Search USGS⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search USGS

Results for “Names”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 37 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
USGS1956

Geographic names of Antarctica

The geographic nomenclature of Antarctica was long in need of an overall systematic treatment, objective in approach and based upon thorough examination of all the evidence. The results of such treatment over a period of about three years were presented in Geographical Names of Antarctica, Special Publication No. 86 of the Board on Geographical Names, in May 1947, two supplements to which were issued in 1949 and 1951. The continuing program since that publication has now covered most of the geographic naming in Antarctica. As research has filled in many of the previous gaps in knowledge, a number of names have been modified and minor amendments have been made in the policies. This revised publication brings together the greatly enlarged body of names officially standardized for use by the United States Government, together with new pertinent background information.

Gazetteer↗
USGS2016

Possibility and challenges of conversion of current virus species names to Linnaean binomials

Botanical, mycological, zoological, and prokaryotic species names follow the Linnaean format, consisting of an italicized Latinized binomen with a capitalized genus name and a lower case species epithet (e.g., Homo sapiens ). Virus species names, however, do not follow a uniform format, and, even when binomial, are not Linnaean in style. In this thought exercise, we attempted to convert all currently official names of species included in the virus family Arenaviridae and the virus order Mononegavirales to Linnaean binomials, and to identify and address associated challenges and concerns. Surprisingly, this endeavor was not as complicated or time-consuming as even the authors of this article expected when conceiving the experiment.

Systematic Biology↗
USGS1998

History and tradition, or contemporary ornithology? Why ornithological journals should not have bird names

Ask any non-ornithologist to predict the prestige of the following journals, based on the name alone: American Birds, Auk, Bluebird, Condor, Emu, Forktail, Gerfaut, Ibis, Journal of Avian Biology, and Journal of Field Ornithology . The results always will be that the first one and the last two are placed in one category, and the blizzard of bird-named journals in another, lower category. When that same non-ornithologist is called upon to evaluate the publication records of ornithologists, those with important papers in bird-named journals likely will suffer lower rankings. If lucky, an ornithologist under review will receive support from an internationally distinguished ornithological colleague who will take explicit pains to argue that publication in The Auk is a meritorious professional accomplishment. Such arguments, however, may not counteract the damage of a single referee's sneering at the names of the journals in which a bird biologist has chosen to publish. One cannot overstate the importance of the serendipitous collection of peer reviews that determines whether ornithologists get and then keep their first academic jobs, receive tenure, are promoted, are evaluated fairly, and, most important, achieve and maintain the respect of colleagues in other biological disciplines.

The Auk↗
USGS1993

The U.S. Board on Geographic Names publications catalog

This catalog highlights the various publications produced by the BGN and summarizes their contents. Some of these publications are free; others are reasonably priced. All publications and their prices are on a separate price list included with this catalog. This price list will be updated as needed to reflect new and revised editions, as well as changes in prices. For further information about the BGN or on geographic names in the United States or Antarctica, please refer to page 12 for the address and phone number of the BGN Executive Secretary for Domestic Names. For further information on geographic names in foreign countries and areas, please refer to page 12 for the address and phone number of the BGN Executive Secretary for Foreign Names.

Monograph↗
USGS1989

Authorities and organizations involved with geographic names - 1989: United States, Canada, Mexico

There is a need for accurate and standard geographic names usage in all levels of government, industry, commerce, communications, education, and research. There is also a growing number of organizations in North America that are, fully or partly, involved in the scholarly study of geographic names. This report is a list of official national, State/Provincial, and regional provincial authorities concerned with name standardization, and of organizations involved with the study of geographic names, in the United States, Canada, and Mexico. The appendixes are copies of documents that provide additional information about the organization, policies, procedures, and publications of some of these organizations.

Report↗
USGS1995

Comments on the status of revived old names for some North American birds

We discuss 44 instances of the use of generic, specific, or subspecific names that differ from those generally in use for North American (sensu AOU 1957) birds. These names are generally older than the names presently used and have been revived on the basis of priority. We examine the basis for the proposed changes and make recommendations as to which names should properly be used in an effort to promote nomenclatural stability in accordance with the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature.

The Auk↗
USGS2015

A further note on the scientific name of Bullocks’ Oriole

Chesser (2013) intended to introduce a justified emendation to Icterus bullockii under Article 32.5.1 of the Code (ICZN 1999), because the name honors both William Bullock, Sr., and William Bullock, Jr. However, the correction bullockorum is "incorrect" and therefore is an unjustified emendation (Article 33.2.3). Under the assumption that the name Bullock was latinized (cf. Article 31.1.1) to Bullockius (bullocki– + the nominative case ending –us) and therefore that the name bullockii comprises the stem bullocki– + the genitive case ending –i, the justified correction bullockiorum is required.

Zootaxa↗
USGS2014

The valid generic name for red-backed voles (Muroidea: Cricetidae: Arvicolinae): Restatement of the case for Myodes Pallas, 1811

In view of contradictions in the recent literature, the valid genus-group name to be applied to northern red-backed voles— Myodes Pallas, 1811, or Clethrionomys Tilesius, 1850—is reviewed. To develop the thesis that Myodes (type species, Mus rutilus Pallas, 1779) is the correct name, our discussion explores the 19th-century taxonomic works that bear on the relevant taxa, the transition in zoological codes apropos the identification of type species, and past nomenclatural habits in cases where no type species was originally indicated. We conclude that Myodes is the senior name to use for the genus-group taxon that includes the Holarctic species rutilus and frame this conclusion within a synonymy of the genus.

Journal of Mammalogy↗
USGS1996

The proper name of the neotropical tree boa often referred to as Corallus enhydris (Serpentes: Boidae)

Confusion regarding the application of the proper scientific name for the common Neotropical tree boa has existed since Linnaeus described Boa enydris and Boa hortulana in 1758. We review the nomenclatural history of the species and point out the misapplication of scientific names that have characterized this form. Our review indicates that the proper scientific name for this highly variable, wide-ranging arboreal boid is Corallus hortulanus, not Corallus enydris, as has been used so frequently in recent years.

Journal of Herpetology↗
USGS1984

Geographic Names Information System

The Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) is an automated data system developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) to standardize and disseminate information on geographic names. GNIS provides primary information for all known places, features, and areas in the United States identified by a proper name. The information in the system can be manipulated to meet varied needs. You can incorporate information from GNIS into your own data base for special applications.

Report↗
USGS1987

Geographic names information system

This Data Users Guide is the result of the efforts of a number of people who have contributed to the research, development, and implementation of the Geographic Names Information System (GNIS). Roger L. Payne prepared and wrote this Data Users Guide, which is designed to provide a description of the data in each of the data elements of the four data bases of GNIS. The GNIS program, which includes the automated names system and the National Gazetteer program, is a coordinated effort under the direction of Donald J. Orth, Chief of the Branch of Geographic Names. The automated system was initially developed by Sam Stulberg and Roger L. Payne. System enhancement and software development is coordinated by Judy J. Stella, head programmer for GNIS, and special projects coordinator is Louis A. Yost IV. Coordination of the research and compilation of certain gazetteers is directed by Robin D. Worcester with research assistance and support from Jon Campbell, Linda S. Davis, and Nancy Engel.

Data Users Guide↗
USGS2009

Response to the Point of View of Gregory B. Pauly, David M. Hillis, and David C. Cannatella, by the Anuran Subcommittee of the SSAR/HL/ASIH Scientific and Standard English Names List

The Point of View by Gregory Pauly, David Hillis, and David Cannatella misrepresents the motives and activities of the anuran subcommittee of the Scientific and Standard English Names Committee, contains a number of misleading statements, omits evidence and references to critical literature that have already rejected or superseded their positions, and cloaks the limitations of their nomenclatural approach in ambiguous language. Their Point of View is not about promoting transparency in the process of constructing the English Names list, assuring that its taxonomy is adequately reviewed, or promoting nomenclatural stability in any global sense. Rather, their Point of View focuses in large part on a single publication, The Amphibian Tree of Life , which is formally unrelated to the Standard English Names List , and promotes an approach to nomenclature mistakenly asserted by them to be compatible with both the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature and one of its competitors, the PhyloCode .

Herpetologica↗
USGS2015

Comment on Spracklandus Hoser, 2009 (Reptilia, Serpentes, ELAPIDAE): request for confirmation of availability of the generic name and for the nomenclatural validation of the journal in which it was published (Case 3601; BZN 70:234–237; 71:30–38; 133-135,181-182 ,252-253)

In Case 3601 Raymond Hoser has asked the Commission to validate for the purposes of nomenclature the name Spracklandus Hoser, 2009, and ‘the journal in which it was published,’ issue 7 of the Australasian Journal of Herpetology (AJH). We note that the entire run of AJH has been written, edited, and published solely by Hoser. Although his requests to the Commission were presented as narrow and, in his words, ‘routine matters,’ we are convinced that they represent an important tipping-point with broad implications of major concern for zoological taxonomy and nomenclature as a whole and, by extension, the greater scientific community. Since Hoser’s actions and works have failed to follow scientific best practices (e.g. Turtle Taxonomy Working Group, 2007, 2014; Kaiser et al., 2013; Kaiser, 2014) and both the Commission’s general Recommendations and Code of Ethics in Appendix A, the global herpetological community has widely rejected his taxonomic decisions and resultant nomenclature. This has unfortunately caused a confusing dual nomenclature to develop in the herpetological community, with most boycotting or ignoring Hoser’s 700+ new names coined in the AJH, while he and a few personal followers actively promote their usage. We believe that suppression of the name Spracklandus , and all issues of AJH, is the only effective way to bring this contentious and confusing issue to resolution. The plenary power available under Article 81.1 of the Code exist specifically to allow the Commission to make rulings in individual cases that disturb stability and cause confusion, whether the works are Code-compliant or not. We maintain that it is in the interest of nomenclatural stability, not only for herpetology, but for all of zoological taxonomy, that the plenary power be invoked to declare the works in AJH unavailable, regardless of any narrow interpretation of their technical Code-compliance. We present our arguments for rejection of the validity of AJH in the following commentary. In view of the wide-reaching implications of this case for all of zoology, and reflecting the deep and broad-based community concern over these issues, our contributing authors include 70 global scientific leaders and accomplished amateurs from a wide variety of zoological disciplines.

Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature↗
USGS1970

Pedro, Livengood, and Tanana: A study of place-names near Fairbanks, Alaska

In t he early hours of March 30, 1867, Secretary of State William H. Seward completed the purchase of the remote and unexplored land known as Russian America, or Alaska. Discovered in 1741 by Vitus Bering, Alaska progressed from a Czarist colony to a territory of the United States, and finally, to its present status as the largest of the 50 States. As part of the commemoration of the centennial of Alaska's purchase, the U.S. Geological Survey published the Dictionary of Alaska Place Names. This paper is an outgrowth of my opportunity to participate in the compilation of the Dictionary. It presents a comparative study of the geographic names of a relatively small area comprising 11,000 square miles in the central part of Alaska lying between the Tanana and Yukon Rivers. The area studied was generally confined to the Fairbanks and Livengood 1: 250,000-scale maps, which are centered around Fairbanks, the supply center for interior and northern Alaska.

Alaska↗
USGS2018

GNIS-LD: Serving and visualizing the Geographic Names Information System Gazetteer as linked data

In this dataset description paper we introduce the GNIS-LD, an authoritative and public domain Linked Dataset derived from the Geographic Names Information System (GNIS) which was developed by the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) and the U.S. Board on Geographic Names. GNIS provides data about current, as well as historical, physical, and cultural geographic features in the United States. We describe the dataset, introduce an ontology for geographic feature types, and demonstrate the utility of recent linked geographic data contributions made in conjunction with the development of this resource. Co-reference resolution links to GeoNames.org and DBpedia are provided in the form of owl:sameAs relations. Finally, we point out how the adapted workflow is foundational for complex Digital Line Graph (DLG) data from the USGS National Map and how the GNIS-LD data can be integrated with DLG and other data sources such as sensor observations.

Conference Paper↗
USGS2016

The importance of species name synonyms in literature searches

The synonyms of biological species names are shown to be an important component in comprehensive searches of electronic scientific literature databases but they are not well leveraged within the major literature databases examined. For accepted or valid species names in the Integrated Taxonomic Information System (ITIS) which have synonyms in the system, and which are found in citations within PLoS, PMC, PubMed or Scopus, both the percentage of species for which citations will not be found if synonyms are not used, and the percentage increase in number of citations found by including synonyms are very often substantial. However, there is no correlation between the number of synonyms per species and the magnitude of the effect. Further, the number of citations found does not generally increase proportionally to the number of synonyms available. Users looking for literature on specific species across all of the resources investigated here are often missing large numbers of citations if they are not manually augmenting their searches with synonyms. Of course, missing citations can have serious consequences by effectively hiding critical information. Literature searches should include synonym relationships and a new web service in ITIS, with examples of how to apply it to this issue, was developed as a result of this study, and is here announced, to aide in this.

PLoS ONE↗
USGS1982

The nomenclatural enigma of single versus double -i endings for scientific patronyms emended to represent a man's name: A comment and some considerations

The current inconsistency over the use of single vs. double -i endings for singular masculine scientific patronyms in official lists of scientific names of fishes causes needless confusion and labor. Taxonomists once preferred rules for Latinization calling for double -i endings, but current rules suggest single -i endings. Recent rulings by the International Commission of Zoological Nomenclature make it impossible to produce uniformity in this area. It is suggested that the Committee on Names of Fishes submit a petition to the Commission that modifies the present rules to allow the use of single -i endings in most cases and thus conform with current literature and the opinions of most ichthyologists.

Fisheries↗