J. Eukuiyot. MfcrobiL, 48(3), May-June pp. 393-3Y4 0 May-June hy the Society of Pnitozoologisrs

BOOK REVIEW

Aescht, Ema. 2001. Catalogue of the Generic Names of Ciii- ares (Protozou, Ciljophora). Denisia, vol. 1, p. 1-350. Biolo- giezentrum des 00. Landesmuseums, A-4040, Linz, Austria. ISSN 1608-8700. Price: 760 ATS (Austrian shillings) or 55.23 EURO (ca. 50 U.S. dollars), excluding postage. [Copies may be purchased via e-mail: bio-buch@landesmuseum-1inz.ac.at or via the website: www.biologiezentrum.at (Visa and Master cards accepted).]

Austrian colleague Ema Aescht has produced a remarkably complete and accurate nomenclatural catalogue, an annotated dictionary of all generic names of recent and fossil ciliated Pro- tozoa appearing in the literature during the past 250 years, a labor representing a critical review and evaluation of more than 2,700 proposed or implicated names of cilioprotists. Over 1,500 relevant references, also annotated, comprise the selective bib- liography, a veritable trove of publications, old and recent, in- dispensable to ciliate taxonomists and other biologists beset with concern over proper names to assign to the ciliates in- volved in their own research, be it ecological or experimental in nature. The painstaking monograph will ever stand as a trib- ute to the great love and devotion that Ema obviously has for these ‘‘wee beasties,” protistan infusorians long known simply as “the ciliates.”

So that the reader of this review-and purchaser of the vol- ume-will not be misled, two points should immediately be made clear as to what this unique catalogue is NOT. It is NOT a taxonomic monograph (although obviously taxonomy is af- fected by nomenclatural decisions) and it is NOT directly con- cerned with the systematic categories or ranks at levels above and below the generic level (although, again, type-species have to be involved; and some genera themselves also serve as types of the families containing them). Ciliate orders, classes, sub- phyla, etc., are thus, quite understandably and quite rightly, not even mentioned. And species are not switched around, whether or not such taxonomic action might be desirable in the future, amongst the genera whose names (only!) form the principal subject of this detailed nomenclatural work. Yet Erna Aescht’s monumental critical compilation, so conscientiously assembled over a period of years, is an indispensable handmaiden to both such activities (suprageneric classifications and taxonomic re- visions).

The volume is essentially divided into four major sections, described very briefly in the remainder of this book review. But, preceding those, we find some 15 pages given to a succinct history of naming ciliates and to the rationale for the catalogue and the format used-important information! Everything is me- ticulously explained so that no misunderstandings need arise in using material on later pages. The fact that original (as well as relevant subsequent) sources of taxonomic-nomenclatural lit- erature have been exhaustively examined-combined with Aescht’s comprehension of the rules comprising the most recent edition of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature- can reassure the readerher that her conclusions may be taken as authoritative. Indeed, one of the principal reasons for mis- takes and inaccuracies in the naming of organisms throughout the long history of zoological (and botanical) taxonomy is (along with widespread disregard for provisions of the ’ICZN and ICBN) the ignorance or carelessness of authors with respect to the pertinent past literature, resulting in perpetrating or per- petuating errors on a grand scale. Nomenclatural stability has suffered. A number of us have long bemoaned this situation, but Aescht is the first to seize the bull by the horns and DO

something about it-for ALL the ciliates-in a most substantial and detailed way.

Nearly half of the book (160 pp.), Aescht’s Chapter 2, is devoted to the annotated listing of all ciliate generic names, from the Abathostoma of the late Jacques Berger’s 1964 doc- toral dissertation to the Zosterograptus in the abstract of 1980 by Fryd-Versavel, Iftode, and Deroux. Although the alphabet- ized entries are succinct, only occasionally are they reducible to 2 4 lines of print; in some instances, 15-20 lines may be necessary to embrace such basic data as the currently correct authorship and date of the name, its orthography, gender, proper type-species, synonyms, and sometimes homonyms, etc., all with pertinent references to its nomenclatural-taxonomic his- tory, including careful citation of original and appropriate later papers. A concluding statement (commentary or advice or men- tion of a relevant decision by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature) is given for clarity in complicated cases. Perhaps the most important names for the general pro- tozoologist are those of the nomenclaturally available and tax- onomically valid genera; these are given in boldface italics, making them stand out clearly. There are 1,443 generic names so listed. If your own favorite one is in plain italics or ordinary Roman type, beware: it is invalid in some way (as explained in place) and should no longer be employed as a “good” name for the genus of ciliates involved.

The second main section of the treatise, although only 17 pages in length, is devoted to a very brief but invaluable treat- ment of the rules of the latest (year 1999) International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, provisions in force as of I January 2000. Space does not allow discussion here of that vast subject nor of Aescht’s explanations of her application of the new rules to the names of ciliates. In general, I am in full accord with Aescht’s views; and I must say that her consistency of action is commendable, even if in a few cases I might take exception to her occasional seemingly almost over-strict approach to so- lution of a specific problem (such as the correct authorship of a name). But it may be that I am in disagreement with several restrictions of the revised Code itself, a matter well beyond the scope of this review and, at any rate, certainly not Erna’s fault!

In this second section, we also find a number of additional interesting facts about ciliate genera and their nomenclature. For example, there seems to be no let up in describing new ones, validly named (>250 in the past 30 years alone). The gender of 65% of the names is feminine. Most (58%) ciliates are found free-living in marine or freshwater habitats, while 29% are symbiotic forms, 7% possibly endemic in soils, and 6% known only as fossils. The most popular genera (judged by frequency of appearance of their names in the literature, cal- culated from numbers of citations found in the Zoological Re- cord since 1978) are, by far (and not unexpectedly), Purume- cium and Tetrahymenu, followed by Euplotes, Stylonychia, Ich- thyophthirius (a surprise?), Colpodu, Vorricella, and Dileptus. The most prolific generic name-bestowers to date have been Foissner (all since 1975, and still going strong!), Jankowski, Kahl, Corliss, Chatton, and now-by actions taken in this trea- tise-Aescht herself, with Faurk-Fremiet, de Puytorac, Raabe, Dujardin, and Stokes next. Biggest namers of new species may be the same or quite different: for example, during the past half- century, one would have to add such workers as Dragesco, Ko- zloff, Raikov, Deroux, Borror, Vuxanovici, Agamaliev, Bur- kovsky, Small, Albaret, Batisse, Lom, Njink, Lynn, FernBndez- Leborans, Banina, Hemberger, Affa’a, Alekperov, AL-Rasheid, Song, and still others. Favorite specific epithets of ciliate type-

393

394 J. EUKARYOT. MICROBIOL., VOL. 48, NO. 3, 2001 May-June

species (and of other species as well), incidentally, are terri- cola, intestinalis, marina, pelagica, vornr, gracilis, viridis, ac- uminata, and elegans. Recall that specific epithets, as long as they are of organisms assigned to different genera, can be iden- tical. Interestingly enough, 67% of the ciliate genera erected to date have been monotypic (i.e. containing but a single species).

The third principal section of the Catalogue, the annotated bibliography (author’s Chapter 4) covers 78 pages, including two of introductory comments. The value of these 1,531 care- fully checked references has been referred to at the beginning of this review. Citations are primarily devoted to works specif- ically related to names of genera, especially their origins, as would be expected. A count reveals that some 30% of the pa- pers were published in the period 1979-2000, including de- scriptions of several hundred new genera and even more new species, giving an indication of a great amount of activity in this area of ciliate research during the past two decades.

The last section-five appendices, each very helpful in its own right-occupies the final 79 pages of the monograph. Ap- pendix 1 (34 pp.) is a table of the names of the valid type- species of all the “good” genera, including correct authorships (with dates) and, among other comments, the gender of the genera, the judged quality of the descriptions, and the general habitat of the type-species: all most useful data! Appendix 2 lists the few subgeneric names (found mostly among tintinnids and two or three parasitic ciliates) in optional current usage. Appendix 3 cites the (rare!) cases of ciliate names that have been treated by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, including the results of that body’s decisions.

Appendix 4 is a 26-page Index of Generic Names. Although

to a large extent this obviously overlaps with the huge section of Chapter 2 (see above), it supplies page references to all oc- currences of a given name throughout the Catalogue-places where it may have been involved in synonymies, for example, and its location in the important records given on type-species (Appendix 1). Again, different type faces are used to indicate the status of given names. Finally, Appendix 5 is a 16-page Index of Specific Names (i.e. the second part of the name of a species-what I prefer calling the specific epithet, following botanical practice). Running from ahbrevescens to zyrpeae, some entries require two or three--even four-lines of page numbers, showing the popularity of certain descriptive names throughout scores of years (see comments above on the per- mitted multiple usage of identical specific epithets).

A brief word about the journal in which this Catalogue ap- pears: Denisia is a new Austrian journal, launched in February 2001 to provide a second outlet for the monographic publica- tions of the Biology Center of the Upper Austrian Museum. Stapjia, now in its 75th volume, known to many protomologists in recent years through publications of Wilhelin Foissner and the appearance, in 1998, of a 506-page set of papers (edited by Erna Aescht) on the life and works of Ernst Haeckel, celebrated biologist, and protistologist, of the latter half of the 19th cen- tury, will henceforth be reserved for botanical monographs. The new periodical, specifically for zoological works, has been named after Michael Denis, a well-known Austrian amateur lepidopterist as well as a distinguished librarian, poet, and bib- liographer who died exactly 200 years ago.-JOHN 0. CORLISS, P.O. Box 2729, Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004, USA. E-mail: jocchezmoi @ aol.com

ERRATUM Eric W. Linton and Richard E. Triemer (J. Eukuryot. MicrobioZ., 48(1), 2001, pp. 88-94, “Reconstruction of the Flagellar

Apparatus in Ploeotiu costutu (Euglenozoa) and its Relationship to Other Euglenoid Flagellar Apparatuses”) refer the reader to the following website: http://lifsci.rutgers.edu/-triemer/plates.htm to view Fig. 1-10 as they were not satisfied with the quality of the printed version of these figures.