrapolation indicated that two principal ranks above phylum rank would also harbour validly published names if the according categories were covered by the ICNP. The appropriate categories would be kingdom and domain, regarded as separate principal ranks. The benefit from introducing these ranks is confirmed by analysing the previous taxonomic activity above phylum level and the nomenclatural problems associated with this activity. An etymological examination of the way names of taxa above genus level are formed under distinct codes of nomenclature provides hints for implementing additional categories. According emendations of the ICNP are proposed to include kingdom and domain as a means of further stabilizing prokaryotic nomenclature.

On requests for validation of names published in electronic material that does not provide a permanent record.

The validation of the name of a prokaryotic taxon under the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes (ICNP) is occasionally attempted although the original proposal of the name does not meet all requirements. The publication of a corrigendum is necessary in such a case but authors must ensure that the corrigendum contains the full description of the respective taxon. The modification of the original article is not compatible with the ICNP. One requirement for valid publication is that the effective publication of a taxon name constitutes a permanent record. Journals which modify articles after publication are not acceptable as a source of effective publications.

Valid publication of four additional phylum names.

The International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes (ICNP) now includes the phylum category. For the purpose of the valid publication of their names under the ICNP, we consider here four phyla. Slightly modified descriptions of 'Abditibacteriota' Tahon et al. 2018 and 'Desulfobacterota' Waite et al. 2020 are provided to meet the requirements of the ICNP for phylum names. Methanobacteriota is proposed as a substitute for 'Euryarchaeota' Garrity and Holt 2021, while Nanobdellota is proposed to replace 'Nanoarchaeota' Huber et al. 2002, based on the genus Nanobdella Kato et al. 2022.

The gender gap in names of prokaryotes honouring persons.

The aim of this study is to analyse prokaryotic names which honour persons, eponyms, from a gender perspective. Data were retrieved from the List of Prokaryotic names with Standing in Nomenclature. Excluding new combinations, the etymologies of 23 315 unique names at the rank of genus, species and subspecies were analysed. A total of 2018 (8.7 %) names honour persons (eponyms), for which the development of the female share over time was further investigated. Women started to be honoured very recently (1947) compared to men (1823). Moreover, only 14.8 % of all prokaryotic eponyms refer to females. This ratio has hardly improved since 1947, although the number of women whose contributions to microbiology could have been recognized has increased over time. In contrast, about 50 % of prokaryotic names derived from mythological characters refer to females. To reduce this gender gap, we encourage authors proposing new taxon names to honour female scientists who can serve as role models for new generations.

Guidelines for interpreting the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes and for preparing a Request for an Opinion.

In this paper the Judicial Commission provides general guidance for interpreting the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes (ICNP) and specific assistance to authors, reviewers and editors of a Request for an Opinion, or of other suggestions related to the ICNP. The role of the Judicial Commission is recapitulated, particularly with respect to the processing of such Requests. Selected kinds of nomenclature-related proposals are discussed that are unsuitable as the basis for a Request. Particular emphasis is put on Requests for placing names or epithets on the list of nomina rejicienda, and a dichotomous identification key is provided to guide potential authors of a Request that targets the name of a species or subspecies because of issues with its type strain. To this end, the criteria for the valid publication of such names under the ICNP are revisited. Aspects of other kinds of Requests are also addressed. The study is based on a comprehensive review of all Judicial Opinions issued since the publication of the Approved Lists in 1980. One goal of this paper is to assist potential authors in deciding whether their concern should be the subject of a Request, and if so, in composing it with the greatest chance of success. It is also clarified how to obtain additional help regarding nomenclature-related issues.

Judicial Opinion 128.

Judicial Opinion 128 addresses nomenclatural issues related to the names of classes validly published under the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes. It is confirmed that the common ending -proteobacteria of some class names is not indicative of a joint taxonomic or phylogenetic placement; that the nomenclatural type of Mollicutes Edward and Freundt 1967 (Approved Lists 1980) is Mycoplasmatales Freundt 1955 (Approved Lists 1980); and that the placement of a name on the list of rejected names does not imply that another name with the same spelling but a distinct rank is also placed on that list. The names at the rank of class Anoxyphotobacteria (Gibbons and Murray 1978) Murray 1988, Archaeobacteria Murray 1988, Bacteria Haeckel 1894 (Approved Lists 1980), Firmibacteria Murray 1988, Microtatobiotes Philip 1956 (Approved Lists 1980), Oxyphotobacteria (ex Gibbons and Murray 1978) Murray 1988, Photobacteria Gibbons and Murray 1978 (Approved Lists 1980), Proteobacteria Stackebrandt et al. 1988, Schizomycetes Nägeli 1857 (Approved Lists 1980), Scotobacteria Gibbons and Murray 1978 (Approved Lists 1980) are placed on the list of rejected names. For three common nominative singular suffixes of genus names their genitive singular and nominative plural forms are confirmed: -bacter (-bacteris, -bacteres); -fex (-ficis, -fices); and -genes (-genis, -genes). The class names Aquificae Reysenbach 2002, Chrysiogenetes Garrity and Holt 2002, Chthonomonadetes Lee et al. 2011, Gemmatimonadetes Zhang et al. 2003, Opitutae Choo et al. 2007 and Verrucomicrobiae Hedlund et al. 1998 are orthographically corrected to Aquificia, Chrysiogenia, Chthonomonadia, Gemmatimonadia, Opitutia and Verrucomicrobiia, respectively.

Ancestral regulatory mechanisms specify conserved midbrain circuitry in arthropods and vertebrates.

Corresponding attributes of neural development and function suggest arthropod and vertebrate brains may have an evolutionarily conserved organization. However, the underlying mechanisms have remained elusive. Here, we identify a gene regulatory and character identity network defining the deutocerebral-tritocerebral boundary (DTB) in Drosophila This network comprises genes homologous to those directing midbrain-hindbrain boundary (MHB) formation in vertebrates and their closest chordate relatives. Genetic tracing reveals that the embryonic DTB gives rise to adult midbrain circuits that in flies control auditory and vestibular information processing and motor coordination, as do MHB-derived circuits in vertebrates. DTB-specific gene expression and function are directed by cis-regulatory elements of developmental control genes that include homologs of mammalian Zinc finger of the cerebellum and Purkinje cell protein 4Drosophila DTB-specific cis-regulatory elements correspond to regulatory sequences of human ENGRAILED-2, PAX-2, and DACHSHUND-1 that direct MHB-specific expression in the embryonic mouse brain. We show that cis-regulatory elements and the gene networks they regulate direct the formation and function of midbrain circuits for balance and motor coordination in insects and mammals. Regulatory mechanisms mediating the genetic specification of cephalic neural circuits in arthropods correspond to those in chordates, thereby implying their origin before the divergence of deuterostomes and ecdysozoans.

Judicial Commission of the International Committee on Systematics of Prokaryotes: Minutes of the Meeting on 3 March 2022.

The minutes of the online meeting of the Judicial Commission of the International Committee on Systematics of Prokaryotes that was held on 3 March 2022 per video conference are presented.

Judicial Commission of the International Committee on Systematics of Prokaryotes: Minutes of the Meeting on 27 July 2022.

The minutes of the online meeting of the Judicial Commission of the International Committee on Systematics of Prokaryotes that was held on 27 July 2022 per video conference are presented.

Solving the remaining problems with names of classes. Request for an Opinion.

The legitimacy, spelling and grammatical gender of names of classes validly published under the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes (ICNP) is reviewed in the aftermath of the decision to make Rule 8 of the ICNP non-retroactive regarding the formation of such names. This ruling removed most of the nomenclatural uncertainty that affected names of classes but some issues remain to be solved. Some previously legitimate names of classes became illegitimate by this decision while others retained their illegitimacy. The Judicial Commission is asked to conduct according clarifications. It is proposed to place the names at the rank of class Anoxyphotobacteria (Gibbons and Murray 1978) Murray 1988, Archaeobacteria Murray 1988, Bacteria Haeckel 1894 (Approved Lists 1980), Firmibacteria Murray 1988, Microtatobiotes Philip 1956 (Approved Lists 1980), Oxyphotobacteria (ex Gibbons and Murray 1978) Murray 1988, Photobacteria Gibbons and Murray 1978 (Approved Lists 1980), Proteobacteria Stackebrandt et al. 1988, Schizomycetes Nägeli 1857 (Approved Lists 1980) and Scotobacteria Gibbons and Murray 1978 (Approved Lists 1980) on the list of rejected names. It is also requested to orthographically correct the names Aquificae Reysenbach 2002, Chrysiogenetes Garrity and Holt 2002, Gemmatimonadetes Zhang et al. 2003, Opitutae Choo et al. 2007 and Verrucomicrobiae Hedlund et al. 1998.

Filling the gaps: missing taxon names at the ranks of class, order and family.

The International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes (ICNP) recently underwent some major modifications regarding the higher taxonomic ranks. On the one hand, the phylum category was introduced into the ICNP, which rapidly led to the valid publication of more than forty names of phyla. On the other hand, a decision on the retroactivity of Rule 8 regarding the names of classes was made, which removed most of the nomenclatural uncertainty that had affected those names during the last decade. However, it turned out that a number of names at the ranks of class, order and family are either not validly published or are validly published but illegitimate, although these names occur in the literature and are based on the type genus of a phylum with a validly published name. A closer examination of the literature for these and similar cases indicates that the names are unavailable under the ICNP either because of minor formal errors in the original descriptions, because another name should have been adopted for the taxon when the name was proposed, because of taxonomic uncertainties that were settled in the meantime, or because the names were placed on the list of rejected names. The purpose of this article is to fill the gaps by providing the missing formal descriptions and to ensure that the resulting taxon names are attributed to the original authors who did the taxonomic work.

Status of the SeqCode in the International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology.

The recent publication of an alternative nomenclatural code that targets prokaryotes, the Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes Described from DNA Sequence Data (SeqCode), raises questions about how to treat names 'validly published' under that code in the International Journal of Systematic and Evolutionary Microbiology (IJSEM). Here, it is reiterated that the IJSEM must function in accordance with the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes (ICNP). It is also reiterated that the ICNP covers all prokaryotes and that it accordingly assigns a nomenclatural status to all names of prokaryotic taxa. This implies that the ICNP also assigns a status to names that are only 'validly published' under the SeqCode. It follows that the IJSEM must treat such names as not validly published, since 'validly published under the SeqCode' is not a nomenclatural status, under the ICNP. Such names should be marked accordingly as Candidatus names or printed in quotation marks. The same measures would need to be taken by other journals which intend to adhere to the ICNP.

Proposals to emend Rules 8, 15, 22, 25a, 30(3)(b), 30(4), 34a, and Appendix 7 of the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes.

To complete the ongoing revision of the International Code of Nomenclature of Prokaryotes, we here propose emendation of Rules 8, 15, 22, 25a, 30(3)(b), 30(4), 34a and Appendix 7. These proposed emendations deal with: the nomenclatural type of taxa above genus; the suitability of names published in supplementary material or in papers published on e-print servers for effective publication; the number of culture collection designations to be included in an effective publication of a name of a species or subspecies to qualify for validation of the name; the kinds of restrictions that may be attached to deposits of type strains; and the question whether elevation of a subspecies to the rank of species or lowering of a species to the rank of subspecies establish new combinations. Some of these emendations change the meaning of the Code while others are mere textual clarifications.

Blastococcus tunisiensis sp. nov., isolated from limestone collected in Tunisia.

A new actinobacterium strain, designated BMG 823T, was isolated from a limestone sample collected in Tunisia. Its taxonomic position was scrutinized using a polyphasic approach. Colonies of strain BMG 823T were pink orange-coloured, regular and had a moist surface. Cells are Gram-stain-positive, catalase-negative and oxidase-negative. The strain grew at pH 5.5-9, 10-40 °C and in presence of up to 4 % NaCl (w/v). Chemotaxonomically, strain BMG 823T was characterized by cell-wall type III containing meso-diaminopimelic acid as diamino acid, glucose, ribose and rhamnose as whole-cell sugars, MK-9(H4) as predominant menaquinone, and phosphatidylcholine, diphosphadidylglycerol, phosphatidethanolamine, phosphatidylcholine, phosphatidylinositol, unidentified glycolipid, unidentified aminophospholipids and unidentified glycophospholipid as major polar lipids. The fatty acid profile consisted of iso-C16 : 0 and iso-C17 : 1 ω9. Phylogenetic trees based on 16S rRNA gene and genome sequences placed strain BMG 823T within the genus Blastococcus and separated it from all type strains of validly published species. Comparison of 16S rRNA gene sequence similarity, digital DNA-DNA hybridization and average nucleotide identity indicated that strain BMG 823T was most closely related to Blastococcus litoris DSM 106127T and Blastococcus colisei BMG 822T with pairwise values well below the species differentiation thresholds. The distinct phenotypic and genotypic features of strain BMG 823T (=DSM 46838T=CECT 8881T) within the genus Blastococcus warrant its recognition as the type strain for the new species for which we propose the name Blastococcus tunisiensis sp. nov.