Restoring indigenous names in taxonomy
- PMID: 33097807
- PMCID: PMC7584613
- DOI: 10.1038/s42003-020-01344-y
Restoring indigenous names in taxonomy
Abstract
Some pillars of scientific practice appear immutable. We propose that one of these needs more thorough consideration and modification: this being the long-standing emphasis in nomenclature for first published names over pre-existing indigenous names, in accepting species epithets. We suggest that biologists re-evaluate this practice, in the context of a current more general re-evaluation of indigenous knowledge. We propose that it is now time to critically examine taxonomic protocols in favour of both assigning and reinstating indigenous names whenever possible.
Conflict of interest statement
The authors declare no competing interests.
References
-
- Lyver POB, et al. Key biocultural values to guide restoration action and planning in New Zealand. Restor. Ecol. 2016;24:314–323. doi: 10.1111/rec.12318. - DOI
-
- Veale AJ, et al. Using te reo Māori and ta re Moriori in taxonomy. N.Z. J. Ecol. 2019;43:1–11.
-
- Turland, N. et al. International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (Shenzhen Code) adopted by the Nineteenth International Botanical Congress Shenzhen, China, July 2017. (Koeltz Botanical Books, 2018).
MeSH terms
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
