https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4304-767X
-
Views
-
Cite
Cite
Zhu-Qing He, Let scientific names and indigenous names carry out their respective duties, Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society, Volume 203, Issue 3, March 2025, zlae063, https://doi.org/10.1093/zoolinnean/zlae063
Close - Share Icon Share
Extract
I am a taxonomist from China specializing in the study of crickets and katydids. Recently, there has been a growing perspective that some scientific names are offensive (including eponyms of racists, colonialists, imperialists, and war criminals) and that they should be replaced (Hammer and Thiele 2021, Smith and Figueiredo 2021a, b). My stance on this matter is that there is no need to replace scientific names. The following are my personal opinions, and they do not represent the views of my race, culture, country, institution, or family.
Here, I present an example of names that may be considered offensive to the Chinese. Manchuria has historically been recognized as a region in north-east China. Manchukuo (1932–45) was a former puppet state created in 1932 by Imperial Japan. Although Manchuria was a region and Manchukuo was a state, the general use of names with prefixes such as ‘manch-’, ‘mands-’, or ‘mantch-’ tends to make the Chinese uncomfortable. The first piece of evidence is: the Chinese indigenous names for all plants or fungi with the species name ‘manch-’, ‘mands-’, or ‘mantch-’ typically commence with ‘north-east’ or a similar term, never with ‘Manchuria’. Most animals share a similar nomenclature. The second piece of evidence is: some Chinese taxonomists have suggested replacing the names ‘manchukuo’ of some insects (Chou et al. 1983). Although the name with prefixes such as ‘manch-’, ‘mands-’, or ‘mantch-’ may refer to Manchuria instead of Manchukuo, all of them evoke memories of unpleasant history. Nevertheless, I personally disagree with changing these scientific names, even Manchukuo. When these are used as species’ names, they lose their original meaning and become a functional mechanism for scientists to discuss the species. Moreover, these names include a wide range of creatures: two genera and multiple species of animals (e.g. invertebrates, fishes, amphibians, birds, and mammals), diatoms, fungi, and plants (Tables 1, 2, data from GBIF.org GBIF.org (2024)). I believe renaming taxa threatens nomenclatural stability and scientific communication, as explained by Ceríaco et al. 2023.
