Battling the un-dead: the status of the Diptera genus-group names originally proposed in Johann Wilhelm Meigen’s 1800 pamphlet

Zootaxa ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 4275 (1) ◽  
pp. 1
Author(s):  
NEAL L. EVENHUIS ◽  
THOMAS PAPE
Keyword(s):  
Type Species ◽  
Zoological Nomenclature ◽  
The Status ◽  
Nomina Dubia

The work of Meigen 1800 was suppressed by the ICZN Commission in 1963 for the purposes of zoological nomenclature. The work as such is still to be treated as having been published and it remains available as a source of published descriptions and illustrations. Therefore, while the names in Meigen (1800) are deemed unavailable, a subsequent usage of any of the names may be considered a novel proposal. We review the first post-Meigen 1800 occurrence of each name, its first date of availability and authorship, and determine status and synonymy.        Designations of type species are given for the following genus-group names: Coryneta Hendel, 1908 [Hybotidae]; Cyanea Hendel, 1908 [Hippoboscidae].        Acting as First Reviser, we select the following as the correct original spelling from multiple original spellings: Calirrhoe Hendel, 1908.        New synonymies are proposed for the following: Ablabesmyia Johannsen, 1905 under Pelopia Latreille, 1802, n. syn. [Limoniidae]; Amasia Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Penthetria Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Bibionidae]; Amphinome Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Limonia Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Limoniidae]; Antiopa Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Chrysotoxum Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Syrphidae]; Apivora Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Volucella Geoffroy, 1762, n. syn. [Syrphidae]; Atalanta Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Clinocera Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Empididae]; Calirrhoe Meigen & Hendel in Hendel, 1908 under Prosena Le Peletier & Audinet-Serville, 1828, n. syn. [Tachinidae]; Chrysozona Hendel, 1903 under Haematopota Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Tabanidae]; Cinxia Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Sericomyia Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Syrphidae]; Cleona Meigen in Hendel 1908 under Callomyia Meigen, 1804, n. syn. [Platypezidae]; Clythia Hendel, 1903 under Platypeza Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Platypezidae]; Coryneta Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Tachydromia Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Hybotidae]; Crocuta Bezzi, 1907 under Siphona Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Tachinidae]; Cyanea Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Melophagus Latreille, 1802, n. syn. [Hippoboscidae]; Cypsela Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Sphaerocera Latreille, 1804, n. syn. [Sphaeroceridae]; Dionnaea Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Rhamphomyia Meigen, 1822, n. syn. [Empididae]; Dorilas Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Pipunculus Latreille, 1802, n. syn. [Pipunculidae]; Echinodes Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Eriothrix Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Tachinidae]; Erinna Hendel, 1903 under Xylophagus Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Xylophagidae]; Eulalia Hendel, 1903 under Odontomyia Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Stratiomyidae]; Euphrosyne Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Macrocera Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Keroplatidae]; Flabellifera Osten Sacken, 1882 under Tanyptera Latreille, 1804, n. syn. [Tipulidae]; Fungivora Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Mycetophila Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Mycetophilidae]; Helea Osten Sacken, 1882 under Ceratopogon Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Ceratopogonidae]; Hermione Bezzi, 1908 under Oxycera Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Stratiomyidae]; Itonida Bezzi, 1908 under Cecidomyia Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Cecidomyiidae]; Lampetia Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Merodon Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Syrphidae]; Laphria Bezzi, 1907 under Laphria Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Asilidae]; Lapria Bezzi, 1907 under Laphria Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Asilidae]; Larvaevora Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Tachina Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Tachinidae]; Liriope Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Ptychoptera Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Ptychopteridae]; Lycoria Latreille, 1802 under Sylvicola Harris, 1776, n. syn. [Anisopodidae]; Melusina Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Trichocera Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Trichoceridae]; Musidora Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Lonchoptera Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Lonchopteridae]; Noeza Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Hybos Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Hybotidae]; Omphrale Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Scenopinus Latreille, 1802, n. syn. [Scenopinidae]; Pales Bezzi, 1906 under Nephrotoma Meigen, 1803, n. syn . [Tipulidae]; Penthesilea Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Blera Billberg, 1820, n. syn. [Syrphidae]; Petaurista Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Trichocera Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Trichoceridae]; Phalaenula Desmarest, 1818 under Psychoda Latreille, 1797, n. syn. [Psychodidae]; Philia Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Dilophus Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Bibionidae]; Phryne Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Sylvicola Harris, 1776, n. syn. [Anisopodidae]; Polymeda Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Erioptera Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Limoniidae]; Polyxena Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Cordyla Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Mycetophilidae]; Potamida Hendel, 1903 under Clitellaria Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Stratiomyidae]; Rhodogyne Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Gymnosoma Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Tachinidae]; Salmacia Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Gonia Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Tachinidae]; Scathophaga Meigen, 1803 under Scopeuma Latreille, 1802, n. syn. [Scathophagidae]; Coremacera Rondani, 1856 under Statinia Latreille, 1802, n. syn. [Sciomyzidae]; Tendipes Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Chironomus Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Chironomidae]; Titania Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Chlorops Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Chloropidae]; Trepidaria Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Calobata Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Micropezidae]; Tritonia Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Temnostoma Le Peletier & Audinet-Serville, 1828, n. syn. [Syrphidae]; Tubifera Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Eristalis Latreille, 1804, n. syn. [Syrphidae]; Urophora Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830 under Euribia Latreille, 1802, n. syn. [Tephritidae]; Zelima Hendel, 1903 under Xylota Meigen, 1822, n. syn. [Syrphidae]; Zelmira Meigen in Hendel, 1908 under Orfelia Costa, 1857, n. syn. [Keroplatidae].        The following three names have not been found to be synonymous with any other taxon, and are treated here as nomina dubia: Orithea Meigen in Hendel, 1908; Salpyga Meigen in Hendel, 1908; Titia Meigen in Hendel, 1908 (preoccupied).      The following four names are found to be senior synonyms of more commonly used genus-group names: Euribia Latreille, 1802 of Urophora Robineau-Desvoidy, 1830, n. syn. [Tephritidae]; Pelopia Latreille, 1802 of Ablabesmyia Johannsen, 1905, n. syn.; Scopeuma Latreille, 1802 of Scathophaga Meigen, 1803, n. syn. [Scathophagidae]; Statinia Latreille, 1802 of Coremacera Rondani, 1856, n. syn. [Sciomyzidae]. If they are construed as threatening stability of nomenclature and/or taxonomy, applications to the ICZN Commission may be warranted to request suppression of these names in favor of their junior synonyms. 

Delimitation of the segmented trapdoor spider genus Luthela gen. nov., with comments on the genus Sinothela from northern China (Araneae, Mesothelae, Liphistiidae)

Zootaxa ◽  
2022 ◽  
Vol 5091 (1) ◽  
pp. 131-154
Author(s):  
XIN XU ◽  
LI YU ◽  
FENGXIANG LIU ◽  
DAIQIN LI
Keyword(s):  
Type Species ◽  
New Genus ◽  
Taxonomic Revision ◽  
Northern China ◽  
Morphological Characters ◽  
Molecular Data ◽  
Male And Female ◽  
The North ◽  
The Status ◽  
Nomina Dubia

A new genus of the primitively segmented trapdoor spiders, which is endemic to the north of China, is described, Luthela gen. nov., and the status of Sinothela Haupt, 2003 and Sinothela sinensis (Bishop & Crosby, 1932) is discussed and both are treated as nomina dubia. The new genus Luthela gen. nov. is erected based on morphology and molecular data of the type species Luthela yiyuan sp. nov. A taxonomic revision of the new genus is given. Three Sinothela species are transferred to the new genus, L. luotianensis comb. nov. and L. schensiensis comb. nov. are redescribed using our newly collected specimens, include L. heyangensis comb. nov. as a junior synonym of L. schensiensis comb. nov., and describe six new species based on both male and female morphological characters: L. badong sp. nov., L. dengfeng sp. nov., L. handan sp. nov., L. taian sp. nov., L. yiyuan sp. nov., and L. yuncheng sp. nov.  

scholarly journals Nomenclatural changes in Centroptella Braasch & Soldán, 1980 (Ephemeroptera, Baetidae)

ZooKeys ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 914 ◽  
pp. 81-125
Author(s):  
Nikita J. Kluge ◽  
Roman J. Godunko ◽  
Marek Svitok
Keyword(s):  
Type Species ◽  
Original Description ◽  
Systematic Position ◽  
Species Group ◽  
Zoological Nomenclature ◽  
Wide Sense ◽  
African Species ◽  
Additional Material ◽  
Nomina Dubia ◽  
New Synonymy

The genus Centroptella Braasch & Soldán, 1980 is accepted here in a wide sense, i.e., including Chopralla Waltz & McCafferty, 1987. This genus concept is similar to the concept of the genus Bungona Harker, 1957 proposed by Salles et al. (2016), but with the generic name Centroptella instead of Bungona. The type species of Bungona, B. narilla Harker, 1957, has an unknown systematic position; the neotype designation proposed by Suter and Pearson (2001) is invalid, being inconsistent with the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature; the species name B. narilla and the generic name Bungona are nomina dubia, so the name Centroptella is the senior name for the genus under consideration. The generic names Chopralla and Crassolus Salles, Gattolliat & Sartori, 2016 both are junior synonyms of Centroptella (syn. nov.). The subgenera Bungona, Centroptella and Chopralla proposed by Salles et al. (2016) are unnatural. The following new combinations are proposed: Centroptella bintang (Marle, Salles & Gattolliat, 2016) comb. nov., Centroptella bifida (Shi & Tong, 2019) comb. nov., Centroptella fusina (Tong & Dudgeon, 2003) comb. nov., Centroptella fustipalpus (Lugo-Ortiz & McCafferty, 1998) comb. nov., Centroptella illiesi (Lugo-Ortiz & McCafferty, 1998) comb. nov., Centroptella inzingae (Crass, 1947) comb. nov., Centroptella papilionodes (Marle, Salles & Gattolliat, 2016) comb. nov., Centroptella pontica (Sroka, Godunko & Gattolliat, in Sroka et al. 2019) comb. nov., Centroptella ovata (Shi & Tong, 2019) comb. nov., Centroptella quadrata (Shi & Tong, 2019) comb. nov. and Centroptella saxophila (Agnew, 1961) comb. nov. The two Australian species, C. fustipalpus and C. illiesi, differ from each other in the shape of tergalii; corrections to the original description of C. fustipalpus are given based on re-examination of the holotype and paratypes; details of larval structures of C. illiesi are figured. Corrections to the former descriptions of the South African species C. inzingae and C. saxophila are given. Examination of type material led to the discovery that the original description of the Oriental species Centroptella liebenauae Soldán, Braasch & Muu, 1987 was based on two different species: the descriptions of imago and subimago belong to Centroptella longisetosa Braasch & Soldán, 1980 (the type species of Centroptella), and the description of larva belongs to a different species, which we describe here as Centroptella ingridaesp. nov. The holotype of C. liebenauae, a larva, should be considered lost; based on the date of collection, it belonged to C. longisetosa; a set of larval exuviae with the same collecting data as the holotype, is designated as the neotype of C. liebenauae, and a new synonymy is established: C. longisetosa = C. liebenauaesyn. nov. The larvae originally assigned to C. liebenauae are placed to a new species Centroptella ingridaesp. nov. belonging to the inzingae-ingridae species group; all stages of development of this species are described based on male and female imagines reared from larvae in Thailand and on the misidentified paratypes of C. liebenauae from Vietnam. Centroptella longisetosa is redescribed based on the single paratype from China, the neotype and paratypes of C. liebenauae from Vietnam, and additional material from India. Additional data on the holotype of Centroptella colorata Soldán, Braasch & Muu, 1987 are given.

The nomenclatural status of Hysaplesia, Hylaplesia, Dendrobates and related nomina (Amphibia, Anura), with general comments on zoological nomenclature and its governance, as well as on taxonomic databases and websites

Bionomina ◽  
2017 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-48 ◽  
Author(s):  
ALAIN DUBOIS
Keyword(s):  
Type Species ◽  
Taxonomic Status ◽  
International Community ◽  
Zoological Nomenclature ◽  
The Status ◽  
Necessary And Sufficient

Dozens of publications, mostly in the last 45 years, have been devoted to nomenclatural problems concerning the status of the zoological nomina Hysaplesia, Hylaplesia, Dendrobates and related nomina. The Commission finally voted on this case in 2009, but this vote shows a misunderstanding of several of the problems at stake, as it contains a double and contradictory decision: the change in the type species of Hysaplesia and its suppression, although one only of these two acts would have been necessary and sufficient to solve this case, whereas taking them both together has other unforeseen and negative nomenclatural consequences. A final comprehensive solution to these nomenclatural problems is presented here, which does not require any more action from the Commission. However, the fact that the Commission, as well as the whole international community, have proved to be unable to understand fully the nomenclatural problems at stake and to solve them truthfully, while ignoring deliberately some contributions to the discussion, calls attention. This case suggests that there is a strong risk that nomenclature might become a domain where intellectual fairness and competence are secondary and where problems are ‘solved’ through the medieval ‘Principle of Authority’, through relying on the ‘opinions’ of a few persons, committees or websites rather than on rational discussions based on a knowledge of taxonomic publications and an understanding of the Code. This course would result in dragging zoological nomenclature so to say outside the field of science and contribute to weakening still more a domain, taxonomy, which is already facing major problems, at the time of the crisis of biodiversity. Additional problems concerning taxonomic databases and websites are pointed out, and suggestions are offered in this respect, including the distinction between the concepts of ‘nomenclatural status’ and ‘taxonomic status’ of nomina.

scholarly journals A preliminary review of the fossil species of Ranina Lamarck, 1801 (Decapoda, Brachyura, Raninidae), with systematic remarks

2017 ◽  
Vol 4 (1) ◽  
pp. 43
Author(s):  
Giovanni Pasini ◽  
Alessandro Garassino
Keyword(s):  
Type Species ◽  
Preliminary Review ◽  
Fossil Species ◽  
Diagnostic Characters ◽  
Type Series ◽  
Nomina Dubia ◽  
Doubtful Species

The systematics of the fossil representatives of Ranina Lamark, 1810, has been discussed by several authors in the last century, showing some problematics above all due to the lack of a close diagnosis of the type species (<em>R. ranina</em>) and to the scarce number of well-preserved type series of each fossil species. However, based upon a close comparison among the type series of each species, authors’ original descriptions, and the main diagnostic characters of <em>Ranina</em>, this preliminary review finds that twelve species have to be considered as doubtful species within <em>Ranina</em>, as follows: <em>?Ranina americana</em> Withers, 1924, <em>?R. berglundi</em> Squires &amp; Demetrion, 1992,<em> ?R. bouilleana</em> A. Milne Edwards, 1872, <em>?R. brevispina</em> Lőrenthey, 1898,<em> ?R. granulosa</em> A. Milne Edwards, 1872, <em>?R. griesbachi</em> Noetling, 1897, <em>?R. haszlinskyi</em> Reuss, 1859, <em>?R. libyca</em> (Van Straelen, 1935),<em> ?R.</em> <em>molengraaffi</em> Van Straelen, 1924,<em> ?R. oblonga</em> (von Münster, 1840), <em>?R. ornata</em> De Angeli &amp; Beschin, 2011, and<em> ?R. speciosa</em> (von Münster, 1840). Four species have to be considered as <em>Ranina nomina dubia</em>, as follows: <em>Ranina elegans</em> Rathbun, 1945, <em>R. hirsuta</em> (Schafhäutl, 1863), <em>R. lamiensis</em> Rathbun, 1945, and<em> R. tejoniana</em> Rathbun, 1926. <em>Ranina</em> <em>bavarica</em> Ebert, 1887,<em> R. fabri</em> Schafhäutl, 1863, and<em> R. helii</em> Schafhäutl, 1863, have to be assigned to Lophoranina Fabiani, 1910. <em>Ranina</em> <em>cuspidata</em> Guppy, 1909, has to be assigned to Calappa Weber, 1795 (Calappidae De Haan, 1833). Finally,<em> R. burleighensis</em> Holland in Holland &amp; Cvancara, 1958, has to be considered as doubtful species within Decapoda.

On the availability of the name Poecilia kempkesi Poeser 2013 (Cyprinodontiformes: Poeciliidae)

Zootaxa ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 4927 (2) ◽  
pp. 294-296
Author(s):  
PEDRO H. N. BRAGANÇA ◽  
FELIPE P. OTTONI
Keyword(s):  
New Species ◽  
Type Species ◽  
Poecilia Reticulata ◽  
Species Group ◽  
Zoological Nomenclature ◽  
International Code ◽  
Fourth Species

The poeciliid species, Poecilia kempkesi Poeser, 2013, was the fourth species of the subgenus Acanthophacelus Eigenmann, 1907 to be described, based on individuals from a single urban anthropized locality close to Paramaribo, Suriname (Poeser, 2013). The description itself lacked any section clearly distinguishing the new species from the remaining species of Poecilia Bloch & Schneider 1801, and in particular from the species of the subgenus Acanthophacelus, type species Poecilia reticulata Peters, 1859. According to Article 13 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN, 1999) the criteria of availability for a species-group name are: 

scholarly journals The Linz Zoocode project: a set of new proposals regarding the terminology, the Principles and Rules of zoological nomenclature. First report of activities (2014‒2019)

Bionomina ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-111 ◽  
Author(s):  
ALAIN DUBOIS ◽  
AARON M. BAUER ◽  
LUIS M.P. CERÍACO ◽  
FRANÇOIS DUSOULIER ◽  
THIERRY FRÉTEY ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
International Community ◽  
Zoological Nomenclature ◽  
International Code ◽  
International Meeting ◽  
First Report ◽  
The Status ◽  
International Body ◽  
The Creation

In July 2014, the international meeting “Burning questions and problems of zoological nomenclature” was held in Linz (Austria). It acknowledged the presence in the current International Code of Zoological Nomenclature of a number of severe problems, and accordingly decided the creation of a new international body, the Linz Zoocode Committee (LZC), in charge of writing the Linz Zoocode, a set of new proposals regarding the terminology, the Principles and Rules of zoological nomenclature. Here we present the first report of the activities of this Committee, covering the period 2014‒2019. It contains the presentation of our work, and the first documents adopted by the Committee: the Preamble and Principles of the Zoocode, the description of its structure and a first instalment of the Zoocode Glossary. The Zoocode regulates the status of zoological nomina and nomenclatural acts (onomatergies). Its aim is to provide an explicit, precise and objective nomenclatural system for the unambiguous and universal naming of all zoological taxa recognised by taxonomists, so that, in the frame of a given classification, the nomen of each taxon is unique and distinct. It relies on a Nomenclatural Process consisting in four main stages: nomenclatural assignment and availability, taxonomic allocation, nomenclatural validity and correctness, and registration of nomina and onomatergies. Whereas the Code currently in force is based on six stated Principles, the Zoocode recognises 17 distinct ones. We here submit these documents to the consideration of the international community of zootaxonomists, in the perspective of the incorporation of these proposals into the next version of the Code.

scholarly journals One name to rule them all: Belinurus trilobitoides (Buckland, ) is senior synonym to fourteen named species

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
James C. Lamsdell
Keyword(s):  
Type Species ◽  
New Genus ◽  
Distinct Species ◽  
Junior Synonym ◽  
International Commission ◽  
Zoological Nomenclature ◽  
International Code ◽  
Senior Synonym ◽  
Horseshoe Crabs ◽  
The Subject

One of the oldest fossil horseshoe crabs figured in the literature is Entomolithus lunatus Martin, 1809, a Carboniferous species included in his Petrificata Derbiensia. While the species has generally been included within the genus Belinurus Bronn, 1839, it was recently used as the type species of the new genus Parabelinurus Lamsdell, 2020. However, recent investigation as to the appropriate authority for Belinurus (see Lamsdell and Clapham, 2021) revealed that all the names in Petrificata Derbiensia were suppressed in Opinion 231 of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (1954) for being consistently nonbinomial under Article 11.4 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN) (International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, 1999). Despite the validation of several species names for anthozoans, brachiopods, and cephalopods described in Petrificata Derbiensia in subsequent rulings (International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, 1956a, b), Belinurus lunatus has not been the subject of any subsequent Commission ruling or opinion, and so its use in Petrificata Derbiensia remains suppressed. The Belinurus lunatus species name was used in several subsequent publications during the 1800s, none of which made the name available under ICZN article 11.5; Parkinson (1811) is also suppressed for being nonbinomial, while Woodward (1830), Buckland (1837), Bronn (1839), and Baily (1859) refer to the species only as a synonym of Belinurus trilobitoides (Buckland, 1837) through citation to the suppressed Pretificata Derbiensia. The first author to make Belinurus lunatus an available name was Baldwin (1905), who used the name in reference to a new figured specimen from Sparth Bottoms, Rochdale, UK, but again as an explicit junior synonym of Belinurus trilobitoides (Buckland, 1837). Therefore, it was not until Eller (1938) treated B. lunatus as a distinct species from B. trilobitoides that B. lunatus became an available name as per ICZN Article 11.6.1 under the authorship of Baldwin (1905) following ICZN Article 50.7.

Pagurodofleinia, a replacement generic name for Dofleinia McLaughlin & Asakura, 2004 (Crustacea: Decapoda),  preoccupied by Dofleinia Wassilieff, 1908 (Cnidaria: Anthozoa)

Zootaxa ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 1089 (1) ◽  
pp. 64
Author(s):  
AKIRA ASAKURA
Keyword(s):  
Type Species ◽  
International Commission ◽  
Zoological Nomenclature ◽  
Generic Diagnosis ◽  
International Code

It has been called to my attention that the generic name Dofleinia, established by McLaughlin and Asakura (2004) for Parapagurodes doederleini (Doflein, 1902), is a junior subjective homonym of Dofleinia Wassilieff, 1908 (Cnidaria: Anthozoa: Actiniidae).  In accordance with Article 60 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, 1999), I now propose Pagurodofleinia as a replacement name. The type species, Catapagurus doederleini Doflein, 1902, the gender (feminine), and the etymology (named for F. Doflein who first described the type species) remain as given by McLaughlin & Asakura (2004), as does the generic diagnosis.

Revision of world Ceroptresini (Hymenoptera: Cynipidae) with the description of a new genus and five new species

Zootaxa ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 4685 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
IRENE LOBATO-VILA ◽  
JULI PUJADE-VILLAR
Keyword(s):  
New Species ◽  
Type Species ◽  
Morphological Traits ◽  
New Genus ◽  
Taxonomic Revision ◽  
Valid Species ◽  
Distribution Data ◽  
The Status ◽  
The Usa ◽  
First Time

A taxonomic revision of the tribe Ceroptresini (Hymenoptera: Cynipidae) is conducted for the first time. Prior to this study, the total number of valid species of Ceroptres, the only genus within Ceroptresini to date, was 23. As a result of this revision, 15 Ceroptres species are retained as valid and one species, Amblynotus ensiger Walsh, 1864, is desynonymized from Ceroptres petiolicola (Osten-Sacken, 1861), being considered here as a valid Ceroptres species: C. ensiger (Walsh, 1864) status verified and comb. nov. An additional five new species are described from Mexico: Ceroptres junquerasi Lobato-Vila & Pujade-Villar sp. nov.; C. lenis Lobato-Vila & Pujade-Villar sp. nov.; C. mexicanus Lobato-Vila & Pujade-Villar sp. nov.; C. nigricrus Lobato-Vila & Pujade-Villar sp. nov.; C. quadratifacies Lobato-Vila & Pujade-Villar sp. nov., increasing the total number of valid Ceroptres species to 21. Ceroptres masudai Abe, 1997 is synonymized with C. kovalevi Belizin, 1973. Ceroptres niger Fullaway, 1911 is transferred to Andricus (Andricus confusus Lobato-Vila & Pujade-Villar comb. nov. and nom. nov.). Five species (Amblynotus inermis Walsh, 1864; Cynips quercusarbos Fitch, 1859; Cynips querficus Fitch, 1859; Cynips quercuspisum Fitch, 1859; and Cynips quercustuber Fitch, 1859) are not considered as valid Ceroptres. The status of Ceroptres quereicola (Shinji, 1938), previously classified as an unplaced species, is commented on. In addition, a Nearctic species from the USA, Ceroptres politus Ashmead, 1896, is here proposed as the type species of a new genus within Ceroptresini: Buffingtonella Lobato-Vila & Pujade-Villar gen. nov. Redescriptions, biological and distribution data, illustrations and keys to genera and species within Ceroptresini are provided. The diagnostic morphological traits of Ceroptresini, Ceroptres and the new genus are discussed. 

Bicarinellata a new name for Bicarinella Rode, Lieberman, and Rowell, 2003 (Arthopoda, Bradoriida) preoccupied by Bicarinella Waterhouse, 1966 (Mollusca, Gastropoda) and Bicarinella Akopyan, 1976 (Mollusca, Gastropoda)

2008 ◽  
Vol 82 (6) ◽  
pp. 1220-1220 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alycia L. Stigall
Keyword(s):  
New Zealand ◽  
Late Cretaceous ◽  
Type Species ◽  
East Antarctica ◽  
Zoological Nomenclature ◽  
Early Cambrian ◽  
International Code ◽  
New Name ◽  
Valid Genus ◽  
The One

The genus Bicarinella Rode et al., 2003 was erected for a new hipponicharionid bradoriid species described from the early Cambrian of East Antarctica, characterized by a subtriangular carapace with prominent anterior and posterior lobes developed as two distinctive, sharp ridges (bi = two, carina = ridges). Unfortunately, the name Bicarinella is preoccupied by two different gastropod genera: Bicarinella Waterhouse 1966, a Permian gastropod from New Zealand and Australia, and Bicarinella Akopyan 1976, a gastropod from Late Cretaceous strata of Armenia, Serbia, Romania, Tajikistan, and Egypt (Mennessier, 1994; Banjac, 1998; Pana, 1998). Mennessier (1994) transferred Bicarinella Akopyan, 1976 from its original status as an independent taxon to a subgenus of Pseudomesalia Douvillé 1916, but subsequent workers have continued to consider Bicarinella a valid genus (Pena, 1998; Banjac, 1998). Due to the preoccupation, the bradoriid genus is herein renamed in accordance with the requirement of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (1999, article 60). It is also noted here that the one of the two distinct gastropod genera should be renamed. The name Bicarinellata (bi = two, carina = ridges) is proposed as a replacement name for Bicarinella Rode et al., 2003. This name retains the original prefixes to preserve taxonomic stability as much as possible. The type species of Bicarinellata is B. evansi by original designation (Rode et al., 2003).

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document