mandatory change of incorrect original spelling ‘truncata’ (adj.) to agree in gender with (feminine) genus name (Art. 34.2.)
Journal title changed from “Transactions and proceedings of ….” to “Journal and proceedings of …“
mandatory change of incorrect original spelling ‘truncata’ (adj.) to agree in gender with (feminine) genus name (Art. 34.2.)
Journal title changed from “Transactions and proceedings of ….” to “Journal and proceedings of …“
mandatory change of incorrect original spelling to agree in gender - as a noun in the genitive case, the personal (female) name requires an ending of -ae. Named after Dr. Ilse Danneel
mandatory change of incorrect original spelling to agree in gender - as a noun in the genitive case, the personal (female) name requires an ending of -ae. Named after Dr. Ilse Danneel
spellings in original publication are pseudodolabratus and pseudo-dolabratus (NOT pseudolabratus); has been made available at subspecific rank by Sudzuki (1964)
spellings in original publication are pseudodolabratus and pseudo-dolabratus (NOT pseudolabratus); has been made available at subspecific rank by Sudzuki (1964)
mandatory change of incorrect original spelling to agree in gender - as a noun in the genitive case, the personal (female) name requires an ending of -ae (named after Katherine Ordway).
mandatory change of incorrect original spelling to agree in gender - as a noun in the genitive case, the personal (female) name requires an ending of -ae (named after Katherine Ordway).
paper published by Pax & Wulfert, but single authority of species is Wulfert, as specified by the authors in the orginal publication – see pp. 198, 207: “Rotaria rotatoria var. spongioderma WULF.”
paper published by Pax & Wulfert, but single authority of species is Wulfert, as specified by the authors in the orginal publication – see pp. 198, 207: “Rotaria rotatoria var. spongioderma WULF.”
mandatory change of incorrect original spelling 'polyphema' (noun in apposition: Pŏlyphēmus (-os ), i, m., = Πολύφημος. I. The one-eyed Cyclops in Sicily- II. One of the Argonauts). There is no etymology given in the orig. publ. nor are there any hints otherwise in the description
mandatory change of incorrect original spelling 'polyphema' (noun in apposition: Pŏlyphēmus (-os ), i, m., = Πολύφημος. I. The one-eyed Cyclops in Sicily- II. One of the Argonauts). There is no etymology given in the orig. publ. nor are there any hints otherwise in the description
mandatory change of incorrect original spelling Lie-Petterseni - hyphen must be deleted (Art. 32.5.2.) and species name must begin with a lower-case letter (Art. 5.1.)
mandatory change of incorrect original spelling Lie-Petterseni - hyphen must be deleted (Art. 32.5.2.) and species name must begin with a lower-case letter (Art. 5.1.)
mandatory change of incorrect original spelling ‘solidus’ (adj.) to agree in gender with (feminine) genus name (Art. 34.2.). - Series has been added to this and all other relevant entries
mandatory change of incorrect original spelling ‘solidus’ (adj.) to agree in gender with (feminine) genus name (Art. 34.2.). - Series has been added to this and all other relevant entries
Agreed, authorship should be credited to Hudson (1886), given that Bolton’s ‘publication among fly-leaves’ can hardly be taken as publication for the purpose of providing a public and permanent scientific record
Agreed, authorship should be credited to Hudson (1886), given that Bolton’s ‘publication among fly-leaves’ can hardly be taken as publication for the purpose of providing a public and permanent scientific record
Bērziņš (1973) used two alternative spellings, 'mekogensis' and 'mekongensis', for the single species of Anchitestudinella. Both spellings were used subsequently but it has never been clarified which of the two should be considered the correct spelling. As the first reviser, Segers (2007:6) fixed 'mekongensis' as the correct original spelling: "Considering the etymology of the name, which is derived from River Mekong, I suggest treating the latter, with -n-, as correct original spelling under Art.24.2.3 of the ICZN."
Bērziņš (1973) used two alternative spellings, 'mekogensis' and 'mekongensis', for the single species of Anchitestudinella. Both spellings were used subsequently but it has never been clarified which of the two should be considered the correct spelling. As the first reviser, Segers (2007:6) fixed 'mekongensis' as the correct original spelling: "Considering the etymology of the name, which is derived from River Mekong, I suggest treating the latter, with -n-, as correct original spelling under Art.24.2.3 of the ICZN."
this reflects taxonomic opinions and does not form part of the LAN proper.
[see Donner’s (1956) revision of H. bidens (in: Verhandlungen der Zoologisch-Botanischen Gesellschaft in Wien, 96) for details about this synonymy; he regards Macrotrachela bidens “Milne, 1886” only as Callidina bidens Gosse in a new combination]
this reflects taxonomic opinions and does not form part of the LAN proper.
[see Donner’s (1956) revision of H. bidens (in: Verhandlungen der Zoologisch-Botanischen Gesellschaft in Wien, 96) for details about this synonymy; he regards Macrotrachela bidens “Milne, 1886” only as Callidina bidens Gosse in a new combination]
This is Wulfert's (1966) Ascomorpha saltans var. indica (an unavailable infrasubspecific name) made available at subspecific rank by Koste, 1978. No matter if Koste credited the name to Wulfert, it is available from the latter publication and thus takes Koste’s authorship and date (Art.10.2.).
This is Wulfert's (1966) Ascomorpha saltans var. indica (an unavailable infrasubspecific name) made available at subspecific rank by Koste, 1978. No matter if Koste credited the name to Wulfert, it is available from the latter publication and thus takes Koste’s authorship and date (Art.10.2.).
I do have a copy of that work, but it doesn’t have a date on it. References to the work (not many) are inconsistent: Hudson & Gosse (1889), who redescribe and figure the species, cite the work as having been published in 1887, but Harring (1913) cites is with year 1888. Vorce himself, in 1890, mentions 1887 as the year of publication, which we regard as the date of publication…….
I do have a copy of that work, but it doesn’t have a date on it. References to the work (not many) are inconsistent: Hudson & Gosse (1889), who redescribe and figure the species, cite the work as having been published in 1887, but Harring (1913) cites is with year 1888. Vorce himself, in 1890, mentions 1887 as the year of publication, which we regard as the date of publication…….
The part of the series (Studies on the Fauna of Curacao and other Caribbean islands, 52) is contained in Journal: Uitgaven Natuurwetenschappelijke Studiekring voor Suriname en de Nederlandse Antillen. No. 88
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
The part of the series (Studies on the Fauna of Curacao and other Caribbean islands, 52) is contained in Journal: Uitgaven Natuurwetenschappelijke Studiekring voor Suriname en de Nederlandse Antillen. No. 88
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
Both the 1830 publication and the 1832 follow-up where the species is given a description use the spelling Dinocharis paupera. Harring et al. seem to have made a mistake.
If you are ever interested in accessing these papers, by the way, their re-prints of them in Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften are freely available as jpgs from BBAW, and some of the separate issues can be found as pdfs on archive.org.
Both the 1830 publication and the 1832 follow-up where the species is given a description use the spelling Dinocharis paupera. Harring et al. seem to have made a mistake.
If you are ever interested in accessing these papers, by the way, their re-prints of them in Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften are freely available as jpgs from BBAW, and some of the separate issues can be found as pdfs on archive.org.
Both the 1830 publication and the 1832 follow-up where the species is given a description use the spelling Dinocharis paupera. Harring et al. seem to have made a mistake.
If you are ever interested in accessing these papers, by the way, their re-prints of them in Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften are freely available as jpgs from BBAW, and some of the separate issues can be found as pdfs on archive.org.
Both the 1830 publication and the 1832 follow-up where the species is given a description use the spelling Dinocharis paupera. Harring et al. seem to have made a mistake.
If you are ever interested in accessing these papers, by the way, their re-prints of them in Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften are freely available as jpgs from BBAW, and some of the separate issues can be found as pdfs on archive.org.
Has the spelling been checked against the original publication? Unfortunately I don't have access to this early Ehrenberg but I note that Harring, Hudson & Gosse and others cite this species as pauper.
Has the spelling been checked against the original publication? Unfortunately I don't have access to this early Ehrenberg but I note that Harring, Hudson & Gosse and others cite this species as pauper.
Has the spelling been checked against the original publication? Unfortunately I don't have access to this early Ehrenberg but I note that Harring, Hudson & Gosse and others cite this species as pauper.
Has the spelling been checked against the original publication? Unfortunately I don't have access to this early Ehrenberg but I note that Harring, Hudson & Gosse and others cite this species as pauper.
"Most surnames or family names (Nachnamen) consist of only one word. Titles of former aristocrats (like Graf for "Count") have become parts of the Nachname in Germany, giving longer names of several words, usually including the nobiliary particle von (meaning "of") or zu (meaning "to", sometimes "at"), often von und zu are also found together (meaning "of and to/at").[4][5] The legal rules for these names are the same as those for other Nachnamen, which gives rise to a number of cases where people legally bear such names but are not recognized by the associations of formerly noble families in Germany, which continue to apply the old rules of the German Empire in their publications. Most of these cases come about when a woman of noble descent marries a man with no title, and the two adopt the woman's name as their common Nachname, which was impossible under imperial law."
"Most surnames or family names (Nachnamen) consist of only one word. Titles of former aristocrats (like Graf for "Count") have become parts of the Nachname in Germany, giving longer names of several words, usually including the nobiliary particle von (meaning "of") or zu (meaning "to", sometimes "at"), often von und zu are also found together (meaning "of and to/at").[4][5] The legal rules for these names are the same as those for other Nachnamen, which gives rise to a number of cases where people legally bear such names but are not recognized by the associations of formerly noble families in Germany, which continue to apply the old rules of the German Empire in their publications. Most of these cases come about when a woman of noble descent marries a man with no title, and the two adopt the woman's name as their common Nachname, which was impossible under imperial law."
For information: mekongensis is what is intended (and does appear with this spelling once in the text) but heading and caption to drawing spelled as mekogensis
For information: mekongensis is what is intended (and does appear with this spelling once in the text) but heading and caption to drawing spelled as mekogensis
I have author as Hudson 1886. I can find no trace of this species in Bolton's "Portfolio" Numbers 1 - 11 and I would consider Bolton’s original as unpublished and Hudson 1886 to be correct (or, at least Bolton in Hudson & Gosse, 1886).
I have author as Hudson 1886. I can find no trace of this species in Bolton's "Portfolio" Numbers 1 - 11 and I would consider Bolton’s original as unpublished and Hudson 1886 to be correct (or, at least Bolton in Hudson & Gosse, 1886).
Year of publication needs to be checked. I have also seen this species cited as 1897 and 1st paper in this volume is marked in pencil 1897, although printed year on cover is 1898.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
Year of publication needs to be checked. I have also seen this species cited as 1897 and 1st paper in this volume is marked in pencil 1897, although printed year on cover is 1898.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
Not in Vol. 34 for 1912. Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
Reference needs checking. Looks as though this may be a separate monograph, in which case citation should be: Rotatorienfauna Westpreussens, Danzig, viii + 207pp.
But I haven't been able to trace this work in the NHM Library or in BHL.
NB Also applies to: bidens, Diurella bisulcata, Diplax crassipes, Diplax paludosa, Anuraea quinquecostata, Metopidia rottenburgi, Metopidia similis, Metopidia unguipes, Diplax [and in B List] brevistyla, Diurella
Source incorrect, name was made available as Metopidia triptera Ehrenberg, 1830:
Ehrenberg, C. G. 1830. Organisation, Systematik und geographisches Verhältniss der Infusionsthierchen. Zwei Vorträge, in der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin gehalten in den Jahren 1828 und 1830. - pp. [1-2], 1-108. Berlin. (Dümmler).
Source incorrect, name was made available as Floscularia ornata Ehrenberg, 1830:
Ehrenberg, C. G. 1830. Organisation, Systematik und geographisches Verhältniss der Infusionsthierchen. Zwei Vorträge, in der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin gehalten in den Jahren 1828 und 1830. - pp. [1-2], 1-108. Berlin. (Dümmler).
Arévalo: please check again the last name in the original source (I don't have access to it). Cite the last name(s) as cited on the title page of the original source. If the name was given as José Arévalo García, then the last name is Arévalo García. If it was given as José Arévalo de Jiménez, then the last name is Arévalo de Jiménez. If the name was given as José Arévalo de Vargas y Jiménez, then cite the last name as Arévalo de Vargas y Jiménez. It is usual that Spanish persons have two last names, but there are many variations. Occasionally Spanish authors like to be cited with only one of the last names. If the name is given as José Arévalo in the original source, then citing the name as Arévalo is correct.
Arévalo: please check again the last name in the original source (I don't have access to it). Cite the last name(s) as cited on the title page of the original source. If the name was given as José Arévalo García, then the last name is Arévalo García. If it was given as José Arévalo de Jiménez, then the last name is Arévalo de Jiménez. If the name was given as José Arévalo de Vargas y Jiménez, then cite the last name as Arévalo de Vargas y Jiménez. It is usual that Spanish persons have two last names, but there are many variations. Occasionally Spanish authors like to be cited with only one of the last names. If the name is given as José Arévalo in the original source, then citing the name as Arévalo is correct.
Arévalo: please check again the last name in the original source (I don't have access to it). Cite the last name(s) as cited on the title page of the original source. If the name was given as José Arévalo García, then the last name is Arévalo García. If it was given as José Arévalo de Jiménez, then the last name is Arévalo de Jiménez. If the name was given as José Arévalo de Vargas y Jiménez, then cite the last name as Arévalo de Vargas y Jiménez. It is usual that Spanish persons have two last names, but there are many variations. Occasionally Spanish authors like to be cited with only one of the last names. If the name is given as José Arévalo in the original source, then citing the name as Arévalo is correct.
Török: please verify the original source and check the spelling of the author once again.
The Hungarian language has ö and ő, one with dots and the other one with oblique accents. This is the one with oblique accents: ő. Possibly not decoded correctly if copied to other files.
Török: please verify the original source and check the spelling of the author once again.
The Hungarian language has ö and ő, one with dots and the other one with oblique accents. This is the one with oblique accents: ő. Possibly not decoded correctly if copied to other files.
Török: please verify the original source and check the spelling of the author once again.
The Hungarian language has ö and ő, one with dots and the other one with oblique accents. This is the one with oblique accents: ő. Possibly not decoded correctly if copied to other files.
The name of the French author should correctly be cited as "Guerne", not "De Guerne" because the "de" in this name was a title of nobility in this name (complete name was Baron Jules de Guerne).
Note that quoting the name in the form "J. de Guerne" in the citation of the editor of the work is correct: here the first name is added, and so the title of nobility "de" is also added.
This is the usual standard for French names (examples: Lamarck, not de Lamarck, Buffon, not de Buffon). In names like De Gaulle the "de" is not a title of nobility. Citing the name as "De Guerne" would be done if this was not a noble person.
The name of the French author should correctly be cited as "Guerne", not "De Guerne" because the "de" in this name was a title of nobility in this name (complete name was Baron Jules de Guerne).
Note that quoting the name in the form "J. de Guerne" in the citation of the editor of the work is correct: here the first name is added, and so the title of nobility "de" is also added.
This is the usual standard for French names (examples: Lamarck, not de Lamarck, Buffon, not de Buffon). In names like De Gaulle the "de" is not a title of nobility. Citing the name as "De Guerne" would be done if this was not a noble person.
The name of the French author should correctly be cited as "Guerne", not "De Guerne" because the "de" in this name was a title of nobility in this name (complete name was Baron Jules de Guerne).
Note that quoting the name in the form "J. de Guerne" in the citation of the editor of the work is correct: here the first name is added, and so the title of nobility "de" is also added.
This is the usual standard for French names (examples: Lamarck, not de Lamarck, Buffon, not de Buffon). In names like De Gaulle the "de" is not a title of nobility. Citing the name as "De Guerne" would be done if this was not a noble person.
The name of the French author should correctly be
cited as "Guerne", not "De Guerne" because the
"de" in this name was a title of nobility in this name (complete name was Baron Jules de Guerne).
Note that quoting the name in the form "J. de Guerne" in the citation of the editor of the work is correct: here the first name is added, and so the title of nobility "de" is also added.
This is the usual standard for French names (examples: Lamarck, not de
Lamarck, Buffon, not de Buffon). In names like De Gaulle the "de" is not a title of nobility. Citing the name as "De Guerne" would be done if this was not a noble person.
The name of the French author must be cited as "Beauchamp", not "de Beauchamp" or "De Beauchamp" because the "de" is a title of nobility in this name (complete name was Paul Marais de Beauchamp).
This is usual standard for French names (example: Lamarck, not de Lamarck), the only exception is when the "de" is phonetically combined with the surname like in "d'Orbigny" (in such names the d' is added to the surname in taxonomic names).
The author's name De Ridder is correctly displayed here, because this was a Belgian and not a French author (and the De is not a title of nobility in this name).
The name of the German author in a taxnomic name must be cited as Hofsten, not Von Hofsten or von Hofsten. This is the usual standard for German names.
Ergebnisse der Deutschen Limnologischen Venezuela-Expedition 1952 is recorded in ZDB as the name of a serial, so this seems to be fine.
In the PDF file I see this name recorded as Lecane closterocerca wulferti Hauer, 1956, with a comment "junior subjective synonym of nominal taxon". I did not understand why the subspecies status has later been removed. I have no access to the original source. If it was established as a subspecies, it should be recorded as such. If it was established as a species, then it should be listed as a species.
Delete "Octavo", this was not the name of the publisher but a standard term to specify the size of the book.
The name of the published was Schubart.
Schrank, F. von Paula 1801. Grundriß der allgemeinen Naturgeschichte und Zoologie zum Gebrauch der Vorlesungen in zwo Abtheilungen. - pp. 1-16, [1], 1-412, [1]. Erlangen. (Schubart).
In the PDF file I read a comment by which this was regarded as an "unnecessary substitute name for Vorticella rotatoria Müller, 1786 (= Brachionus rotatoria Pallas, 1766)".
Müller 1786 only used Brachionus rotatorius Pallas, 1766, and I see no provision in the Code that would allow to establish a substitute name for a subsequent use of another name. A subsequent use or misidentification is not an available name (Art. 49). Moreover, I did not see that Schrank 1801 mentioned any of the two given names.
Check the name of the author. If given in Russian script in the original source, then spell it consistently according to the international standard transcription mode.
The y at the end of Zavadovsky is possibly not in agreement with the international transciption standards.
Not a new name established by Müller 1773: 131, only a
subsequent use of Vorticella urceolaris Linné, 1767.
Müller 1773: 131
gave a bibliographical reference to "Lin. Syst. 12." (= 12th edition of
Systema naturæ, today we would write "Linné 1767") and cited the
Linnean original genus Vorticella and the original Linnean diagnosis
"simplex pedunculata, ore dentato".
I do not understand why the Linnean name is not used for the taxon. Perhaps because Linné had a different species in mind. But I see in the PDF file that no types of Müller are preserved. Are Linnean types preserved? Otherwise a neotype could simply be selected for the Linnean name.
If this is no solution, then a Case should be brought to the Commission to clarify the situation, to suppress Vorticella urceolaris Linné, 1767 for both the principles of Priority and Homonymy, and all subsequent usages until 1773, and to validate Müller's 1773 name as available.
Schriften für Süßwasser und Meereskunde: in the GVK library catalogue recorded as "Schriften für Süsswasser- und Meereskunde", adding the hyphen is in any case necessary.
Please check if the original source spelled ß or ss, and take the original spelling.
Name of the author in the original work was spelled Linnæus (not with ae, but with æ). Linnæus did not spell himself Linnaeus, this is known from preserved handwritten documents.
In the title of the monograph the word naturæ was spelled with æ and not with ae (at both occasions).
Holmiæ was also spelled with æ and not with ae in the original source.
journal name is correct and entirely consistent with ZDB entry, but please check the last name of the author:
Zivkovic could have been written with accent aigu (acute accent) above the c (ć). If the name was spelled in Serbian script, then take care to use the correct transcription for this last letter. The Serbian letter which looks like ħ (h with a hyphen in the middle) is transcribed as ć, not as c. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbian_Cyrillic_alphabet
title of the journal as cited in library catalogues: Festschrift zur Feier des fünfundzwanzigjährigen Bestehens der K. K. Zoologisch-Botanischen Gesellschaft in Wien
it is possible that the journal name is not complete and should be amended: Rad Jugoslavenske Akademije Znanosti i Umjetnosti, Matematičko-Prirodoslovni Razred. Please check this.
Schrank, F. von Paula 1803.
Favna Boica. Durchgedachte Geschichte der in Baiern einheimischen und
zahmen Thiere. Dritten und lezten Bandes zweyte Abtheilung. - pp. [1],
1-372, III-XIX [= 3-19]. Landshut. (Krüll).
It is important to add "Dritten und lezten Bandes zweyte Abtheilung".
Title of monograph insufficient (I took it from the PDF file). Must be indicated Tome second.
In the PDF file was indicated "substitute name" for Trichoda rattus Müller, 1776. Lamarck's name was established as a regular new name with description, with a synonym "Trichoda rattus", a bibliographical reference to figures by Müller 1776 and to figures in "Encyclop.". I do not see a mandatory provision in the Code that a name established in this form must be considered as a substitute name. Lamarck 1816 did not indicate an intention to replace the name for nomenclatural reasons, to qualify for a new replacement name.
This jounal could have a second title in Hungarian, possibly A Pozsonyi Orvos-Természettudományi Egyesület közleményei. It is best to check the original source.
author name Zivkovic could have been written with e accent aigu (acute accent) above the c (ć) (see below under Le. mica).
Correct and complete journal name was Arhiv Bioloških Nauka - Archives des Sciences Biologiques (Serbocroatian name in Latin script, originally spelled with š = s hazhik)
I did not understand the comment in the PDF file: "preoccupied as Lecane amazonica Koste & Roberton (non Murray, 1913)" - Murray 1913 established Monostyla amazonica. No primary homonymy. Perhaps secondary homonymy, which is not an issue for the LAN.
But the name is a primary homonym of Lecane closterocerca amazonica Koste & Robertson, 1978.
I did not understand the comment in the PDF file: "preoccupied as Lecane amazonica Koste & Roberton (non Murray, 1913)" - Murray 1913 established Monostyla amazonica. No primary homonymy. Perhaps secondary homonymy, which is not an issue for the LAN.
But the name is a primary homonym of Lecane closterocerca amazonica Koste & Robertson, 1978.
Primary homonym of braziliensis, Lepadella monodactyla Koste 1972, only one name can be used. Add First Reviser decision, or a
comment that until present (add date) a First Reviser has not selected
precedence. Only one name should appear on List A.
Primary homonym of braziliensis, Lepadella benjamini Koste 1972, only one name can be used. Add First Reviser decision, or a comment that until present (add date) a First Reviser has not selected precedence. Only one name should appear on List A.
aequalis, Notommata Ehrenberg 1830 - was not made available by Ehrenberg 1830: 66 (nomen nudum, menioned without description or reference). If this species was figured on a plate of the same work, the plate should be added, p. 66 is not sufficient.
alba, Megalotrocha Ehrenberg 1831 - was given with the date 1831, I do not understand why, it was published on p. 65 in the same work as the previous species. Seems to be exactly the same situation as in the previous species. Nomen nudum, if a figure was not given.
All names taken from this publication by Ehrenberg should be revised.
turfacea, Dinocharis tetractis, Petr 1891; Věstník Královské české společnosti náuk, for 1890: p.222; no deposited types known [junior subjective synonym of nominal taxon; name declinable]
diadema, Floscularia, Petr 1891; Věstník Královské české společnosti náuk, for 1890: p.216, fig.1; no deposited types known [junior subjective synonym of Collotheca heptabrachiata (Schoch, 1869); name indeclinable]
as already pointed out to us, the correct journal title is 'Kieler Meeresforschungen'
2012-03-31 15:58
Scratchpads developed and conceived by (alphabetical):
Ed Baker,
Katherine Bouton
Alice Heaton
Dimitris Koureas,
Laurence Livermore,
Dave Roberts,
Simon Rycroft,
Ben Scott,
Vince Smith
thanks for catching that – corrected!
2013-04-05 20:56thanks for catching that – corrected!
2013-04-05 20:56thanks for catching that – volume corrected
2013-04-05 20:45thanks for catching that – volume corrected
2013-04-05 20:451897 verified as the correct year of publication
2013-04-05 20:381897 verified as the correct year of publication
2013-04-05 20:38mandatory change of incorrect original spelling ‘truncata’ (adj.) to agree in gender with (feminine) genus name (Art. 34.2.)
2013-04-05 20:37Journal title changed from “Transactions and proceedings of ….” to “Journal and proceedings of …“
mandatory change of incorrect original spelling ‘truncata’ (adj.) to agree in gender with (feminine) genus name (Art. 34.2.)
2013-04-05 20:37Journal title changed from “Transactions and proceedings of ….” to “Journal and proceedings of …“
mandatory change of incorrect original spelling ‘solidus’ (adj.) to agree in gender with (feminine) genus name (Art. 34.2.)
2013-04-05 20:11mandatory change of incorrect original spelling ‘solidus’ (adj.) to agree in gender with (feminine) genus name (Art. 34.2.)
2013-04-05 20:11mandatory change of incorrect original spelling to agree in gender - as a noun in the genitive case, the personal (female) name requires an ending of -ae. Named after Dr. Ilse Danneel
2013-04-05 20:10mandatory change of incorrect original spelling to agree in gender - as a noun in the genitive case, the personal (female) name requires an ending of -ae. Named after Dr. Ilse Danneel
2013-04-05 20:10spellings in original publication are pseudodolabratus and pseudo-dolabratus (NOT pseudolabratus); has been made available at subspecific rank by Sudzuki (1964)
2013-04-05 20:09spellings in original publication are pseudodolabratus and pseudo-dolabratus (NOT pseudolabratus); has been made available at subspecific rank by Sudzuki (1964)
2013-04-05 20:09thanks for catching that, corrected; and also for Floscularia quadrilobata Hood, 1892, Synchaeta tavina Hood, 1893, Sacculus cuirassis Hood, 1894
2013-04-05 20:06thanks for catching that, corrected; and also for Floscularia quadrilobata Hood, 1892, Synchaeta tavina Hood, 1893, Sacculus cuirassis Hood, 1894
2013-04-05 20:06mandatory change of incorrect original spelling to agree in gender - as a noun in the genitive case, the personal (female) name requires an ending of -ae (named after Katherine Ordway).
2013-04-05 20:04mandatory change of incorrect original spelling to agree in gender - as a noun in the genitive case, the personal (female) name requires an ending of -ae (named after Katherine Ordway).
2013-04-05 20:04mandatory change of incorrect original spelling (Umlaut replaced – Art.32.5.2.1.)
2013-04-05 20:02mandatory change of incorrect original spelling (Umlaut replaced – Art.32.5.2.1.)
2013-04-05 20:02correct date of issue is 1922
2013-04-05 20:00correct date of issue is 1922
2013-04-05 20:00mandatory change of incorrect original spelling ‘fimbriata’ (adj.) to agree in gender with (masculine) genus name (Art. 34.2.)
2013-04-05 19:56mandatory change of incorrect original spelling ‘fimbriata’ (adj.) to agree in gender with (masculine) genus name (Art. 34.2.)
2013-04-05 19:56paper published by Pax & Wulfert, but single authority of species is Wulfert, as specified by the authors in the orginal publication – see pp. 198, 207: “Rotaria rotatoria var. spongioderma WULF.”
2013-04-05 19:53paper published by Pax & Wulfert, but single authority of species is Wulfert, as specified by the authors in the orginal publication – see pp. 198, 207: “Rotaria rotatoria var. spongioderma WULF.”
2013-04-05 19:53mandatory change of incorrect original spelling 'polyphema' (noun in apposition: Pŏlyphēmus (-os ), i, m., = Πολύφημος. I. The one-eyed Cyclops in Sicily- II. One of the Argonauts). There is no etymology given in the orig. publ. nor are there any hints otherwise in the description
2013-04-05 19:51mandatory change of incorrect original spelling 'polyphema' (noun in apposition: Pŏlyphēmus (-os ), i, m., = Πολύφημος. I. The one-eyed Cyclops in Sicily- II. One of the Argonauts). There is no etymology given in the orig. publ. nor are there any hints otherwise in the description
2013-04-05 19:51mandatory change of incorrect original spelling Lie-Petterseni - hyphen must be deleted (Art. 32.5.2.) and species name must begin with a lower-case letter (Art. 5.1.)
2013-04-05 19:49mandatory change of incorrect original spelling Lie-Petterseni - hyphen must be deleted (Art. 32.5.2.) and species name must begin with a lower-case letter (Art. 5.1.)
2013-04-05 19:49mandatory change of incorrect original spelling ‘solidus’ (adj.) to agree in gender with (feminine) genus name (Art. 34.2.). - Series has been added to this and all other relevant entries
2013-04-05 19:48mandatory change of incorrect original spelling ‘solidus’ (adj.) to agree in gender with (feminine) genus name (Art. 34.2.). - Series has been added to this and all other relevant entries
2013-04-05 19:48mandatory change of incorrect original spelling, shapé needs to be corrected to shape (Art. 32.5.2.)
2013-04-05 19:45mandatory change of incorrect original spelling, shapé needs to be corrected to shape (Art. 32.5.2.)
2013-04-05 19:45Agreed, authorship should be credited to Hudson (1886), given that Bolton’s ‘publication among fly-leaves’ can hardly be taken as publication for the purpose of providing a public and permanent scientific record
2013-04-05 19:28Agreed, authorship should be credited to Hudson (1886), given that Bolton’s ‘publication among fly-leaves’ can hardly be taken as publication for the purpose of providing a public and permanent scientific record
2013-04-05 19:28mandatory change of incorrect original spelling ‘uniseta’ (adj.) to agree in gender with (masculine) genus name (Art. 34.2.)
2013-04-05 17:43mandatory change of incorrect original spelling ‘uniseta’ (adj.) to agree in gender with (masculine) genus name (Art. 34.2.)
2013-04-05 17:43thanks for catching that – year corrected!
2013-04-05 17:42thanks for catching that – year corrected!
2013-04-05 17:42mandatory change of incorrect original spelling - hyphen must be deleted (Art. 32.5.2.)
2013-04-05 17:37mandatory change of incorrect original spelling - hyphen must be deleted (Art. 32.5.2.)
2013-04-05 17:37Bērziņš (1973) used two alternative spellings, 'mekogensis' and 'mekongensis', for the single species of Anchitestudinella. Both spellings were used subsequently but it has never been clarified which of the two should be considered the correct spelling. As the first reviser, Segers (2007:6) fixed 'mekongensis' as the correct original spelling: "Considering the etymology of the name, which is derived from River Mekong, I suggest treating the latter, with -n-, as correct original spelling under Art.24.2.3 of the ICZN."
2013-04-05 17:35Bērziņš (1973) used two alternative spellings, 'mekogensis' and 'mekongensis', for the single species of Anchitestudinella. Both spellings were used subsequently but it has never been clarified which of the two should be considered the correct spelling. As the first reviser, Segers (2007:6) fixed 'mekongensis' as the correct original spelling: "Considering the etymology of the name, which is derived from River Mekong, I suggest treating the latter, with -n-, as correct original spelling under Art.24.2.3 of the ICZN."
2013-04-05 17:35this reflects taxonomic opinions and does not form part of the LAN proper.
2013-04-05 17:33[see Donner’s (1956) revision of H. bidens (in: Verhandlungen der Zoologisch-Botanischen Gesellschaft in Wien, 96) for details about this synonymy; he regards Macrotrachela bidens “Milne, 1886” only as Callidina bidens Gosse in a new combination]
this reflects taxonomic opinions and does not form part of the LAN proper.
2013-04-05 17:33[see Donner’s (1956) revision of H. bidens (in: Verhandlungen der Zoologisch-Botanischen Gesellschaft in Wien, 96) for details about this synonymy; he regards Macrotrachela bidens “Milne, 1886” only as Callidina bidens Gosse in a new combination]
This is Wulfert's (1966) Ascomorpha saltans var. indica (an unavailable infrasubspecific name) made available at subspecific rank by Koste, 1978. No matter if Koste credited the name to Wulfert, it is available from the latter publication and thus takes Koste’s authorship and date (Art.10.2.).
2013-04-05 17:32This is Wulfert's (1966) Ascomorpha saltans var. indica (an unavailable infrasubspecific name) made available at subspecific rank by Koste, 1978. No matter if Koste credited the name to Wulfert, it is available from the latter publication and thus takes Koste’s authorship and date (Art.10.2.).
2013-04-05 17:32thanks for catching that – year corrected!
2013-04-05 17:28thanks for catching that – year corrected!
2013-04-05 17:28thanks for catching that – title corrected!
2013-04-05 17:22thanks for catching that – title corrected!
2013-04-05 17:22Dinocharis pauper is an incorrect subsequent spelling, apparently introduced by Hudson & Gosse (1886) (Genus Dinocharis is feminine).
2013-04-05 17:19Dinocharis pauper is an incorrect subsequent spelling, apparently introduced by Hudson & Gosse (1886) (Genus Dinocharis is feminine).
2013-04-05 17:19Dinocharis pauper is an incorrect subsequent spelling, apparently introduced by Hudson & Gosse (1886) (Genus Dinocharis is feminine).
2013-04-05 17:19Dinocharis pauper is an incorrect subsequent spelling, apparently introduced by Hudson & Gosse (1886) (Genus Dinocharis is feminine).
2013-04-05 17:19I do have a copy of that work, but it doesn’t have a date on it. References to the work (not many) are inconsistent: Hudson & Gosse (1889), who redescribe and figure the species, cite the work as having been published in 1887, but Harring (1913) cites is with year 1888. Vorce himself, in 1890, mentions 1887 as the year of publication, which we regard as the date of publication…….
2013-04-05 17:15I do have a copy of that work, but it doesn’t have a date on it. References to the work (not many) are inconsistent: Hudson & Gosse (1889), who redescribe and figure the species, cite the work as having been published in 1887, but Harring (1913) cites is with year 1888. Vorce himself, in 1890, mentions 1887 as the year of publication, which we regard as the date of publication…….
2013-04-05 17:15thanks for catching that – publication year corrected!
2013-04-05 17:13thanks for catching that – publication year corrected!
2013-04-05 17:13mandatory change of incorrect original spelling ‘dissimilis’ (adj.) to agree in gender with (feminine) genus name (Art. 34.2.)
2013-04-05 17:11mandatory change of incorrect original spelling ‘dissimilis’ (adj.) to agree in gender with (feminine) genus name (Art. 34.2.)
2013-04-05 17:11journal title completed!
2013-04-05 17:10journal title completed!
2013-04-05 17:10(n. ser). added
2013-04-05 17:08(n. ser). added
2013-04-05 17:08(n. ser). added
2013-04-05 17:06(n. ser). added
2013-04-05 17:06mandatory change of incorrect original spelling ‘magnificus’ (adj.) to agree in gender with (feminine) genus name (Art. 34.2.)
2013-04-05 17:04mandatory change of incorrect original spelling ‘magnificus’ (adj.) to agree in gender with (feminine) genus name (Art. 34.2.)
2013-04-05 17:04mandatory change of incorrect original spelling ‘mollis’ (adj.) to agree in gender with (neuter) genus name (Art. 34.2.)
2013-04-05 17:03mandatory change of incorrect original spelling ‘mollis’ (adj.) to agree in gender with (neuter) genus name (Art. 34.2.)
2013-04-05 17:03yes, but that is how we have it anyway? Date confirmed anyway from original publication, if you meant a different year
2013-04-05 17:00yes, but that is how we have it anyway? Date confirmed anyway from original publication, if you meant a different year
2013-04-05 17:00thanks for catching that – year corrected!
2013-04-05 16:59thanks for catching that – year corrected!
2013-04-05 16:59mandatory change of incorrect original spelling ‘rectocaudatus’ (adj.) to agree in gender with (feminine) genus name (Art. 34.2.)
2013-04-05 16:47mandatory change of incorrect original spelling ‘rectocaudatus’ (adj.) to agree in gender with (feminine) genus name (Art. 34.2.)
2013-04-05 16:47mandatory change of incorrect original spelling ‘sibirica’ (adj.) to agree in gender with (neuter) genus name (Art. 34.2.)
2013-04-05 16:43mandatory change of incorrect original spelling ‘sibirica’ (adj.) to agree in gender with (neuter) genus name (Art. 34.2.)
2013-04-05 16:43spelling corrected to voigtii
2013-04-05 16:40spelling corrected to voigtii
2013-04-05 16:40yes, added
2013-04-05 16:35yes, added
2013-04-05 16:35Journal is Volume 19 of Sixth series
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-29 23:29Journal is Volume 19 of Sixth series
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-29 23:29Bryceela voigtii in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-29 23:27Bryceela voigtii in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-29 23:27Check date of publication. Possibly published 1948
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London.
2013-03-29 23:25sibirica in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-29 23:13sibirica in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-29 23:13rectocaudatus in original publication
Source checked: Biodiversity Heritage Library online
2013-03-29 23:11rectocaudatus in original publication
Source checked: Biodiversity Heritage Library online
2013-03-29 23:11Should be 1859!
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-29 23:10Should be 1859!
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-29 23:10Check date of publication. Apparently published 1793
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London.
2013-03-29 22:59Check date of publication. Apparently published 1793
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London.
2013-03-29 22:59Ploesoma mollis n.s. in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-29 22:57Ploesoma mollis n.s. in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-29 22:57magnificus in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-29 20:06magnificus in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-29 20:06Journal title is correct. but should indicate that this is the new series - n.s. Vol. 8 part 1
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-29 20:05Journal title is correct. but should indicate that this is the new series - n.s. Vol. 8 part 1
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-29 20:05Journal title is correct. but should indicate that this is the new series - n.s. Vol. 8 part 1
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-29 20:04Journal title is correct. but should indicate that this is the new series - n.s. Vol. 8 part 1
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-29 20:04The part of the series (Studies on the Fauna of Curacao and other Caribbean islands, 52) is contained in Journal: Uitgaven Natuurwetenschappelijke Studiekring voor Suriname en de Nederlandse Antillen. No. 88
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-29 20:00The part of the series (Studies on the Fauna of Curacao and other Caribbean islands, 52) is contained in Journal: Uitgaven Natuurwetenschappelijke Studiekring voor Suriname en de Nederlandse Antillen. No. 88
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-29 20:00dissimile in original publication.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-29 19:57dissimile in original publication.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-29 19:57Check date of publication. Apparently published 1890.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-29 19:55Check date of publication. Apparently published 1854.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-29 19:54Check date of publication. Apparently published 1854.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-29 19:541888 shown on cover.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-29 19:501888 shown on cover.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-29 19:50Both the 1830 publication and the 1832 follow-up where the species is given a description use the spelling Dinocharis paupera. Harring et al. seem to have made a mistake.
If you are ever interested in accessing these papers, by the way, their re-prints of them in Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften are freely available as jpgs from BBAW, and some of the separate issues can be found as pdfs on archive.org.
2013-03-27 23:35Both the 1830 publication and the 1832 follow-up where the species is given a description use the spelling Dinocharis paupera. Harring et al. seem to have made a mistake.
If you are ever interested in accessing these papers, by the way, their re-prints of them in Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften are freely available as jpgs from BBAW, and some of the separate issues can be found as pdfs on archive.org.
2013-03-27 23:35Both the 1830 publication and the 1832 follow-up where the species is given a description use the spelling Dinocharis paupera. Harring et al. seem to have made a mistake.
If you are ever interested in accessing these papers, by the way, their re-prints of them in Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften are freely available as jpgs from BBAW, and some of the separate issues can be found as pdfs on archive.org.
2013-03-27 23:35Both the 1830 publication and the 1832 follow-up where the species is given a description use the spelling Dinocharis paupera. Harring et al. seem to have made a mistake.
If you are ever interested in accessing these papers, by the way, their re-prints of them in Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften are freely available as jpgs from BBAW, and some of the separate issues can be found as pdfs on archive.org.
2013-03-27 23:35Has the spelling been checked against the original publication? Unfortunately I don't have access to this early Ehrenberg but I note that Harring, Hudson & Gosse and others cite this species as pauper.
2013-03-27 14:16Has the spelling been checked against the original publication? Unfortunately I don't have access to this early Ehrenberg but I note that Harring, Hudson & Gosse and others cite this species as pauper.
2013-03-27 14:16Has the spelling been checked against the original publication? Unfortunately I don't have access to this early Ehrenberg but I note that Harring, Hudson & Gosse and others cite this species as pauper.
2013-03-27 14:16Has the spelling been checked against the original publication? Unfortunately I don't have access to this early Ehrenberg but I note that Harring, Hudson & Gosse and others cite this species as pauper.
2013-03-27 14:16Reference should be: Journal of the Quekett Microscopical Club, (ser. 2) 5: p.283
Source checked: Own Copy
2013-03-23 16:57Reference should be: Journal of the Quekett Microscopical Club, (ser. 2) 5: p.283
Source checked: Own Copy
2013-03-23 16:57Referring to comment of 2012-12-06 12:03. My understanding is that the 'von' does form part of the legal surname. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_name'
"Most surnames or family names (Nachnamen) consist of only one word. Titles of former aristocrats (like Graf for "Count") have become parts of the Nachname in Germany, giving longer names of several words, usually including the nobiliary particle von (meaning "of") or zu (meaning "to", sometimes "at"), often von und zu are also found together (meaning "of and to/at").[4][5] The legal rules for these names are the same as those for other Nachnamen, which gives rise to a number of cases where people legally bear such names but are not recognized by the associations of formerly noble families in Germany, which continue to apply the old rules of the German Empire in their publications. Most of these cases come about when a woman of noble descent marries a man with no title, and the two adopt the woman's name as their common Nachname, which was impossible under imperial law."
2013-03-23 16:51Referring to comment of 2012-12-06 12:03. My understanding is that the 'von' does form part of the legal surname. From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/German_name'
"Most surnames or family names (Nachnamen) consist of only one word. Titles of former aristocrats (like Graf for "Count") have become parts of the Nachname in Germany, giving longer names of several words, usually including the nobiliary particle von (meaning "of") or zu (meaning "to", sometimes "at"), often von und zu are also found together (meaning "of and to/at").[4][5] The legal rules for these names are the same as those for other Nachnamen, which gives rise to a number of cases where people legally bear such names but are not recognized by the associations of formerly noble families in Germany, which continue to apply the old rules of the German Empire in their publications. Most of these cases come about when a woman of noble descent marries a man with no title, and the two adopt the woman's name as their common Nachname, which was impossible under imperial law."
2013-03-23 16:51Should be 1899
Source checked: Biodiversity Heritage Library online
2013-03-23 16:34Should be 1899
Source checked: Biodiversity Heritage Library online
2013-03-23 16:34Koste cites as authority: Wulfert, 1966 Limnologica, 4 : 58
Source checked: Own Copy
2013-03-23 16:30Koste cites as authority: Wulfert, 1966 Limnologica, 4 : 58
Source checked: Own Copy
2013-03-23 16:30Shown in LAN as junior subjective synonym of Habrotrocha bidens (Gosse, 1851).
Erected as nom.nov. pro Macrotrachela bidens Milne, 1886 [England]. Bryce considers this distinct from Callidina bidens of Gosse.
Bartos 1951 (& Wisniewski, 1954) considers H. milnei as a distinct species.
Source checked: Own Copy
2013-03-23 16:28Shown in LAN as junior subjective synonym of Habrotrocha bidens (Gosse, 1851).
Erected as nom.nov. pro Macrotrachela bidens Milne, 1886 [England]. Bryce considers this distinct from Callidina bidens of Gosse.
Bartos 1951 (& Wisniewski, 1954) considers H. milnei as a distinct species.
Source checked: Own Copy
2013-03-23 16:28For information: mekongensis is what is intended (and does appear with this spelling once in the text) but heading and caption to drawing spelled as mekogensis
Source checked: Own Copy
2013-03-23 16:23For information: mekongensis is what is intended (and does appear with this spelling once in the text) but heading and caption to drawing spelled as mekogensis
Source checked: Own Copy
2013-03-23 16:23For information: magna-calcarata in original publication
Source checked: Own Copy
2013-03-23 16:16For information: magna-calcarata in original publication
Source checked: Own Copy
2013-03-23 16:16I have author as Hudson 1886. I can find no trace of this species in Bolton's "Portfolio" Numbers 1 - 11 and I would consider Bolton’s original as unpublished and Hudson 1886 to be correct (or, at least Bolton in Hudson & Gosse, 1886).
Source checked: Own Copy
2013-03-23 16:13I have author as Hudson 1886. I can find no trace of this species in Bolton's "Portfolio" Numbers 1 - 11 and I would consider Bolton’s original as unpublished and Hudson 1886 to be correct (or, at least Bolton in Hudson & Gosse, 1886).
Source checked: Own Copy
2013-03-23 16:13uniseta in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 16:07uniseta in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 16:07truncatum in original publication. Journal title is: Journal and proceedings of…
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 16:05truncatum in original publication. Journal title is: Journal and proceedings of…
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 16:05Publication is in Heft 1, published 1894 (Heft 2 published 1896)
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 16:02Publication is in Heft 1, published 1894 (Heft 2 published 1896)
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 16:02Year of publication needs to be checked. I have also seen this species cited as 1897 and 1st paper in this volume is marked in pencil 1897, although printed year on cover is 1898.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 15:58Year of publication needs to be checked. I have also seen this species cited as 1897 and 1st paper in this volume is marked in pencil 1897, although printed year on cover is 1898.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 15:58In volume 110.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 15:54In volume 110.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 15:54Should be stipitata.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 15:52Should be stipitata.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 15:52Check date of publication. Apparently published 1951.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 15:49solidus in original publication. Journal citation should indicate this is second series.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 14:29solidus in original publication. Journal citation should indicate this is second series.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 14:29Although indication on original is 1888, there is a possibility that year of publication was 1889 - you should attempt to verify this.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 14:26Check date of publication. Apparently published 1951.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 14:23For information: shapé in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 14:21For information: shapé in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 14:21Article is by Pax & Wulfert.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 14:18Article is by Pax & Wulfert.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 14:18polyphema in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 14:14polyphema in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 14:14Check date of publication. Apparently published 1949.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 14:12For information: Lie-Petterseni in original publication.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 14:09For information: Lie-Petterseni in original publication.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 14:09Check date of publication. Apparently published 1890.
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 14:07fimbriata in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 14:02fimbriata in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 14:02Year needs to be checked: 1921 on cover and on spine (of bound volume).
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 13:59Year needs to be checked: 1921 on cover and on spine (of bound volume).
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 13:59granulosus in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 13:53Check the date: apparently published in 1951
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 13:52fertöensis in original publication. Volume is: Bd 80, Nr. 7/9
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 13:49fertöensis in original publication. Volume is: Bd 80, Nr. 7/9
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 13:49Francé in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 13:43Publication is in Heft 1, published 1894 (Heft 2 published 1896)
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 13:30For information: dixon-nuttalli in original
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 13:27Likely that this was published in 1847 but I have been unable to absolutely determine this. You should make further checks.
Citation should include part No. - Vol. 6 Part 7
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-23 13:24ordwayi in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-01 18:46ordwayi in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-01 18:46Correct citation is: The International Journal of Microscopy and Natural Science. Ser 3. Vol.2 Part 14 p.73, pls.6,7
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-01 18:44Correct citation is: The International Journal of Microscopy and Natural Science. Ser 3. Vol.2 Part 14 p.73, pls.6,7
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-01 18:44danneeli in original in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-01 18:40danneeli in original in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-01 18:40Brachionus angularis form pseudolabratus in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-01 18:37Brachionus angularis form pseudolabratus in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-03-01 18:37Metopidia solidus latusinus in original publication
Source checked: BHL facsimile
2013-03-01 18:34Metopidia solidus latusinus in original publication
Source checked: BHL facsimile
2013-03-01 18:34Not in Vol. 34 for 1912. Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
Reference needs checking. Looks as though this may be a separate monograph, in which case citation should be: Rotatorienfauna Westpreussens, Danzig, viii + 207pp.
But I haven't been able to trace this work in the NHM Library or in BHL.
NB Also applies to:
2013-01-22 10:37bidens, Diurella
bisulcata, Diplax
crassipes, Diplax
paludosa, Anuraea
quinquecostata, Metopidia
rottenburgi, Metopidia
similis, Metopidia
unguipes, Diplax
[and in B List]
brevistyla, Diurella
bitorquata in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-01-22 09:56bidentata in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-01-22 09:51areolata in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-01-22 09:46annulatus in original publication
Citation should read: 7 (Art. III) p.47
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-01-22 09:43alluaudi in original publication
Source checked: Volume in Library of Natural History Museum, London
2013-01-22 09:38Reference should be: Journal of the Quekett Microscopical Club, (ser. 2) 5: p.281, pl.12, fig.2
Source checked: own copy of complete run of Journal (as current President of the Quekett Microscopical Club!)
2013-01-21 20:56Established with short description ("dorsalibus acervatis"), correctly made available.
2012-12-07 00:00Mentioned without description or indication, nomen nudum.
2012-12-06 23:59Should be removed from the List.
Or attributed to the next source where the name was made available.
Mentioned without description or indication, nomen nudum.
2012-12-06 23:58Should be removed from the List.
Or attributed to the next source where the name was made available.
Established with short description ("cocca"), probably correctly made available.
2012-12-06 23:56Established with short description ("tribus dorsalibus"), correctly made available.
2012-12-06 23:55page number incorrect, should be 68, not 48
Established with short description ("cauda simpliciter furcata"), correctly made available.
2012-12-06 23:53Mentioned without description or indication, nomen nudum.
2012-12-06 23:50Should be removed from the List.
Or attributed to the next source where the name was made available.
Source incorrect, name was made available as Metopidia triptera Ehrenberg, 1830:
2012-12-06 23:49Ehrenberg, C. G. 1830. Organisation, Systematik und geographisches Verhältniss der Infusionsthierchen. Zwei Vorträge, in der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin gehalten in den Jahren 1828 und 1830. - pp. [1-2], 1-108. Berlin. (Dümmler).
p. 92, established with a short description.
Source incorrect, name was made available as Floscularia ornata Ehrenberg, 1830:
Ehrenberg, C. G. 1830. Organisation, Systematik und geographisches Verhältniss der Infusionsthierchen. Zwei Vorträge, in der Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin gehalten in den Jahren 1828 und 1830. - pp. [1-2], 1-108. Berlin. (Dümmler).
2012-12-06 23:46p. 65, established with a short description.
Mentioned without description or indication, nomen nudum.
2012-12-06 23:38Should be removed from the List.
Or attributed to the next source where the name was made available.
Mentioned without description or indication, nomen nudum.
2012-12-06 23:37Should be removed from the List.
Or attributed to the next source where the name was made available.
Mentioned without description or indication, nomen nudum.
2012-12-06 23:36Should be removed from the List.
Or attributed to the next source where the name was made available.
Mentioned without description or indication, nomen nudum.
2012-12-06 23:35Should be removed from the List.
Or attributed to the next source where the name was made available.
Mentioned without description or indication, nomen nudum.
2012-12-06 23:34Should be removed from the List.
Or attributed to the next source where the name was made available.
Mentioned without description or indication, nomen nudum.
2012-12-06 23:33Should be removed from the List.
Or attributed to the next source where the name was made available.
Mentioned without description or indication, nomen nudum.
2012-12-06 23:31Should be removed from the List.
Or attributed to the next source where the name was made available.
Established with short description ("ore oblique infero"), correctly made available.
2012-12-06 23:30Mentioned without description or indication, nomen nudum.
2012-12-06 23:28Should be removed from the List.
Or attributed to the next source where the name was made available.
Mentioned without description or indication, nomen nudum.
2012-12-06 23:28Should be removed from the List.
Or attributed to the next source where the name was made available.
Mentioned without description or indication, nomen nudum.
2012-12-06 23:28Should be removed from the List.
Or attributed to the next source where the name was made available.
Mentioned without description or indication, nomen nudum.
2012-12-06 23:28Should be removed from the List.
Or attributed to the next source where the name was made available.
Mentioned without description or indication, nomen nudum.
2012-12-06 23:27Should be removed from the List.
Or attributed to the next source where the name was made available.
Established with short description ("caudae quinque apicibus"), correctly made available.
2012-12-06 23:25Established with short description ("oculis tribus, uno dorsali, duobus frontalibus"), correctly made available.
Original spelling Eosphora Najas.
2012-12-06 23:23Mentioned without description or indication, nomen nudum. The description "cauda furcata" referred to 2 species.
2012-12-06 23:20Should be removed from the List.
Or attributed to the next source where the name was made available.
Established with short description ("ore recto terminali"), correctly made available.
2012-12-06 23:18Mentioned without description or indication, nomen nudum.
2012-12-06 23:17Should be removed from the List.
Or attributed to the next source where the name was made available.
Mentioned without description or indication, nomen nudum.
2012-12-06 23:15Should be removed from the List.
Or attributed to the next source where the name was made available.
Mentioned without description or indication, nomen nudum.
2012-12-06 23:14Should be removed from the List.
Or attributed to the next source where the name was made available.
Established with short description ("cauda ter furcata"), and with an illustration on Pl. 7, name was correctly made available.
2012-12-06 23:12Mentioned without description or indication, nomen nudum.
2012-12-06 23:07Should be removed from the List.
Or attributed to the next source where the name was made available.
Established with short description (cauda simplici), correctly made available.
2012-12-06 23:03page number incorrect, should be 65 and not 45.
Established with short description (oculo unico), name was made available.
2012-12-06 23:01Name was made available, equipped with a short description (cauda simplici).
2012-12-06 22:56Mentioned without description or indication, nomen nudum.
2012-12-06 22:54Should be removed from the List.
Or attributed to the next source where the name was made available.
Mentioned without description or indication, nomen nudum.
2012-12-06 22:53Should be removed from the List.
Or attributed to the next source where the name was made available.
Mentioned without description or indication, nomen nudum.
2012-12-06 22:38Should be removed from the List.
Or attributed to the next source where the name was made available.
Mentioned without description or indication, nomen nudum.
2012-12-06 22:34Should be removed from the List.
Or attributed to the next source where the name was made available.
date should be 1830, 1831 was probably an error
Name was made available, equipped with a short description, no nomen nudum.
2012-12-06 22:30Arévalo: please check again the last name in the original source (I don't have access to it). Cite the last name(s) as cited on the title page of the original source.
2012-12-06 21:54If the name was given as José Arévalo García, then the last name is Arévalo García.
If it was given as José Arévalo de Jiménez, then the last name is Arévalo de Jiménez.
If the name was given as José Arévalo de Vargas y Jiménez, then cite the last name as Arévalo de Vargas y Jiménez.
It is usual that Spanish persons have two last names, but there are many variations. Occasionally Spanish authors like to be cited with only one of the last names.
If the name is given as José Arévalo in the original source, then citing the name as Arévalo is correct.
Arévalo: please check again the last name in the original source (I don't have access to it). Cite the last name(s) as cited on the title page of the original source.
2012-12-06 21:54If the name was given as José Arévalo García, then the last name is Arévalo García.
If it was given as José Arévalo de Jiménez, then the last name is Arévalo de Jiménez.
If the name was given as José Arévalo de Vargas y Jiménez, then cite the last name as Arévalo de Vargas y Jiménez.
It is usual that Spanish persons have two last names, but there are many variations. Occasionally Spanish authors like to be cited with only one of the last names.
If the name is given as José Arévalo in the original source, then citing the name as Arévalo is correct.
Arévalo: please check again the last name in the original source (I don't have access to it). Cite the last name(s) as cited on the title page of the original source.
2012-12-06 21:54If the name was given as José Arévalo García, then the last name is Arévalo García.
If it was given as José Arévalo de Jiménez, then the last name is Arévalo de Jiménez.
If the name was given as José Arévalo de Vargas y Jiménez, then cite the last name as Arévalo de Vargas y Jiménez.
It is usual that Spanish persons have two last names, but there are many variations. Occasionally Spanish authors like to be cited with only one of the last names.
If the name is given as José Arévalo in the original source, then citing the name as Arévalo is correct.
Name of the author should be cited as "Paggi", delete the first name.
2012-12-06 21:50Name of the author should be cited as "Paggi", delete the first name.
2012-12-06 21:49Name of the author should be cited as "Paggi", delete the first name.
2012-12-06 21:49Török: please verify the original source and check the spelling of the author once again.
2012-12-06 21:46The Hungarian language has ö and ő, one with dots and the other one with oblique accents. This is the one with oblique accents: ő. Possibly not decoded correctly if copied to other files.
Török: please verify the original source and check the spelling of the author once again.
2012-12-06 21:46The Hungarian language has ö and ő, one with dots and the other one with oblique accents. This is the one with oblique accents: ő. Possibly not decoded correctly if copied to other files.
Török: please verify the original source and check the spelling of the author once again.
2012-12-06 21:45The Hungarian language has ö and ő, one with dots and the other one with oblique accents. This is the one with oblique accents: ő. Possibly not decoded correctly if copied to other files.
The name of the French author should correctly be cited as "Guerne", not "De Guerne" because the "de" in this name was a title of nobility in this name (complete name was Baron Jules de Guerne).
2012-12-06 21:36Note that quoting the name in the form "J. de Guerne" in the citation of the editor of the work is correct: here the first name is added, and so the title of nobility "de" is also added.
This is the usual standard for French names (examples: Lamarck, not de Lamarck, Buffon, not de Buffon). In names like De Gaulle the "de" is not a title of nobility. Citing the name as "De Guerne" would be done if this was not a noble person.
The name of the French author should correctly be cited as "Guerne", not "De Guerne" because the "de" in this name was a title of nobility in this name (complete name was Baron Jules de Guerne).
2012-12-06 21:36Note that quoting the name in the form "J. de Guerne" in the citation of the editor of the work is correct: here the first name is added, and so the title of nobility "de" is also added.
This is the usual standard for French names (examples: Lamarck, not de Lamarck, Buffon, not de Buffon). In names like De Gaulle the "de" is not a title of nobility. Citing the name as "De Guerne" would be done if this was not a noble person.
The name of the French author should correctly be cited as "Guerne", not "De Guerne" because the "de" in this name was a title of nobility in this name (complete name was Baron Jules de Guerne).
2012-12-06 21:36Note that quoting the name in the form "J. de Guerne" in the citation of the editor of the work is correct: here the first name is added, and so the title of nobility "de" is also added.
This is the usual standard for French names (examples: Lamarck, not de Lamarck, Buffon, not de Buffon). In names like De Gaulle the "de" is not a title of nobility. Citing the name as "De Guerne" would be done if this was not a noble person.
The name of the French author should correctly be
cited as "Guerne", not "De Guerne" because the
"de" in this name was a title of nobility in this name (complete name was Baron Jules de Guerne).
Note that quoting the name in the form "J. de Guerne" in the citation of the editor of the work is correct: here the first name is added, and so the title of nobility "de" is also added.
This is the usual standard for French names (examples: Lamarck, not de
Lamarck, Buffon, not de Buffon). In names like De Gaulle the "de" is not a title of nobility. Citing the name as "De Guerne" would be done if this was not a noble person.
The author's name should be spelled d'Hondt (lower-case d and ' )
2012-12-06 19:19The name of the French author must be cited as "Beauchamp", not "de Beauchamp" or "De Beauchamp" because the "de" is a title of nobility in this name (complete name was Paul Marais de Beauchamp).
This is usual standard for French names (example: Lamarck, not de Lamarck), the only exception is when the "de" is phonetically combined with the surname like in "d'Orbigny" (in such names the d' is added to the surname in taxonomic names).
2012-12-06 12:18The author's name De Ridder is correctly displayed here, because this was a Belgian and not a French author (and the De is not a title of nobility in this name).
2012-12-06 12:11The name of the German author in a taxnomic name must be cited as Hofsten, not Von Hofsten or von Hofsten. This is the usual standard for German names.
2012-12-06 12:08The name of the German author in a taxnomic name must be cited as Hofsten, not Von Hofsten or von Hofsten.
2012-12-06 12:06The name of the German author in a taxnomic name must be cited as Hofsten, not Von Hofsten or von Hofsten.
2012-12-06 12:03The name of the German author in a taxnomic name must be cited as Hofsten, not Von Hofsten or von Hofsten.
2012-12-06 12:03Original spelling Diplodina Arctiscon, corrected original spelling Diplodina arctiscon.
Title of work is correctly displayed here, in the PDF file the space after the hyphen (Natur- ) was wanting.
2012-12-06 11:58Ergebnisse der Deutschen Limnologischen Venezuela-Expedition 1952 is recorded in ZDB as the name of a serial, so this seems to be fine.
In the PDF file I see this name recorded as Lecane closterocerca wulferti Hauer, 1956, with a comment "junior subjective synonym of nominal taxon". I did not understand why the subspecies status has later been removed. I have no access to the original source. If it was established as a subspecies, it should be recorded as such. If it was established as a species, then it should be listed as a species.
2012-12-06 00:14Delete "Octavo", this was not the name of the publisher but a standard term to specify the size of the book.
The name of the published was Schubart.
Schrank, F. von Paula 1801. Grundriß der allgemeinen Naturgeschichte und Zoologie zum Gebrauch der Vorlesungen in zwo Abtheilungen. - pp. 1-16, [1], 1-412, [1]. Erlangen. (Schubart).
http://www.mdz-nbn-resolving.de/urn/resolver.pl?urn=urn:nbn:de:bvb:12-bs...
In the PDF file I read a comment by which this was regarded as an "unnecessary substitute name for Vorticella rotatoria Müller, 1786 (= Brachionus rotatoria Pallas, 1766)".
Müller 1786 only used Brachionus rotatorius Pallas, 1766, and I see no provision in the Code that would allow to establish a substitute name for a subsequent use of another name. A subsequent use or misidentification is not an available name (Art. 49). Moreover, I did not see that Schrank 1801 mentioned any of the two given names.
2012-12-06 00:02Check the name of the author. If given in Russian script in the original source, then spell it consistently according to the international standard transcription mode.
The y at the end of Zavadovsky is possibly not in agreement with the international transciption standards.
2012-12-05 23:34Not a new name established by Müller 1773: 131, only a
subsequent use of Vorticella urceolaris Linné, 1767.
Müller 1773: 131
gave a bibliographical reference to "Lin. Syst. 12." (= 12th edition of
Systema naturæ, today we would write "Linné 1767") and cited the
Linnean original genus Vorticella and the original Linnean diagnosis
"simplex pedunculata, ore dentato".
I do not understand why the Linnean name is not used for the taxon. Perhaps because Linné had a different species in mind. But I see in the PDF file that no types of Müller are preserved. Are Linnean types preserved? Otherwise a neotype could simply be selected for the Linnean name.
If this is no solution, then a Case should be brought to the Commission to clarify the situation, to suppress Vorticella urceolaris Linné, 1767 for both the principles of Priority and Homonymy, and all subsequent usages until 1773, and to validate Müller's 1773 name as available.
2012-12-05 23:29Schriften für Süßwasser und Meereskunde: in the GVK library catalogue recorded as "Schriften für Süsswasser- und Meereskunde", adding the hyphen is in any case necessary.
Please check if the original source spelled ß or ss, and take the original spelling.
2012-12-05 23:09The Belgian journal name was correctly cited, but this journal has volume numbers (serial run was 1.1934 - 67.1999(2000)).
Add the volume number, here and at some 50 other occasions in the List.
2012-12-05 23:06The Belgian journal name was correctly cited, but this journal has volume numbers (serial run was 1.1934 - 67.1999(2000)).
Add the volume number, here and at some 50 other occasions in the List.
2012-12-05 23:06In the monograph title it was originally spelled "quæ detexit", not quae.
Havniæ was spelled with æ and not with ae in the original source.
2012-12-05 22:59Name of the author in the original work was spelled Linnæus (not with ae, but with æ). Linnæus did not spell himself Linnaeus, this is known from preserved handwritten documents.
In the title of the monograph the word naturæ was spelled with æ and not with ae (at both occasions).
Holmiæ was also spelled with æ and not with ae in the original source.
2012-12-05 22:56This seems to be the file with the correct Polish diacritics. In the PDF file and in the second file in this list the Polish is not correct.
2012-12-05 22:49AV-centralen i lund. It seems that this is not a journal, it is nowhere recorded as such in library catalogues, see
http://kvk.ubka.uni-karlsruhe.de
Cite the title of the serial in a form that scientists can find the published name in the future.
2012-12-05 22:43Cite the journal name consistently. Lunds Universitets Års-skrift is a proposal, this was also used in other names.
(The letter Å (å in lower-case) is perhaps not correctly decoded here, wherever this file is copied to, this is the A with a small ball above.)
If you give the subtitle Acta Universitatis Lundensis, then do this at all occasions where this journal is cited.
2012-12-05 22:40Check the Estonian journal title, I did not find it, it was not correctly cited. Toimetiset should be spelled Toimetised, Nsv could mean NSV.
2012-12-05 22:35ZDB journal entry seems to be Bollettino di pesca, di piscicoltura e di idrobiologia / Supplemento memorie scientifiche
2012-12-05 22:33The Romanian diacritics were correctly displayed in the PDF file, here they are distorted. Should be taken care of the character encoding used.
2012-12-05 22:03Check journal title for correct Polish with all diacritic marks. I think that Lwow should be spelled Lwów.
2012-12-05 22:00Cite the Chinese original title, in pinyin transription. Eventually add the Chinese characters, if you can do that.
Nobody in China will find the title if exclusively an English translation is given. Library employees in China do not understand English.
2012-12-05 21:57Journal name is Der Naturfoscher, the "Der" is important
(Le Naturaliste Canadien and The Victorian Scientist given at other occasions are correct).
2012-12-05 21:52journal name is correct and entirely consistent with ZDB entry, but please check the last name of the author:
Zivkovic could have been written with accent aigu (acute accent) above the c (ć). If the name was spelled in Serbian script, then take care to use the correct transcription for this last letter. The Serbian letter which looks like ħ (h with a hyphen in the middle) is transcribed as ć, not as c.
2012-12-05 21:45http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbian_Cyrillic_alphabet
Correct journal name is Zoologiska Bidrag från Uppsala
The letter å (perhaps not correctly decoded here) is the a with a small ball above.
2012-12-05 21:36The name Zoppi de Roa is very probably correctly cited.
2012-12-05 21:33cite the full journal name: Annotation of the Oceanographical Research
2012-12-05 21:31journal name incorrect, correct should be Vierteljahrsschrift der Naturforschenden Gesellschaft in Zürich
2012-12-05 17:46I do not understand why coprophila described in the same work is not in the list.
journal name misspelled, correct should be:
Iheringia, Série Zoologia
2012-12-05 17:44title of the journal as cited in library catalogues:
2012-12-05 17:43Festschrift zur Feier des fünfundzwanzigjährigen Bestehens der K. K. Zoologisch-Botanischen Gesellschaft in Wien
spell out the full journal title, in this form it is not possible to find the original source. Cross-check with online library resources.
2012-12-05 17:37the correct journal title is 'Kieler Meeresforschungen'
2012-12-05 17:33the correct journal title is 'Kieler Meeresforschungen'
2012-12-05 17:32the correct journal title is 'Kieler Meeresforschungen'
2012-12-05 17:31the correct journal title is 'Kieler Meeresforschungen'
2012-12-05 17:28the correct journal title is 'Kieler Meeresforschungen'
2012-12-05 17:19the correct journal title is 'Kieler Meeresforschungen'
2012-12-05 17:19the correct journal title is 'Kieler Meeresforschungen'
2012-12-05 17:18the correct journal title is 'Kieler Meeresforschungen'
2012-12-05 17:18the correct journal title is 'Kieler Meeresforschungen'
2012-12-05 17:17the correct journal title is 'Kieler Meeresforschungen'
2012-12-05 17:17the correct journal title is 'Kieler Meeresforschungen'
2012-12-05 17:16should be Muzea, not musea
2012-12-05 17:10should be Muzea, not musea
2012-12-05 17:09should be Muzea, not musea
2012-12-05 17:09should be Muzea, not musea
2012-12-05 17:08should be Muzea, not musea
2012-12-05 17:08journal: should be Muzea, not musea
2012-12-05 17:07journal name: should be Muzea, not musea
2012-12-05 17:06should be Muzea, not musea
2012-12-05 17:05Muzea, not musea
2012-12-05 17:00it is possible that the journal name is not complete and should be amended: Rad Jugoslavenske Akademije Znanosti i Umjetnosti, Matematičko-Prirodoslovni Razred. Please check this.
2012-12-05 16:57Mémoires de la Société des Sciences, de l'Agriculture et des Arts de Lille. This seems to be the correct title.
If 1895, this should be the 5th series, but probably not volume 6, perhaps volume 1 (from 1895) or 2 (volume 8 was from 1925).
2012-12-05 16:55Correct and complete monograph title:
Schrank, F. von Paula 1803.
Favna Boica. Durchgedachte Geschichte der in Baiern einheimischen und
zahmen Thiere. Dritten und lezten Bandes zweyte Abtheilung. - pp. [1],
1-372, III-XIX [= 3-19]. Landshut. (Krüll).
It is important to add "Dritten und lezten Bandes zweyte Abtheilung".
http://resolver.sub.uni-goettingen.de/purl?PPN609492438
Original spelling Limnias Ceratophylli.
2012-12-05 16:50Title of monograph insufficient (I took it from the PDF file). Must be indicated Tome second.
In the PDF file was indicated "substitute name" for Trichoda rattus Müller, 1776. Lamarck's name was established as a regular new name with description, with a synonym "Trichoda rattus", a bibliographical reference to figures by Müller 1776 and to figures in "Encyclop.". I do not see a mandatory provision in the Code that a name established in this form must be considered as a substitute name. Lamarck 1816 did not indicate an intention to replace the name for nomenclatural reasons, to qualify for a new replacement name.
2012-12-05 16:43This jounal could have a second title in Hungarian, possibly A Pozsonyi Orvos-Természettudományi Egyesület közleményei. It is best to check the original source.
2012-12-05 16:20journal name incorrect, must be:
Denkschriften der kaiserlichen Akademie der Wissenschaften, mathematisch-naturwissenschaftliche Classe (Wien).
2012-12-05 16:11Journal volume number 1 refers to the second series of this journal, it is indispensable to indicate this.
Arkiv för Zoologi (2) 1: 565-592
2012-12-05 16:10author name Zivkovic could have been written with e accent aigu (acute accent) above the c (ć) (see below under Le. mica).
Correct and complete journal name was Arhiv Bioloških Nauka - Archives des Sciences Biologiques (Serbocroatian name in Latin script, originally spelled with š = s hazhik)
2012-12-05 16:08volume number 170 must be incorrect
2012-12-05 16:06check the Hungarian title and cite it correctly with all diacritic marks as in the original source. The second word could be és.
2012-12-05 16:05remove subgenus (Rhinoglena)
2012-12-05 15:58remove subgenus (Cephalodella)
2012-12-05 15:57remove Œ
2012-12-05 15:56remove subgenus (Copeus)
2012-12-05 15:54Should be marked as a junior primary homonym of Lecane closterocerca amazonica Koste & Robertson, 1978.
2012-12-05 15:46Should be marked as a junior primary homonym of Lecane closterocerca amazonica Koste & Robertson, 1978.
2012-12-05 15:46Should be marked as a junior primary homonym of Lecane closterocerca amazonica Koste & Robertson, 1978.
2012-12-05 15:45Remove subgenus Schistocerca (if this was meant as a subgenus)
2012-12-05 15:43I did not understand the comment in the PDF file: "preoccupied as Lecane amazonica Koste & Roberton (non Murray, 1913)" - Murray 1913 established Monostyla amazonica. No primary homonymy. Perhaps secondary homonymy, which is not an issue for the LAN.
But the name is a primary homonym of Lecane closterocerca amazonica Koste & Robertson, 1978.
2012-12-05 15:20I did not understand the comment in the PDF file: "preoccupied as Lecane amazonica Koste & Roberton (non Murray, 1913)" - Murray 1913 established Monostyla amazonica. No primary homonymy. Perhaps secondary homonymy, which is not an issue for the LAN.
But the name is a primary homonym of Lecane closterocerca amazonica Koste & Robertson, 1978.
2012-12-05 15:20Original spelling Brachionus Bakeri, marked as a new species, without description or indication, nomen nudum. Unavailable, remove from List A.
2012-12-05 14:50Primary homonym of braziliensis, Lepadella monodactyla Koste 1972, only one name can be used. Add First Reviser decision, or a
2012-12-05 14:19comment that until present (add date) a First Reviser has not selected
precedence. Only one name should appear on List A.
Primary homonym of braziliensis, Lepadella benjamini Koste 1972, only one name can be used. Add First Reviser decision, or a comment that until present (add date) a First Reviser has not selected precedence. Only one name should appear on List A.
2012-12-05 14:18aequalis, Notommata Ehrenberg 1830 - was not made available by Ehrenberg 1830: 66 (nomen nudum, menioned without description or reference). If this species was figured on a plate of the same work, the plate should be added, p. 66 is not sufficient.
alba, Megalotrocha Ehrenberg 1831 - was given with the date 1831, I do not understand why, it was published on p. 65 in the same work as the previous species. Seems to be exactly the same situation as in the previous species. Nomen nudum, if a figure was not given.
All names taken from this publication by Ehrenberg should be revised.
2012-12-05 12:42the correct year is 1891, entry changes to:
turfacea, Dinocharis tetractis, Petr 1891; Věstník Královské české společnosti náuk, for 1890: p.222; no deposited types known [junior subjective synonym of nominal taxon; name declinable]
2012-04-07 12:09the correct year is 1891, entry changes to:
diadema, Floscularia, Petr 1891; Věstník Královské české společnosti náuk, for 1890: p.216, fig.1; no deposited types known [junior subjective synonym of Collotheca heptabrachiata (Schoch, 1869); name indeclinable]
2012-04-07 12:06as already pointed out to us, the correct journal title is 'Kieler Meeresforschungen'
2012-03-31 15:58