How come animals can be identified as dictators?

How do animals earn the title of dictators?

Roads are being renamed, statues are being ripped down, and certain names in books are being rewritten. A discussion has also emerged in the realm of zoology: Should animals like the Hitler beetle or the Mussolini butterfly be given new names?

This five-millimeter-long creature, which hides away in caves, is making quite a stir. But it's not because of its size - it's because of its scientific name: Anophthalmus hitleri. The beetle, which has no eyes, was named after Adolf Hitler and is highly sought-after by certain collectors for its name. A similar situation exists at the Natural History Museum in Berlin, with a dinosaur: Dysalotosaurus lettowvorbecki, named after Paul von Lettow-Vorbeck, who committed atrocities in Africa as the head of the German colonial army.

There are numerous examples like these, most of which are animals that were scientifically described long ago. However, they are being evaluated in the light of current events like the renaming of streets, the removal of monuments, and the critical examination of language in general. Controversial animal names are also being discussed in the scientific community. But don't expect any changes anytime soon. Here's what you need to know about animal names:

How are animals given scientific names?

Every year, thousands of new animal species are discovered across the globe. The international rules of zoological nomenclature dictate how taxonomists should proceed. According to Professor Michael Ohl of the Museum für Naturkunde in Berlin, the nomenclature doesn't dictate the content. Researchers are free to choose names as long as they are technically accurate. "These names become official as soon as they are published and cannot be undone."

There's a long-standing tradition of naming newly discovered animal species after people - to please a generous donor, to honor family or friends, or to capture attention by using famous namesakes. For example, a species of millipede is named after pop star Taylor Swift, beetles are named after actor Leonardo DiCaprio, and a species of moth is named after former US President Donald Trump.

Which names are problematic?

The example of the Hitler beetle and a moth named after the Italian dictator Benito Mussolini highlights the issue of naming things after people. What if a politician shifts towards extremist views or a movie star faces trial for sexual assault? Some scientists argue that species names can also be discriminatory or racist.

Paleobiologist Emma Dunne from the University of Erlangen-Nuremberg, along with other experts, has examined the names of all known (about 1500) dinosaurs. She doesn't want to reveal the results of the study before its publication. As mentioned in a report in the scientific journal "Nature", the team found that many of the fossils discovered in Tanzania between 1908 and 1920 were named after German researchers instead of local expedition members or those who gave the names based on colonial place names. Most of the names with a gender-specific ending were also male.

How significant is the issue?

Approximately 20% of animal names are eponyms, which means they're meant to honor individuals. This is the largest group of names that could potentially cause offense, according to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, the body that owns the naming rules. Toponyms, or place names, make up about 10% of names and could also be seen as offensive. "Several hundred thousand accepted scientific names could therefore be called into question," the Commission states.

In the case of dinosaur names, the researchers found that less than 3% were considered problematic. In terms of numbers, this issue is relatively insignificant, explains co-author Evangelos Vlachos from the Paleontological Museum in Trelew, Argentina, in the "Nature" report. However, it's of great importance: We need to critically evaluate past practices and make corrections where necessary.

What does the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature think?

The Commission has no plans to rename animals due to ethical concerns. "We understand, of course, that some names may cause discomfort or offense," says taxonomist Daniel Whitmore of the State Museum of Natural History in Stuttgart, who is a member of the commission. "My priority, however, is a universal and stable nomenclature to avoid confusion." He adds, "It's not our job to judge if names are offensive or ethically unacceptable because that's a very subjective and personal matter." The Commission acknowledges that it's impossible to please everyone, so deciding which names to change would be difficult.

Berlin zoologist Ohl can understand that it's currently not feasible to rename animal species under the nomenclature rules. "The Commission doesn't want to go there without further ado because it's afraid of opening a Pandora's box," he explains. But the Commission must face this issue and develop criteria on how to best address ethically questionable names. "There's pressure from society and the scientific community," he says.

Is the debate influenced by Western countries?

A taxonomist from Sri Lanka, Rohan Pethiyagoda, believes that if animal species were to be renamed, it would divert researchers from their main task of describing the Earth's biodiversity. Instead, they would need to tackle irrelevant issues, he states in the journal "Megataxa." Pethiyagoda doesn't see the point in altering scientific names since most species already have common names, with scientific ones being mainly employed by specialists.

Whitmore agrees that this issue may not be a pressing concern for the general public. To change a scientific name, an application can be filed with the Commission, which then reviews it over a prolonged decision-making process involving the scientific community. Namely, they authorize name alterations in cases of technical inaccuracies, as illustrated by Whitmore. Nonetheless, no one has requested a name change for moral purposes, not even for the Hitler beetle.

Is there a possible alternative?

"Renaming the Hitler beetle wouldn't significantly impact the situation," claims Ohl. The beetle would not be erased from existence; it would still have several scientific names, making it available for those seeking it for its name.

One approach to considering controversial animal names could be to discuss their histories in museums, fostering contemplation. The Berlin Natural History Museum has already adopted this method with Dysalotosaurus lettowvorbecki. The museum's exhibit features a disclaimer: "Unfortunately, the rigorous regulations of taxonomy obstruct any subsequent amendments to species names once they have been designated."

Read also:

In the field of linguistics, discussions have emerged about renaming animals like the Hitler beetle or the Mussolini butterfly due to their controversial names, echoing the current trend of reevaluating historical figures and symbols. Adolf Hitler, as a notorious dictator, has already influenced the naming of various animal species, such as the Anophthalmus hitleri.

The topic of animal naming within the scientific community is not just limited to zoology. For instance, in the realm of paleontology, researchers are assessing the historical implications and potential problematic nature of species names, such as the dinosaur Dysalotosaurus lettowvorbecki. The naming tradition in zoology has a long history, with animals often being named after influential figures or as a form of recognition. However, the question arises on whether this practice should be reconsidered in light of changing societal norms and sensitivities.

Source: www.ntv.de