Translator Disclaimer
21 August 2020 Nomenclatural consequences of the Oculudentavis khaungraae case, with comments on the practice of ‘retraction’ of scientific publications
Alain Dubois
Author Affiliations +
Abstract

The recent publication in the journal Nature of a paper describing a new fossil as a ‘hummingbird-sized dinosaur', followed immediately by a rebuttal stating that it was in fact a lizard, and then by the ‘retraction' of the original paper, raised concerns about the nomenclatural availability of the new binomen Oculudentavis khaungraae that it introduced. It is shown here that so-called ‘retraction’, by authors, editors or publishers, of a controversial paper, has no bearing under the Rules of the Code on the nomenclatural availability of the paper and of the new nomina or nomenclatural acts it may contain, which can be withdrawn only by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature acting under its Plenary Power. It is furthermore argued that the principle of ‘retraction’ of scientific publications itself is anti-scientific, harmful to the history of science, and belongs in the domain of ‘denialism': it should be fully abandoned by serious scientific journals.

© Publications scientifiques du Muséum national d'Histoire naturelle, Paris.
Alain Dubois "Nomenclatural consequences of the Oculudentavis khaungraae case, with comments on the practice of ‘retraction’ of scientific publications," Zoosystema 42(23), 475-482, (21 August 2020). https://doi.org/10.5252/zoosystema2020v42a23
Received: 3 August 2020; Accepted: 13 August 2020; Published: 21 August 2020
JOURNAL ARTICLE
8 PAGES


SHARE
ARTICLE IMPACT
RIGHTS & PERMISSIONS
Get copyright permission
Back to Top