Scientific knowledge is constantly evolving. Reality may change, but the techniques and methodologies we have at our disposal to analyze it, study it and learn about it in more detail and depth change faster. This does not mean that the scientific body of knowledge is unstable and can generate doubts; simply that every day we know more about the reality that surrounds us. What is very relevant is whether we can transfer these changes to the knowledge that exists in society, if we are able to update popular knowledge as we learn more. Scientific activity cannot generate more uncertainty than is essential, but on the contrary must tend towards empowering citizens for a sustainable, fair and responsible interaction with reality.
A specific example is the case of scientific terminology to designate living species. Species can evolve, but the scientific name by which we identify them can change faster. The development and use of new technologies allows us to refine our knowledge of their particularities, which are still the basis of their identity. This change is often not transferred to society, and the common names of living beings are maintained through time.
Un cas singular es el de la botànica. Els botànics Oriol de Bolòs (1924 – 2007) i Francesc Masclans (1905 – 2000) van vetllar per adequar els noms populars de les plantes a les actualitzacions científiques dels termes. Cosa gens fàcil, per cert. Com li vols posar cipripedi a l’orquídia coneguda com les sabatetes de la Mare de Déu! Recentment, a mes, el XX Congres Internacional de Botànica (IBC) celebrat a Madrid el 2024 va decidir canviar alguns noms d’espècies de plantes per les seves connotacions morals i racistes. També hi ha experts que, ans al contrari, no voldrien canviar el nom científic per res, argumentant la universalitat del coneixement científic. Com sempre, de tot per a tothom…
My contribution, as a microbiologist, to the terminological evolution of living beings is in the field of bacteria. This was done during my post-doctoral stay in the laboratory of Dr. Johan F. De Jonckheere at the Institut d’Hygiène et d’Épidémiologie (IHE) in Brussels, later called Institut Scientifique de la Sante Publique and more recently Sciensano, the new Belgian national institute of public health. As an international expert in the study of protists (amoeba, in particular) in a free state, Dr. De Jonckheere had the necessary technology to advance the taxonomic study of the purple photosynthetic bacteria of the genus Chromatium that had been partial protagonists of my doctoral thesis at the University of Barcelona.
El resultat d’aquesta estada va ser la constatació que dues espècies considerades diferents fins aleshores Chromatium vinosum i Chromatium minutissimum eren pràcticament la mateixa. Així ho revelaven els estudis de riboprinting fets a l’IHE i publicats a la revista International Journal of Systematic Bacteriology (Mas-Castella, J., Guerrero, R., De Jonckheere, J.F. 1996. High degree of similarity between Chromatium vinosum and Chromatium minutissimum as revealed by riboprinting. Int. J. Syst. Bacteriol. 46, 922–925.)
Years later, studies by research groups of international experts such as Rodney A. Herbert, Rudolf Amann and Ulrich Fischer (W. Serrano et al. 2011. Systematic and Applied Microbiology 34, 590– 594) confirmed, using other technologies, the close relationship between these species. They say in their work: “Thus, the low nucleotide diversity observed within the A. vinosum phylogroup, reinforced the close relationship of all these strains. Based on this data, the status of the species A. vinosum DSM 180T and A. minutissimum DSM 1376T as separate entities must be revised. Both type strains are similar in very many features as was reported by Mas-Castella et al. [1996] and Pavon and Gaju [1997]. In addition, our findings were also supported by the fact that the DDH relatedness within this group showed values >80% plausible for a single genospecies”.
I think that if we are able to understand that the name that identifies a species in the present day can change for different reasons, we will be able to advance in the public’s understanding of science.