English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

In a recent publication, Whitman et al. (2015) have called into question the interpretation of the International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria (Lapage et al., 1992) given by Tindall et al. (2014), especially with respect to the way the priority of names at the ranks of order and family are regulated. The major difference between the two interpretations is that while Tindall et al. (2014) invokes Rule 23a with reference to the priority of names, Whitman et al. (2015) make reference to Rule 51b, a rule that provides information on what the consequences are of not following Rule 23a. In making reference to Rule 23a the wording simply states:

A commentary on the interpretation of the International Code of Nomenclature of Bacteria