Downloads provided by UsageCounts
To the Editor: —Your editorial comment on this question (The Journal, Nov. 25, 1916, p. 1607) is in error. Schaudinn originally placed the Treponema pallidum in the genus Spirochaeta . It was only after he discovered that it did not belong to that genus that he named a new genus, Treponema Both your editorial writer and Dr. Pusey should familiarize themselves with the rules of zoological nomenclature as laid down by the International Committee. Dr. Charles Stiles, Washington, D. C., is the secretary of that committee. It is not a matter of sentiment that makes us prefer the term Treponema pallidum , but a matter of scientific nomenclature. If you discovered a new organism and named it by a term used previously by zoologists to designate an entirely different organism, the name would not stand in zoological nomenclature, and either you or some successor would have a right to give it an
| citations This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | 3 | |
| popularity This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network. | Average | |
| influence This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically). | Average | |
| impulse This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network. | Average |
| views | 2 | |
| downloads | 3 |

Views provided by UsageCounts
Downloads provided by UsageCounts