# Binomial names for virus species: the rediscovery of an old idea

## TL;DR

This paper discusses the shift to binomial naming for viruses, aligning with biological naming conventions as genomic data improves understanding.

## Contribution

The paper highlights the adoption of binomial nomenclature for viruses, reflecting advances in genomic knowledge and standardizing taxonomy.

## Key findings

- The International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses now mandates binomial names for virus species.
- Alternative naming formats for viruses have become less relevant due to advances in genomic sequencing.
- Virus nomenclature has returned to a system similar to traditional biological classification.

## Abstract

The International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses now mandates that all virus species names be presented in a binomial format. This requirement replaces the various naming formats that have been used since the first official virus taxonomy Report was published in 1971. A review of virus classification schemes as they have developed over the past century shows that, although there was an initial inclination to adopt a Linnaean binomial nomenclature, various other naming formats were gradually introduced for practical and scientific reasons. However, as our understanding of viruses has advanced – especially with the increasing availability of genomic sequences – the arguments for these alternative formats (such as that viruses were not living or that they evolved too quickly) have diminished. The nomenclature for virus species now aligns more closely with the conventions used in other areas of biology, the format having nearly come full circle from its beginnings a century ago.