WHAT SHOULD WE CALL THE FORAMINIFERA
Shelled granuloreticulose microorganisms have had a complex etymological history that began in 1826 when d'Orbigny gave his new order the name Foraminiferes and characterized the group. Soon afterwards, further examina- tion and proper Latinization established them as class Foraminifera. D'Orbigny should be credited with the suprafamilial group name, regardless of rank, because he provided defining characteristics, and also because higher taxa are not governed by ICZN rules; in addition, we should consider the history of its attribution and what is traditional and customary in zoological nomenclature. The name Foraminifera is the source of a variety of informal terms, including foraminifera, foraminifer, foraminiferan, and for- am. Long after being demoted to order, the Latinized name was modified to Foraminiferida in 1964 by Loeblich and Tappan, the informal foraminiferid was introduced later. Here, we briefly examine these terms as sets of singular and plural nouns, and their derived adjectives and nouns that begin with foram-. Authors can choose any of the derived terms, but they should be consistent by using only one term-set throughout their paper. Other nouns derived from forami- nifer-, such as foraminiferologist for a student of the group, are not usually part of a term-set. The informal term foram is a valid derivation and it is the most common of the names used in conversation among earth scientists and biologists. It is already accepted in major dictionaries and literature, and it has been used in specific word pairs found in scientific publications. In addition, foram eases communication by its multilingual applicability; it is also the easiest of the terms to pronounce, write, and read. For all these reasons, its use may increase in scientific literature.
On the composition of pollucite and its occurrence at Hebron, Me
IT is a matter of great satisfaction to announce the discovery ·of pollucite in a new locality. This very interesting mineral has heretofore been found only on the Island of Elba and even there in very small quantities, so that it may be called a mineralogical rarity. Its composition, in being the only known mineral in which caesium is an essential constituent, adds greatly to its interest. Before describing the American material, some account of the history of the mineral may be given. In 1846, Breithaupt described* two minerals from Elba, which he called Castor and Pollux fl"Om their great similarity in appearance. He distinguished them easily however by their difference in specific gravity. Oastor is now considered to be identical with petalite, and it is a fact worthy of mention that the latter mineral is found at Peru, Maine, only a few miles from the new pollucite locality, a fact which points, perhaps, to a new association of " Castor and Pollux." -!3l'eithaupt's material was analyzed by Plattner,t but at that tune caesIUm had not been discovered, so that he naturally mistook it for potassium. His results were as follows ':
Le « créationnisme » d'Alcide d'Orbigny et les fondements de la théorie biostratigraphiqueThe 'creationism' of Alcide d'Orbigny and the basis of the biostratigraphical theory.
Abstract D’Orbigny was more interested in the discontinuities of life history than in the origin of species. He looked for reference points to correlate geological strata and to reconstruct their history. This allowed him to formalise the concept of stratigraphic stage and to propose the first geological time scale. Therefore, one of the results was that he was unjustly considered as one of the leaders of the creationism school, because he used the ambiguous term ‘creation’ to designate the renewal of fauna after catastrophic events, but without providing a definition and with a meaning that was probably different from those of his successors.