How to campaign against the Llanfairpwll Myxococcus' name

This topic is in danger of becoming an example of the Streisand effect. The suggested campaign to invalidate the name may draw so much extra attention that it does more to increase the name’s notoriety than the “publicity stunt” which allegedly inspired it.

1 Like

What a fun topic! I’m in the grey zone with regards to the argument itself, but I appreciate that this has been a throught-provoking learning experience, as well as a really fun (and funny!) read. :rofl: Great contributions all around!

1 Like

Couple days back, but just wanted to thank you for sharing this very amusing piece of literature. I like how Meyrick also took issue with the usage of n. sp. in literature, as it implies the “new” species was actually created by the describing author - perhaps in some kind of Frankenstein-esque laboratory.

2 Likes

Exactly. From what I can recall, even the road signs mostly point to Llanfair PG. So the bacterium could be Myxococcus llanfair­pgensis, I guess.

4 Likes

If people like the name, nothing changes, so it can’t backfire on me.

Your topic is how to campaign against the name and have it declared invalid. But drawing attention to it in this way may have made that prospect harder to achieve, since it now has more public support that it might otherwise have had. I suppose this at least supports the common adage that there’s no such thing as bad publicity.

Having said that, I do agree that the choice of name is somewhat dubious. If the authors of the paper wanted to honour the locality where the species was first found, they could easily have chosen one of its common abbreviations. I am not a Welsh speaker, but I find Myxococcus llanfair­pwllensis and even Myxococcus llanfair­pwll­gwyn­gyll­ensis reasonably easy to pronounce and remember.

But that’s boring!

1 Like

Might I suggest a slight alteration to M. llan? With proper Welsh pronunciation, too. Sit back with your popcorn and watch all of the Saeson trying to get their tongues around the double L without sounding like they’re about to cough up a trichobezoar
.
:blush: Sorry, my Morgan ancestry is showing. Lemme just tuck that back in…

2 Likes

I wish people still wrote like this. It is a treat to read. He makes a compelling case for meaningful names and I’m inclined to agree. To that end, why does it make sense to name organisms after people, unless perhaps they share qualities of that person. How many specific epithets of hookeri and wrightii do we need? Should we change them all so they make sense? The idealist in me likes the idea, but the pragmatist knows this is a waste of human efforts. We should take on something simpler like bringing about world peace.

5 Likes

Absolutely. All those who think that the monster name should stay MUST be able to pronounce the place name correctly, like a Welsh native speaker would.
Good luck trying… :rofl:

1 Like

It really is! The Doctor and I have both read commentary letters from journals of the period. People back then know how to conduct a flame war in style. (“Once again, my learned colleague demonstrates the pitfalls of using the cranium and its contents primarily for the display of fashionable hats.”)

We’ve debated whether it’s the result of more widespread familiarity with classic literature and rhetorical techniques, or if it’s just that publication at the speed of paper gave you a real incentive to refine your burn. :laughing:

Well, of course. You wouldn’t want to be mistaken for a Saeson (Welsh version of Sassenach) after all. I’ll admit, the Rh gives me trouble.

Here’s a delightfully written guide for basic Welsh pronunciation. (“How to pronounce Welsh vowels: You know what? You really don’t want to know this.”)

If I said something like this to a native Welsh speaker:

“Hlan-vair puch gwin gill, goggerish vindro boch, hlanty silly-oh, go-go goch

I think they’d know what I meant. It’s like using a foreign language phrase-book to ask for directions. They might smile a little at my accent, but they’d still be able to help me. All languages have a lot of redundancy built into them, so exact pronunciation isn’t vital. This is why there are no rules for the pronunciation of scientific names. The written form is all that really matters.

3 Likes

Dunno if Mark Issacs is still updating it but there’s a list of strange names here:
Curiosities of Biological Nomenclature
https://www.curioustaxonomy.net/
Plenty more abuses to get worked up about!! :)
(Including an entomolgist who named all his insects after his female conquests in graphic Greek!)

2 Likes

So what does Llantysilio mean?

Good point; I don’t know.

Educated guess: IF the first bit Llanfair means holy/saint Mary('s church), THEN Llantysilio must mean St Tysilio('s church).
Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Tysilio’s_Church,_Llantysilio

2 Likes

I will wait until Englishmen start to use some at least half-decent Latin pronunciation for the omnipresent names. Does not matter if the ecclesiastical Latin pronunciation or the reconstructed Latin pronunciation or of some reasonable regional one, but at least half-decent.

1 Like

Latin names pronounced by English speakers are more often than not unintelligible to me.

I have learned three different pronunciations for Latin, but forcing English pronunciation rules on Latin vowels is in my eyes unjustifiable.

I had an interesting experience as an English speaker when I was in Quebec which is French-speaking. I was at a board boardwalk and met a teacher with some students. She spoke little English and me no French but we discovered we were able to communicate using Latin plant names! But she pronounced them in the French way and I in the English way since that’s how I learned or read them. The French way sounded way better and probably is closer to real latin since French is more closely related to Latin (i think?) But it was a neat exchange. I guess the latin names work sometimes, luckily she wasn’t a revisionist with a bunch of new names i don’t know

2 Likes

Some of you may be happy to learn that at the 20th International Botanical Congress in Madrid this past July, the following change to the Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants was proposed and accepted:

The epithet in the name of a species published on or after 1 January 2026 must consist of at least two, but no more than 30 characters.

Tick tock…

6 Likes