For centuries, the scientific names given to plants and other organisms have been the bedrock of biological classification. But these labels, once seen as objective, are now under scrutiny. Embedded within some of these names are echoes of a colonial past, including racist slurs that continue to inflict great emotional harm. Recognizing this, the botanical community has taken a historic step to rectify these injustices by voting in early July to rename over 200 plants.
This decision marks a pivotal moment in botany and biology as many species names are controversial, with calls for renaming. However, nothing about this process is easy. As discussions around problematic species names continue, scientists are navigating complex terrain. Here, historical designations intersect with present-day cultural sensitivity.
An iconic tree with an offensive name
One notable example is the African coral tree, Erythrina caffra. The coral tree is famous for its vibrant red flowers transforming landscapes into brilliant spectacles. When it blossoms, it resembles a radiant coral and provides essential nectar to a variety of pollinators. And the tree’s unique bark, which exhibits a deeply grooved, almost sculptural texture, adds to its aesthetic charm, making it a favored choice for both urban and rural settings.
But for all its beauty, Erythrina caffra hides a dark secret. The second part of its scientific Latin name is derived from an Arabic word meaning “infidel,” which has been used as a racial slur against Black people in South Africa. Nokwanda Makunga, a plant molecular biologist at Stellenbosch University, expressed the pain these names can cause. Makunga said to NPR that, “this word carries a very violent, brutal, socially unjust history.”
The decision to rename these plants was not made lightly. Over a hundred scientists gathered in Madrid to discuss and vote on 433 proposals to amend the naming code. The proposal to alter the derogatory names passed with 63% approval, just above the required 60% threshold.
There are a total of 218 plants, 13 algae, and 70 fungi whose scientific names have some variation of caffra. To ease the transition, the scientists proposed to drop the “c” such that the species would be named affrum or affrorum, a nod to Africa. It’s a brilliant idea because it turns a word that causes pain into one that triggers pride with minimal interference.
The decision, however, sparked a diversity of opinions.
Some scientists worry that changing established names could cause confusion across scientific disciplines and industries. There’s also the concern that such decisions may set a precedent. It could trigger a flurry of requests to change the names of many other species. Understandably, this could cause a lot of chaos both in academia and industry.
<!– Tag ID: zmescience_300x250_InContent_3
–>
“You don’t want to seem, like, bigoted or something like that, but at the same time, naming has to be a stable process,” said Alina Freire-Fierro, a botanist at the Technical University of Cotopaxi in Ecuador who didn’t attend the gathering in Madrid.
In response, the Nomenclature Section of the International Botanical Congress, which meets every six years, established a special committee to discuss the ethics of naming species, including those named after controversial figures. Starting in 2026, any new species names deemed derogatory can be proposed for rejection.
The committee also debated how to handle botanical species that have already been named after controversial individuals. For instance, begonias, beloved flowers that everyone knows, are named after Michel Bégon, who was a slaveowner. Would people change how they refer to these flowers just because scientists changed the textbooks? We don’t know but it’s bound to be controversial. For the time being, the committee will only look at species named after 2026 and will not, to the disappointment of some researchers, review existing names.
Plants are not alone
Of course, these issues aren’t reserved for plants. In 2023, the American Ornithological Society came to the radical decision to remove names given to North American birds in honor of people and replace them with monikers that better describe their plumage and other characteristics. The group said it would prioritize birds whose names trace to enslavers, white supremacists, and robbers of Indigenous graves.
The Hammond’s flycatcher, for example, is named for William Alexander Hammond, a former US surgeon general. Hammond held racist views toward both Black and Indigenous people, writing that Black people specifically were of “little elevated in mental or physical faculties above the monkey of an organ grinder.”
“There is power in a name, and some English bird names have associations with the past that continue to be exclusionary and harmful today,” the society’s president, Colleen Handel, said in a statement. “We need a much more inclusive and engaging scientific process that focuses attention on the unique features and beauty of the birds themselves.”
Thanks for your feedback!