Comments
with the following titles were published
on 30 September 2002 in Volume 59, Part
3 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature
Copies
of these Comments can be obtained free
of charge from the Executive Secretary,
The International Commission on Zoological
Nomenclature, c/o The Natural History Museum,
Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, U.K. (e-mail: iczn@nhm.ac.uk).
Comment
on the proposed fixation of Lycosa
alacris C.L. Koch, 1833 as the type
species of Pardosa C.L. Koch,
1847 (Arachnida, Araneae) to conserve the
usage of Pardosa and of Alopecosa Simon,
1885
(Case
3174; see BZN
59: 7-11)
Pavel Štys and Jan Buchar
Department of Zoology, Charles University,
Vinicna 7, CZ-12844, Praha 2, Czech Republic
We
write in support of Kronestedt, Dondale & Zyuzin’s
proposal which is nomenclaturally sound,
and aims to maintain the continuity of usage
of the generic names Pardosa C.L.
Koch, 1847 and Alopecosa Simon,
1885 in their present universally accepted
meaning. The replacement of Alopecosa by Pardosa,
and the concommitant establishment of a substitute
name for Pardosa, as currently used,
would not only seriously disturb the nomenclature
of the family LYCOSIDAE but would be hardly
acceptable for the wider community of zoologists,
ecologists and biogeographers.
We would like to point out that the species of the two genera concerned
represent over 60% of the species of the LYCOSIDAE in Central Europe, and that
they form one of the most important components of the epigeic arthropod fauna
in the Palaearctic region (and for Pardosa, in the Nearctic and Oriental
regions as well). The ecology of lycosids (jointly with the beetle family CARABIDAE)
has been the subject of numerous ecological and similar studies based mainly
on widely used methods of pitfall trapping. Many species of Pardosa and Alopecosa are
used as bioindicators. Any drastic change of the current nomenclatural usage
would cause confusion and put the strict application of the Code into disrepute.
Comment
on the proposed conservation of the specific
name of Scarabaeus punctatus Villers,
1789 (currently Pentodon bidens punctatus;
Insecta, Coleoptera)
(Case
3201; see BZN
59: 27-29)
Brett C.
Ratcliffe
Systematics Research Collections, University
of Nebraska, W436 Nebraska Hall, Lincoln,
Nebraska 68588-0514, U.S.A.
In
his application, Dr Krell makes a cogent
argument for conserving the junior primary
homonym of Scarabaeus punctatus Villers,
1789 because it, and its senior homonym (a
ruteline scarab) have both been in constant
use, without confusion, for two centuries.
I support the application to conserve the
junior homonym.
Comment
on the proposed conservation of the specific
name of Papilio eurymedon Lucas,
1852 (Insecta, Lepidoptera)
(Case
3222; see BZN
59: 114-116)
E.D. Edwards
CSIRO Entomology, GPO Box 1700, Canberra,
ACT 2601, Australia
M.S. Upton
Unit 2/25, Temperley Street, Nicholls,
2913, Australia
We
support the application by Heppner and Emmel
to suppress the name Papilio antinous Donovan,
1805 for the purposes of the Principle of
Priority. The name was listed in a few Australian
catalogues in the 19th century for an Australian
or reputedly Australian butterfly species.
It was not mentioned again in the Australian
literature until Upton (1985, p. 169) pointed
out that it is a senior subjective synonym
of Papilio eurymedon Lucas, 1852
from North America and recommended that the
name P. antinous be suppressed.
The name P. antinous has never been
associated with any true Australian butterfly
and suppression of the name will not affect
the nomenclature of Australian butterflies.
Comment
on the proposed conservation of the specific
name of Chlorops meigenii Loew,
1866 (Insecta, Diptera)
(Case
3190; see BZN
58: 286-287)
Terry A.
Wheeler and Stéphanie Boucher
Department of Natural Resource Sciences, McGill University,
Macdonald Campus, Ste-Anne-de-Bellevue, QC, H9X 3V9 Canada
We
support the application under Article 23.9
of the Code, for conservation by reversal
of precedence of the specific name of Chlorops
meigenii Loew, 1866 over that of Chlorops
meigenii Fallén, 1823. Strict
application of the Code in this case would
cause confusion as to the correct name of
the Palaearctic species referred to by most
authors for over 100 years as Chlorops
meigenii Loew, 1866. A number of references
in addition to those cited in BZN
58: 287 use this name (or the unjustified
emendation Chlorops meigeni) for
the Palaearctic chloropid species. Nartshuk
(BZN
58: 286, para. 3) noted, correctly, that
the junior synonym Chlorops rufescens Oldenberg,
1923 cannot be used as the valid name for
this species because of its homonymy with
the Nearctic species Chlorops rufescens Coquillett,
1910.
The senior homonym Chlorops meigenii Fallén, 1823 has
not been used as a valid name for over 100 years. Cerodontha denticornis Panzer,
1806 (Insecta, Diptera, AGROMYZIDAE) is the type species of the genus Cerodontha,
and is an abundant, widespread and easily recognized Palaearctic species. As
the type of Chlorops meigenii Fallén, 1823 is an agromyzid
and has long been considered a junior synonym of Cerodontha denticornis (e.g.
Nowakowski, 1973; Papp, 1984) to reverse precedence and treat this name as
junior to Chlorops meigenii Loew, 1866 would not cause nomenclatural
confusion in the AGROMYZIDAE but would remove confusion in the CHLOROPIDAE
created by the recent use of two names, both junior homonyms, for the same
common Palaearctic species.
Additional
references
Nowakowski, J.T. 1973. Monographie
der europäischen Arten der Gattung Cerodontha Rond.
(Diptera: Agromyzidae). Annales Zoologici,
Warsaw, 31: 1-327.
Papp, L. 1984. Family Agromyzidae. Pp. 263-343
in Soós, Á. & Papp, L. (Eds.), Catalogue
of Palaearctic Diptera, vol. 9. Akadémiai Kiadó,
Budapest.
Comment
on the proposed precedence of the specific
name of Euphryne obesus Baird,
1858 over that of Sauromalus ater Duméril,
1856 (Reptilia, Squamata)
(Case
3143; see BZN
58: 37-40)
Ken Nagy
Department of Organismic Biology, Ecology,
and Evolution, University of California,
Los Angeles, California 90095-1606, U.S.A.
I
oppose the proposal to change Sauromalus
obesus (Baird, 1858) to S. ater Duméril,
1856. The change would make it difficult
to access the literature in the areas of
physiology and ecology.
