I like the proposal but agree with Bhagwati´s and Paul´s argument:
Lets take Pristionchus as an example. We have carried out a large
scale screen for dpy mutants and have at least 12 complementation
groups. Although I am not sure what we will do and how far we will
get in identifying these genes molecularly, we don´t even know if the
same genes are mutated to result in dpy phenotypes. Therefore, the
concept of renaming does not really help so much for a categorie such
as dpy or unc.
One simple solution would be to use the species prefix and start to
count by one in each species: Cb-dpy-1 etc. That would also allow
"sub-communities" to easily communicate with regard to the numbering
in those species.
Ralf J .Sommer
Dept. for Evolutionary Biology
Max Planck Institute for Developmental Biology
Tuebingen D-72076, GERMANY