What's in a name? Some thoughts on pollen classification, identification, and nomenclature in Quaternary palynology

Recent developments in Quaternary palaeopalynology necessitate an increased attention to the classification and nomenclature of pollen types. This paper discusses the differences between palaeopalynological and actuo pollen morphological pollen classification and their consequences for pollen identification and for the interpretation of pollen data. The obscure character of pollen types, that leads to confusion in pollen typology and nomenclature, is analysed and various nomenclatural approaches are reviewed. It is concluded that fossil pollen can not - beyond reasonable doubt - be ascribed to recent and native taxa that produce the same kind of pollen. A pollen type should therefore be defined as a limitative collection of morphological properties (e.g. by reference to a concrete key), not as pollen of a taxon. All types distinguished have to be defined separately (e.g. by referring to a concrete key in the name of every pollen type), when various keys are used in combination or when types deviate from types in those keys. Observed pollen types and interpreted taxa should be kept clearly separated in the discussion. Finally, some suggestions are offered for putting these conclusions into practice. (C) 2002 Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.