’ Ha iH) PG 4 ie ’ * ee 7 Pert cethe a Ad a oh ai i saath a Len aeanag RENE Ae a [ib hires ? H crs Tt tet oie Sci ia 4 : nigiaey att sine ah : Kp iat Ham the tet, WR y , Meleven sels achgal tt vie wip ) " ¥ . ‘ y AA i 4 a if ee Agat ‘iid ei he } ay ed ag \ & f Fy" ‘ how deel i wae 4 AY OPM Wcient ee ; Lorrie t ta) pay It My ! can an S54 tyke HU Agana teats aaa ty a bent ‘} ny el bis Pur) ydetr ne \els ren th ba the tt) ct bee ages 1" — petit, ah nh i Nee ae ae 40830 a Boy ir i mt verti why sah hebiert 7 4 . ate aye LAr “u ti uit ae Nes Hh atid i ii a, eye get ie he Ney et lan ett ie eHte itis 31 Pei ltt Aly i Meh I Seen td Chane ahh ie & i ain Hat { His re ii M4 Hath AK) ‘Hlomaiers iis aie Wh ‘inant! Cail tat Har eieaielliay AY Wee AY ing at ayle) * ih i Reape) ii 2 es hae ; i) teed {) ih) ee i ale nA eee it Mii ad bt igs ar fi eee wed ‘ 7 San 42), ; 4 btGiae oth ain ot fish stunt nett B iat Roa ‘ ieriend hi f Hane ; pe! i ' y ayy Pyvone Seu MW eeasengouraritaa m 1 i Hire trad wit wy ny fo Wits ire? Mirlin Maas mie Ay ali reriatstnien yl fe ¢ ‘ ‘ , Pi ha 1) 4 fe , ’ ADE ] \ ey Bre ciety ins BOP TN A ate) itt oA ie SSE Mae a eee Ah vie ; P rit Saale d ' tan ‘ eae tue 4 i + hit ' ‘ tt} a gic Bias Pe OH aa fitaesciaed : hay aati) ' in a a ‘ ae ae eiee i ait fyrt cH, ; iN he ' H H Ab ian : 4 wis wit \ fian't ' ha He t vig M HeaT 1080 oF Jy feud nd 094 yh nai wk) hedeng H ' ’ d y wh yall te batet dy oP Al \ OR ake H rari } Vee dfsnd diwthonds ae ey HbR dint Md tact je etagys Wis, sary tevaniees Sytylettyy ‘ yt ‘ Thane bl \ woe A ali Aes bib LUD be IE) ed ot aptly in} tet std ety gc eceeey LiveMaaey + ered ” OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE VOLUME 11 Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1955—1956 (All rights reserved) INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE OPINIONS AND DIRECTIONS PUBLISHED IN THE PRESENT VOLUME A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts, England) President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President : Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. BoscHMA (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (1st January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (La Plata, Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) De aoa LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th uly : Professor Teiso Esaki (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950 Mr. Norman Denbigh RILEy (British Museum (Natural History), London) (9th June 1950) Professor Tadeusz JACZEWSKI (Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950) Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (Sth July 1950) Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (5th July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice-President) Professor J. R. DyMOND (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 1953) Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President) : Professor Harold E. Vokes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezdgazdasdgi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. STOLL (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) Dr. L. B. HoLttHuis (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (12th August 1953) Dr. K. H. L. Key (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Canberra, A.C.T., Australia) (15th October 1954) Dr. Alden H. MILLER (Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California, U.S.A.) (29th October 1954) ; Doc. Dr. Ferdinand PRANTL (Ndrodni Museum v Praze, Prague, Czechoslovakia) (30th October 1954) Professor Dr. Wilhelm KUHNELT (Zoologisches Institut der Universitat, Vienna, Austria) (6th November 1954) eri F. S. BODENHEIMER (The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel) (11th November 9 Professor Ernst MAYR (Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College, Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A.) (4th December 1954) Professor Enrico TorTONESE (Museo di Storia “‘G. Doria,’ Genova, Italy) (16th December 1954) IV INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE (continued) C. The Staff of the Secretariat of the Commission Honorary Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming, C.M.G., C.B.E. Honorary Personal Assistant to the Secretary: Mrs. M. F. W. Hemming Honorary Archivist : Mr. Francis J. Griffin, A.L.A. Consulting Classical Adviser: Professor The Rev. L. W. Prensted, M.A., D.D. Administrative Officer : Mrs. S. C. Watkins, M.A. (to 29th April 1955) Mrs. N. M. A. Guzelian (from 20th June 1955) “ Official Lists” Section : Miss D. N. Noakes, B.Sc. “* Régles” Section : Mrs. A. F. Wilson, M.A. (formerly Miss A. F. Kerr) Mrs. J. H. Newman Mrs. B. M. Weidema, A.L.A. Secretariat : Miss C. W. Kirton Mrs. I. Saltman Mrs. J. B. Mantell Indexer : Miss Mary Cosh, M.A. Translator : Mrs. R. H. R. Hopkin INTERNATIONAL TRUST FOR ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Chairman : The Right Hon. Walter Elliot, C.H., M.C., F.R.S., M.P. Managing Director and Secretary: Mr. Francis Hemming, C.M.G., C.B.E. Publications Officer : Mrs. C. Rosner ADDRESSES OF THE COMMISSION AND THE TRUST Secretariat of the Commission : 28 Park Village East, Regent’s Park, London, N.W.1. Offices of the Trust : 41 Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7. FOREWORD The present volume—the eleventh of the present series— contains the fourth instalment of Opinions adopted by the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature since the close of the Thirteenth International Congress of- Zoology, Paris, 1948. This volume comprises twenty-nine Opinions (Opinions 351—379) and one Direction (Direction 41). No Declarations are included in the present volume. The immediately preceeding volume in the present Series virtually completed the block of Opinions required for embodying decisions by the International Commission on applications published in volume 2 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature. Only three of the Opinions included in the present volume (Opinions. 351, 356 and 369) are concerned with questions dealt with in the foregoing volume of the Bulletin. Of these Opinions, Opinions 351 and 356 deal either with matters arising from applications published in that volume of the Bulletin or with matters supplementary to such applications. Opinion 369 alone deals directly with a question (the disposal of the generic name 7y/os as used in the Classes Insecta, Arachnida and Crustacea) published in- the foregoing volume on no aspect of which a decision had previously been taken. The great bulk of the Opinions included in the present volume—twenty-one Opinions out of the total of twenty- nine Opinions—embody decisions taken by the Commission on applications published in volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological VI Nomenclature either in the autumn of 1951 or in the spring and summer of 1952. The remaining five Opinions embody decisions taken by the Commission during the period covered by the present volume on matters which were reserved for further consideration by the Paris Congress of 1948. The subject matter of the applications on which these latter Opinions are based was published in the series of notes which appeared in volume 7 of the Bulletin in the spring of 1952. The single Direction included in the present volume contains decisions by the Commission on the family-group-name implications of the Rulings given in the twenty-nine Opinions discussed above. 2. The present volume comprises 498 pages (T.P.—X VIII, 1—480) and one plate. This volume is of substantially the same size as previous volumes. 3. Of the twenty-nine Opinions included in the present volume four deal with names belonging to two, and in one Opinion to three, different Classes of the Animal Kingdom, thus bringing the total number of cases up to thirty-four. Two of the applica- tions relating to these cases were submitted by more than one applicant and when account is taken of this fact, the total number of applicants is seen to amount to thirty-three. 4. One of the applications dealt with in the present volume was concerned with the status of books and the remaining thirty- three with individual names. Of this latter group, twenty-four (72 per cent.) involved the use by the Commission of its Plenary Powers. The use of those Powers was not involved in the application relating to the status of individual books. VII 5. The thirty-three applications relating to individual names dealt with in the Opinions published in the present volume, when grouped by reference to the Classes of the Animal Kingdom to which the genera or species concerned belong, are distributed as Shown in the following table. In the same table the applications are arranged so as to distinguish those which involved the use of the Commission’s Plenary Powers from those which did not. TABLE 1 Distribution of applications (a) by Classes of the Animal Kingdom and (b) by whether they involved the use by the Commission of its Plenary Powers Number of applications Name of Involving the Class use of the Others Total Plenary Powers Trilobita 1 2 Crustacea 3 — 3 Arachnida 1 — 1 Insecta 6 ] 7 Gastropoda 2 2 4 Pelecypoda 1 2 3 Scaphopoda 1 — 1 Cephalopoda 1 = 1 Brachiopoda — 3 3 Echinoidea 4 — 4 Pisces 1 — 1 Amphibia 1 - 1 Reptilia 2 — 2 Totals 24 9 33 6. When the thirty-three applicants are arranged by reference to the countries in which they are resident, applications are seen to Vill -have been received from the following countries (arranged in alphabetical order) :— TABLE 2 Distribution of applicants by country of residence Country of Residence | Number of applicants Argentina 1 Australia 2 Czechoslovakia 1 Denmark 3 France 1 Germany 1 Netherlands 4 Sweden 3 United Kingdom 10 United States of America 7 Total 33 7. By the Rulings given in the Opinions comprised in the present volume, together with the Ruling given in the Direction referred to in paragraph | above, a total of 170 names have been added to the Official Lists and corresponding Official Indexes relating to specific names, generic names, family-group names and the titles of zoological works. The distribution of these entries is seen to be as follows :— TABLE 3 Additions to the ‘‘ Official Lists ’’ and ‘‘ Official Indexes ”’ respectively Category Official Lists Official Indexes Specific Names 43 a Generic Names 34 50 Family-Group Names Wy 18 Titles of Works art he 1 Totals 94 76 IX 8. The thirty-three cases dealing with individual names pub- published in the present volume contain 210 comments from interested specialists. In some cases these comments are joint comments from two or more specialists and in other cases one specialist commented on an application which dealt with more than one Class of the Animal Kingdom. When account is taken of these facts, a total number of 213 specialists contributed com- ments in the present volume. 9. If the comments relating to individual names are grouped according to the Class in the Animal Kingdom to which the genus or species concerned belongs, the distribution of the comments is found to be as follows :— TABLE 4 Distribution of comments on applications relating to individual names, by Classes, of the Animal Kingdom Name of Class Number of Comments Trilobita 2 Crustacea 10 Insecta 13 Gastropoda 10 Pelecypoda 6 Scaphopoda 3 Cephalopoda 3 Echinoidea 35 Pisces 7 Amphibia 2 Reptilia 19 Totals Xx 10. When the authors of the comments on individual names dealt with in the Opinions published in the present volume are grouped by reference to.their country of residence, the distribution is found to be as follows :-— TABLE 5 Distribution of comments on applications relating to individual names, by country of residence of the specialists concerned Country of residence | Number of comments Australia Denmark France Germany Hawaii India Italy Japan Netherlands Poland Portugal Spain Sweden Union of Soviet Socialist Republics United Kingdom United States of America Total XI 11. The Commission is once more indebted to Miss Mary Cosh, M.A., for the preparation of the indexes to the present volume. In style these indexes follow exactly the model laid down for earlier volumes in this Series. FRANCIS HEMMING Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature 28 Park Village East, Regent’s Park, LONDON, N.W.1. 5th April 1956. hg TABLE OF CONTENTS ** Opinions ”’ OPINION 351 Acceptance of the emendation to Dreis- sena of the generic name Driessena van Beneden, 1835 (Class Pelecypoda) OPINION 352 Designation under the Plenary Powers of a type species consistent with the intention of the original author for the genus Cummingella Reed, 1942 (Class Trilobita), a genus based upon a misidentified type species a Le ost : OPINION 353 Validation under the Plenary Powers of the generic name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875 (Class Cephalopoda, Order Ammonoidea) st a: OPINION 354 Addition to the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology of the specific name fasciata Poiret, 1789, as published in the combination me LG Aplysia| fasciata (Class Gastropoda) : OPINION 355 Validation under the Plenary Powers of the specific name punctata Cuvier, 1803, as published in the combination Laplysia [recte Aplysia] punctata (Class Gastropoda) XII Page US) 47 79 91 XIV OPINION 356 Addition to the Official List of Family- Group Names in Zoology of the names of the family- group taxa having Ostrea Linnaeus, 1758, and Gryphaea Lamarck, 1801 (Class Pelecypoda) as their respective type genera (Opinion supplementary to Opinion 338) OPINION 357 Designation under the Plenary Powers (a) of atype species in harmony with accustomed usage for the genus Chortoicetes Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1893, and (b) of the gender to be attributed to the name of that genus and to the name Austroicetes Uvarov, 1925 (Class Insecta, Order Orthoptera) OPINION 358 Designation under the Plenary Powers of a type species in harmony with accustomed usage for the genus Mortonella Pomel, 1883 (Class ce a genus based on a misidentified type species OPINION 359 Suppression under the Plenary Powers of the generic name Miersia Kingsley, 1879, for the purpose of rendering the generic name Acanthephyra Milne Edwards (A.), 1881 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda) the oldest available name for the genus concerned OPINION 360 Validation under the Plenary Powers of the specific name knorri Voltz, 1828, as published in the combination Ostrea knorri (Class Pelecypoda) OPINION 361 Validation under the Plenary Powers of the generic name Antalis Adams (H. ae & Adams (A. 2 [1854] (Class Scaphopoda) OPINION 362 Rejection for nomenclatorial purposes of Geoffroy (E.L.), 1767, Traité sommaire des Coquilles, tant fluviatiles que terrestres, qui se trouvent aux Environs de Paris Page 103 113 129 139 isi 161 173 XV Page OPINION 363 Designation under the Plenary Powers of a type species in harmony with accustomed usage for the nominal genus vege Miller sas = 1774 ee Gastropoda) Be 183 OPINION 364 Addition of the name Ancylastrum Bourguignat, February 1853 (Class Gastropoda) to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Ancylus (Ancylastrum) cumingianus Bourguignat, May 1853, as the type species of the genus so named en Py eS OPINION 365 Suppression under the Plenary Powers of the specific name cinereous Le Conte, 1852, as published in the combination Crotalus cinereous, for the purpose of rendering the specific name atrox Baird & Girard, 1853, as published in the combination Crotalus atrox, the oldest available name for the Western Diamond Rattlesnake (Class Reptilia, Order Squamata) .. shad be OPINION 366 Suppression under the Plenary Powers of the specific name multimaculata Jan. 1863, as published in the combination Crotalus lugubris var. multimaculata, for the purpose of rendering the specific name polysticta Cope, 1865, as published in the com- bination Caudisona polysticta, the oldest available name for the Mexican Lance-Headed Rattlesnake (Class Reptilia, Order Squamata) ah af a Peston S| OPINION 367 Addition to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology of the generic names Toernquistia Reed, 1896 (Class Trilobita) and Tornquistia Paeckel- mann, 1930 (Class Brachiopoda) . is ie eas XVI OPINION 368 Addition to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology of the generic names Jakowleffia Puton, 1875 (Class Insecta, Order Hemiptera) and Yakovlevia Fredericks, 1925 (Class Brachiopoda) OPINION 369 Suppression under the Plenary Powers of the generic names Ty/los Meigen, 1800 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) and Tylos Heyden, 1826 (Class Arachnida) and validation thereby of the generic names Tylos Audouin, [1826] (Class Crustacea, Order Isopoda) and Micropeza Meigen, 1803 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) a a ue se a a OPINION 370 Validation under the Plenary Powers of the generic name Archaeocidaris MCoy, 1844 (Class Echinoidea) by the suppression under the same Powers of the generic name Echinocrinus Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1841 OPINION 371 Suppression under the Plenary Powers of the generic name Protoechinus Austin (T.), 1860, for the purpose of rendering the generic name Pholidocidaris Meek & Worthen, 1869 (Class aba ec the oldest available name for the genus concerned . F OPINION 372 Suppression under the Plenary Powers of the generic names Friechinus Pomel, 1883, and Typhlechinus Neumayr, 1889, for the purpose of render- ing the generic name Lovenechinus Jackson, 1912, the oldest available name for the genus concerned (Class Echinoidea) OPINION 373 Designation under the Plenary Powers of a type species in harmony with accustomed usage for the genus Palaeopsylla Wagner, 1903 se Insecta, Order Siphonaptera) aus ; + 5 Page 255 269 301 Sy 339 359 OPINION 374 Acceptance of the generic name Anti- rhynchonella as from Oehlert, 1887 (Class Brachiopoda) and the addition of that name to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology. . se BY ME OPINION 375 Designation under the Plenary Powers of a type species in harmony with current usage for the genus Heterandria ian . L. Me 1853 oo Osteich- thyes).. a OPINION 376 Suppression under the Plenary Powers of the generic name Lobacantha Kirby (W.), 1837, for the purpose of rendering the generic name Platypria Guérin- Méneville, 1840 (Class Insecta, Order pe the oldest available name for the genus concerned . OPINION 377 Suppression under the Plenary Powers of the specific name tereticauda Eschscholtz, 1833, as published in the combination Triton tereticauda, for the purpose of rendering the specific name /ugubris Hallowell, 1849, as published in the combination Salamandra lugubris, the oldest available name for the species con- cerned (Class Amphibia, Order Caudata) OPINION 378 Designation under the Plenary Powers of a type species in harmony with current usage for the genus Pontonia Latreille, 1829 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), a genus based upon a misidentified type species Me ee ae OPINION 379 Designation under the Plenary Powers of a type species in harmony with accustomed usage for the genus Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758 (Class Insecta, Order Lepidoptera) a Me af Bs. ey XVII Page 369 372) Sei 401 411 42] XVIII ** Directions ”’ Page DIRECTION 41 Addition to the Official List of Family- Group Names in Zoology or, as the case may be, to the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology of the family-group names dealt with in the Opinions in volume 11 of the Opinions and Declara- tions rendered by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, other than family-group names already dealt with in those Opinions 431 Miscellaneous Corrigenda 455 Index to authors of applications dealt with in the present volume and of comments on those applications. . 457 Subject Index .. 460 Particulars of dates of publication of the several parts in which the present volume was published. . 479 Instructions to Binders 480 Printed in England by MrercatFre & CoopER LimirEp, 10-24 Scrutton St., London EC 2 at OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 1. Pp. 1—24 | OPINION 351 Acceptance of the emendation to Dreissena of the generic name Driessena van Beneden, 1835 (Class Pelecypoda) LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1955 Price Twelve Shillings (All rights reserved) Nene eee eee — — Issued 14th July, 1955 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 351 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Kari Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts., England) President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President: Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. BOSCHMA (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (Ast January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) Dr. Joseph PEARSON (Tasmanian Museum, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia) (27th July 1948) Dr. Henning LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948) Professor Teiso EsAkt (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mr. Norman Denbigh RILEy (British Museum (Natural History), London) (9th June 1950) Professor Tadeusz JACZEWSKI (Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950) Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (Sth July 1950) Professor Erich MARTIN HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (Sth July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice- President) , ee J. R. DYMOND (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 1953 Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. Vokes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezdégazdasdgi Muzeum Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. STOLL (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A. (12th August 1953) Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) Dr. L. B. HoLtTHuIs (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Nether- lands) (12th August 1953) OPINION 351 ACCEPTANCE OF THE EMENDATION TO ** DREISSENA ”’ OF THE GENERIC NAME ‘“ DRIESSENA ” VAN BENEDEN, 1835 (CLASS PELECYPODA) RULING :—(1) It is hereby ruled that the emendation to Dreissena (published by van Beneden, 1835, Ann. Sci. nat., Bruxelles) of the generic name Driessena van Beneden, 1835 (Bull. Acad. roy. Sci. Belg.) is a Valid Emendation of the foregoing generic name. (2) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name No. 872 : Dreissena (emend. of Driessena) van Beneden, 1835 (gender : feminine) (type species, by monotypy: Mytulus [ex err. pro Mytilus] polymorphus Pallas, 1771). (3) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. severally specified below :-— (a) The under-mentioned names, each of which is an Invalid Original Spelling for Driessena (emend. of Driessena) van Beneden 1835 (Name Nos. 268 and 269 respectively) :— (i) Driessena van Beneden, 1835 ; (ii) Driessenia van Beneden, 1835 ; (b) The under-mentioned name, being a spelling for Driessena van Beneden, 1835, used by an author in the same year as that in which van Beneden published an emendation of the generic name Driessena to the same form :— Dreissena Dumortier, 1835 (Name No. 270) ; AUG 8 1955 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (c) The under-mentioned names, each of which is an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling of Dreissena (emend. of Driessena) van Beneden, 1835 (Names Nos. 271 to 284 respectively) :— (i) Dreisena Clessin, 1880 ; (ii) Dreissencia Gillett, 1922 ; (iii) Dreissenia Bronn, 1848 ; (iv) Dreissensa Moquin-Tandon, 1856 ; (v) Dreissensia Bronn, 1862 ; (vi) Dreissina Sowerby (G.B.), 1839 ; (vii) Dreistena Boué, 1840 ; (vill) Dresseina Conrad, 1874 ; (ix) Dressena Germain, 1931 ; (x) Dreysseina Munier-Chalmas, 1864 ; (xi) Dreyssena Philippi, 1853 ; (xii) Dreyssensia Hébert & Munier-Chalmas, 9 (xiii) Dreyssentia Bernard, 1895 ; (xiv) Driessensia Dewalque, 1863 (4) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name No. 484: polymorphus Pallas, 1771, as published in the combination Mytulus [ex err. pro Mytilus] polymorphus (specific name of type species of Dreissena (emend. of Driessena) van Beneden, 1835). OPINION 351 5 I.—THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 20th April 1950, Mr. A. E. Ellis (Epsom College, Epsom, England) submitted to the Commission an application for the addition to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology of the names of forty-seven genera of non-Marine Mollusca (Class Pelecypoda, three ; Class Gastropoda, forty-four)!. The follow- ing is an extract from the foregoing application of the portion relating to the generic name Dreissena van Beneden, 1835 :— [Proposed for addition to the “ Official List of Generic Names in Zoology ’’| eoee eee eee ee ee ew eo Dreissena (feminine) van Beneden, 1835, Bull, Acad. Belg., Cl. Sci. 2 : 25, as emended by Dumortier, 1835 (ibid. 2 : 44) from Driessena (type species, by monotypy: Mytulus [error for Mytilus] poly- morphus Pallas, 1771, Reise Prov. russisch. Reichs 1 : 478) oeoee esc eee eee eee eee [Proposed for addition to the “ Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology ’’] eocec eee eee ee we we ee polymorphus Pallas, 1771 Mytulus [ex. err. pro Mytilus| polymorphus eocees ose see eee eee eo Il.—THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : On the receipt of Mr. Ellis’s application the question of the addition to the Official _ The application submitted by Mr. Ellis has been published in full in Opinion 335 (See Vol. 10: 45—76 of the present work). For the circumstances in which it was decided to deal with the generic name Dreissena van Beneden, 1835, in a separate Opinion see paragraph 4 of the present Opinion, 6 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS List of Generic Names in Zoology of the long list of names of genera of non-Marine Mollusca then submitted was allotted the Registered Number 470. When later, for the reasons explained in paragraph 4 below, it was decided to deal separately with the issues raised by the generic name Dreissena van Beneden, 1835, the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 839 was allotted to this subject and the earlier documents relating to this case were transferred to the new File so opened. 3. Publication of Mr. Ellis’s application : Mr. Ellis’s application containing, inter alia, his proposals relating to the generic name Dreissena van Beneden, 1835, was sent to the printer on Ist January 1951 and was published on 20th April of that year in Part 4 of volume 2 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Ellis, 1951, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 2 ; 119—125). 4. Decision to deal separately with the problems raised by the generic name °* Dreissena *’ van Beneden, 1835 : On 27th February 1954 a Voting Paper (V.P.(54)8) was issued to the Members of the Commission for the purpose of obtaining decisions on the proposals submitted by Mr. Ellis. During the Prescribed Voting Period Commissioner Tadeusz Jaczewski, on 8th May 1954, addressed a letter to the Secretary containing information which suggested that the name of the man whom van Beneden had sought to honour when he published the generic name Driessena was Dreissens and not, as hitherto thought, Dreissen, and therefore that the emendation of the name Driessena to Dreissena was incorrect and that the later emendation of this name to Dreissensia ought to be accepted. Immediately upon the receipt (on 11th May 1954) of Commissioner Jaczewski’s letter, Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, executed a Minute (numbered Z.N.(S.) 839), in which he gave directions that the proposals relating to the foregoing generic name be withdrawn from Mr. Ellis’s main application? and be treated as a separate application submitted by that specialist. 2 See footnote 1. OPINION 351 ii 5. Submission to the Commission in May 1954 of separate proposals relating to the generic name ‘‘ Dreissena ’’ van Beneden, 1835 : On receiving from Commissioner Jaczewski the letter referred to in the preceding paragraph, Mr. Hemming took steps to ascertain the views of Mr. Ellis and in addition himself examined part of the older literature relating to the generic name originally published by van Beneden in 1835 with the spelling Driessena. On the completion of the foregoing investigations Mr. Hemming on 31st May 1954 submitted the following Report in which he brought to the notice of the members of the Commission the additional information furnished by Commissioner Jaczewski and submitted proposals for dealing with the present case in the light of the information so received. The Pelecypod generic name originally published by van Beneden in 1835 with the spelling ‘‘ Driessena ”’ By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E., Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature On 27th February 1954, there was issued to the Commission Voting Paper V.P.(54)8 relating to a proposal to add to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology the names of a considerable number of genera of non-marine Mollusca. Among these was the name originally published by van Beneden in 1835 with the spelling Driessena. In the proposal submitted it was recommended that the emendation of this name to Dreissena published by Dumortier in 1835 in the same volume as that containing van Beneden’s new name should be accepted (see Ellis, 1951, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 2 : 229). 2. When returning his Voting Paper on this case Commissioner Tadeusz Jaczewski (Warsaw) informed me that his attention had been drawn by his colleague Professor Dr. St. Feliksiak Unstitute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw) to the fact that this generic name had been published by van Beneden in honour of a M. Dreissens and therefore that the emendation to Dreissensia should be adopted in preference to the earlier emendation Dreissena, which, though it corrected the relative position of the letters ““e”’ and “i” in the first syllable of this word, was nevertheless defective, in that it did not 8 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS include the last letter (the letter “‘s’’) of the name of the man after whom the generic name was published. 3. On receiving Professor Jaczewski’s communication, I at once wrote to Mr. A. E. Ellis (the applicant in this case), asking him to let me know whether on the first publication of this generic name, van Beneden had cited the name of the man in whose honour this generic name had been coined, this being, under the Copenhagen Congress’ decisions, the touchstone by which the acceptance of an emendation is to be judged in future. Second, I asked Mr. Ellis to furnish his views in the question of the relative weight of usage of the spellings Dreissena and Dreissensia respectively. Mr. Ellis has now informed me in a letter dated 16th May 1954, which is reproduced in an annexe to the present note that van Beneden expressly stated, when publishing this generic name, that it “‘ est emprunté du nom de M. Driessens, pharmacien 4 Mazeyk ”’ and that later (in the same year) he corrected the relative position of the letters “‘e’’ and “‘i” in this generic name and repeated his dedication of this name to M. Dreissens, the first syllable of whose name was cited correctly on this occasion. In communicating this information, Mr. Ellis added that, while the version Dreissena was more generally used by British conchologists, the spelling Dreissensia was more widely used by conchologists of Continental Europe. 4. It should be noted that in his letter Mr. Ellis makes it clear that the passages in the volume in which the foregoing generic name was first published in which it was spelled “** Dreissena’”’ in place of “‘ Driessena ”’ ( : 4447 and 166) are attributable not to van Beneden (as commonly stated, e.g., in Neave’s Nomenclator) but to Dumortier. The fact that Dumortier spelled the first syllable “‘ Drei-”’ and not “ Drie- ” is, however, significant, for, as his papers were published in the same volume as that of van Beneden and the first was a direct commentary on van Beneden’s decision to establish this genus, his use of the *‘ Drei- ”’ spelling must be looked upon, not so much as an emendation of the ‘** Drie- ”’ spelling used by van Beneden as a reproduction of the spelling which he believed that van Beneden had used. Both men were, no doubt, acquainted personally with the “ pharmacien 4 Maseyk ’’. Dumortier’s action constitutes, therefore, a remarkable, and exactly contemporaneous, piece of direct evidence that the “* Drei- ” spelling and not the “* Drie- ” spelling was intended by van Beneden. 5. It must be noted also that in the Index (: iii) to the volume in which this generic name of van Beneden’s was published that generic name appears as Driessenia, i.e. with the letter ““i” inserted before the terminal letter “‘a’”’. OPINION 351 9 6. The Copenhagen Congress of 1953 (Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 44, paragraph 71(1)(b)) decided that, where there is clear evidence in the original publication that an Original Spelling was based upon an inadvertent error (e.g., where an author states that he is proposing a name to honour Carolus Linnaeus but the name is printed as ninnaei), the spelling so printed is to be rejected as an Invalid Original Spelling. In these circumstances, it is clear that the only correct spelling for the generic name under consideration is one which comprises the name “‘ Dreissens”’ correctly so spelt. Thus no version can be accepted in which either (a) the letters ‘“‘e ”’ and ‘‘i”’ in the first syllable are incorrectly transposed, or (b) the letter “‘s ’’ at the end of the name “ Dreissens ”’ is omitted. 7. The only question remaining for consideration is whether the emended name should consist of the patronymic “ Dreissens ” with the addition of the letter “‘a’’, the termination used by van Beneden in the portion of his paper which appeared on page 25 of the volume concerned, or with the termination “‘ -ia ’’, the termination used in the index to that volume. This generic name was emended with the first of these terminations (as Dreissensa) by Moquin-Tandon in 1856 and with the second of these terminations (as Dreissensia) by Bronn in 1862 (Klass. Ordn. Weich-Thiere 3 : 478). In view of the fact that both these terminations were used by van Beneden when he established this nominal genus in 1835, it must, in the absence of a Ruling by the Commission, be a matter for individual judgment which of these terminations is to be preferred. When we take into account, that the emendation Dreissensa never acquired any vogue, while Bronn’s emendation to Dreissensia is the one now generally accepted by specialists who do not retain the invalid emendation Dreissena, there can be no doubt that the version Dreissensia published by Bronn is to be preferred. The evidence furnished by Mr. Ellis establishes conclusively that there is no case for the use by the Commission of its Plenary Powers for the purpose of validating the incorrect emenda- tion Dreissena published by Dumortier in 1835. 8. In addition to the emendations and misspellings discussed in the preceding paragraphs, other variant spellings of this name have been published at different times. It is recommended that, as part of the proposed settlement of the spelling to be used for this generic name, all these variants should be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology at the same time that the approved spelling Dreissensia (as published by Bronn in 1862) is placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology, where, as an emendation, it would rank from the author (van Beneden) by whom it was pub- lished in an incorrect form and from the date (1835) on which the incorrect form was originally published. The variants which it is 10 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS suggested should be relegated to the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names are the following :— Dreisena Clessin, 1880, Malak. BI. (n.f.) 2 : 148 Dreissena Dumortier, 1835, Bull. Acad. roy. Sci. Belg. 2 : 44—47, 166 (an emendation of the name published by van Beneden in the same volume) Dreissena van Beneden, 1835, Ann. Sci. nat., Bruxelles (2) 3 : 193 (an emendation of the name published by himself in the same year as Driessena and Driessenia) Dreissencia Gillet, 1922, Bull. Soc. Hist. nat. Yonne 75(2) : 84 Dreissenia Bronn, 1848, Index palaeont. 1 : 437 Dreissensa Moquin-Tandon, 1856, Hist. nat. Moll. France 2 : 598 Driessena van Beneden, 1835, Bull. Acad. roy. Sci. Belg. 2 : 25 (one of two original spellings) Driessenia van Beneden, 1835, Bull. Acad. Roy. Sci. Belg. 2 : Index ii (one of two original spellings) Driessensia Dewalque, 1863, Bull. Soc. géol. France (2) 20 : 797 ANNEXE Letter dated 16th May 1954, received from Mr. A. E. Ellis, (Epsom College, Epsom, Surrey, England) “* Dreissena’’ van Beneden, 1835 In reply to your letter of 11th May, van Beneden, in proposing the generic name Driessena, definitely states (p. 26) that the name “ est emprunté du nom de M. Driessens, pharmacien a Mazeyk ”’. Dumortier, in a subsequent communication on van Beneden’s new genus (Bull. Acad. Belg. 2 : pp. 44—47), consistently spells the name Dreissena, and states that D. polymorpha (Pallas) was discovered in Belgium by “‘ M. Dreissens of Maaseyck’’. On p. 166, in describing a new species, he also uses this emended spelling of the generic name. Van Beneden himself (Annales des Sciences naturelles, 2nd series, 3: 193, 1835), also emends the spelling to Dreissena, and (p. 196) refers to M. Dreissens. It is evident that his original spelling Driessena was a mistake. OPINION 351 11 Dreissena is used by practically all the British authors of the 19th Century—Brown, Forbes & Hanley, Gray, Jeffreys, Reeve, Williams, Rimmer, Adams; Tate keeps the original spelling Driessena. Dreissensia seems to have been first used by Bronn, Klass. & Ord. Thier-Reichs 3, abth. 1,478 (1862), and Fischer, Man. Conchyl. p. 972 (1886) followed Bronn. Kennard & Woodward, Synonymy of the British non-marine Mollusca, p. 295 (1926) also adopt his emendation. The great majority of British authors use Dreissena, and I used this version of the name in my Linnean Soc. Synopsis no. 4, Freshwater Bivalves (1946). I have not got many works by Continental authors, but I note that Geyer (1909), Germain (1931) and Ehrmann (1933) favour Dreissensia. I do not think anyone will be upset whichever way the decision goes : probably British conchologists are more used to Dreissena, and Continental to Dreissensia ; if the latter is correct by the rules, so be it. 6. Discovery in June/July 1954 of additional information bearing on the spelling of the name of the man in whose honour the name ‘* Driessena ’’? van Beneden, 1835, was published : The paper by the Secretary reproduced in the immediately preceding paragraph was submitted to the Members of the Commission on 31st May 1954, together with a revised Voting Paper (V.P.(O.M.)(54)10). Almost immediately afterwards Commissioner L. B. Holthuis reported that investigations undertaken by Mr. A. M. Husson (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) and himself suggested that there were serious doubts as to what was the correct spelling of the name of the apothecary of Maaseik after whom van Beneden had named the genus published with the name Driessena. On receipt of Commissioner Holthuis’s letter Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, took the view that a further post- ponement of the present case was necessary and on Ist July 1954 he accordingly executed a Minute directing the withdrawal of Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)10, in order that the whole circum- stances of the present case might be further reviewed on the receipt from Commissioner Holthuis of the further report which he had undertaken to furnish on the completion of the investiga- tions then being pursued by Mr. Husson and himself. The promised Report (dated 9th July 1954) was received on 10th July 1954 and showed that there were three more or less official 12 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS spellings of the name of the apothecary of Maaseik. Mr. Hemming thereupon prepared the following further Report bearing the number Z.N.(S.) 839, which he submitted to the Commission on 21st July 1954 :— Revised proposals relating to the generic name ‘‘ Driessena’’ van Beneden, 1835 (Class Pelecypoda) By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E., Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature I am sorry to have to trouble the Commission again on the question of the spelling to be adopted for the generic name originally published by van Beneden in 1835 with the spelling Driessena (Class Pelecypoda), but for the reasons explained below I consider this to be necessary. 2. The Commission will recall that on 31st May last I submitted to it a paper on the foregoing subject, together with a Voting Paper (V.P.(O.M.)(54)10). In that paper I drew attention to a communication which I had received from Professor Dr. St. Feliksiak (Warsaw) through Commissioner Tadeusz Jaczewski (Warsaw), from which it appeared that the original publication of the name Driessena by van Beneden contained evidence that the man in whose honour this generic name was coined was a man whose name was spelt “ Dreissens ” (i.e., with a terminal “‘s”’’). The arrangement of the vowels in the first syllable of this name, that is an “‘i”’ followed by an “e” had always been regarded as an accidental transposition and the first syllable had been emended by all workers from “ Drie-”’ to “ Drei- ” but the communication referred to above suggested that the name should be further emended, so as to include a terminal “s”. Apart from the totally overlooked emendation Dreissensa Moquin-Tandon, 1855, the oldest such emendation was that by Bronn (1862) by whom this name was spelt ‘‘ Dreissensia’’. In the Voting Paper referred to above, the Commission was invited to vote on the question whether Bronn’s emendation “‘ Dreissensia’’ should be adopted in place of the emendation ‘‘ Dreissena’’ made by van Beneden himself in 1835, i.e., in the same year as that in which this generic name was first published but in the Amn. Sci. Nat., Bruxelles and not in the Bull. Acad. roy. Sci. Belg. (where this generic name first appeared). 3. The Commission in its vote on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)10 decided unanimously in favour of the adoption of Bronn’s emendation OPINION 351 13 “* Dreissensia’’, but just before the close on Ist July 1954, of the Prescribed Voting Period, I received from Dr. Holthuis a letter dated 28th June 1954, which contained, as I considered, new material relating to this case. The foregoing letter is reproduced in an Annexe to the present Note as Document 1. This led me, as Secretary to the Commission to issue a Direction that the proposals submitted in Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)10 were to be regarded as being temporarily suspended, pending the result of the further investigations which, as Dr. Holthuis explained in his letter, had been put in hand by his colleague Mr. A. M. Husson and himself. Dr. Holthuis’s promised further report was submitted in a letter dated 9th July 1954, which is reproduced in the Annexe to the present Note as Document 2. _ 4. The information contained in the second of Dr. Holthuis’s letters provides an interesting illustration of how recent in many cases are modern surnames and how short a time has elapsed since such names have crystallised into a permanent form. In the present case we see that in the official records of the Kingdom of the Netherlands as it existed prior to the establishment of a separate Kingdom of Belgium, the name of the man in whose honour van Beneden coined the generic name with which we are here concerned was spelt in no less than three different ways, namely :— (1) Driessens, in his baptismal certificate ; (2) Dreissen, in the records of the Dutch Registrar’s Office ; (3) Dreissen, in the Provincial Records ; (4) Dreissens, in his death certificate. 5. In these circumstances, we see at once that there is no spelling of this name which is the sole correct spelling to the exclusion of all other spellings. It follows therefore that the normal criteria for determining what is the correct spelling of a scientific name do not apply in the present case and that some other criterion must be adopted. In the further consideration of this matter, it will be con- venient to examine first the question of the spelling to be adopted for the initial syllable of the generic name with which we are concerned and, second, the question whether or not the letter “‘s”’ should be inserted after the letter “‘n’”’ at the end of the name. 6. In the light of the information furnished by Dr. Holthuis it can no longer be stated categorically that the “‘ie”’ spelling of the first syllable of this name is a mistake for “ei’’ since, as we have seen, this is the spelling used in the baptismal certificate of the man who was later to be known at the “‘ apothecary of Maaseik”’’. What, 14 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS however, we can say with confidence is that from the standpoint of van Beneden in 1835 the “ei” spelling was the preferred spelling, for, although the “‘ie” spelling was used in the place where this generic name first appeared, this spelling was emended to the “ei” form by the apothecary’s friend Dumortier in the same volume (see paragraph 4 of my note of 3lst May 1954) and was similarly emended by van Beneden himself in a paper published in the same year (1835) but in a different periodical (see paragraph 2 above). It is reasonable therefore to conclude that as at 1835 the ‘“‘ ei” spelling was that preferred by van Beneden and that the use of the “ie” spelling in the original publication of this generic name was due to some inadvertence. Even on narrow nomenclatorial grounds there appears therefore to be good reason for emending van Beneden’s generic name from the “ie” spelling to the “ei” spelling. If we look at this matter from a wider point of view, we cannot help being struck by the unanimous acceptance by later workers of the “‘ ei’ spelling for this generic name. In these circumstances it would clearly lead to undesirable name- changing to revert at this stage to the “‘ie”’ spelling, even if it could be shown—which, as Dr. Holthuis has shown is clearly not the case— that the “‘ie’’ spelling was correct and the “‘ ei”’ spelling incorrect. I conclude therefore that in the peculiar circumstances of the present case (1) the “‘ ei”’ spelling is as correct as the “‘ie”’ spelling, (2) that there is evidence to show that the “ei” spelling is that which was favoured by van Beneden (notwithstanding his use of the “ie” spelling in his original paper) and (3) that, in view of the later history of this name, the interests of stability in nomenclature will be best served by accepting the emendation to the “‘ei”’ spelling made by van Beneden himself in the same year as that in which he first published this generic name. 5 7. When we turn to consider the question whether the letter “s’ should be inserted after the letter “‘n”’ in this generic name, we are faced with a situation very similar to that discussed above in connection with the spelling to be adopted for the first syllable of this generic name. The name of the apothecary of Maaseik was spelt without a terminal letter “‘ s ’ in two of the four official records investigated by Dr. Holthuis and Mr. Husson but with such a termination in the first and fourth of these records (see paragraph 4 above). We must conclude therefore that at the date when van Beneden published his generic name the spellings with, and without, the terminal letter ““s’’ were each as correct as the other, there being at that time no spelling which was the right spelling to the exclusion of the other. When we look at van Beneden’s own writings, we find (1) that he spelt his new generic name without a letter “s”’ after the letter ““n’”’ but (2) that, in ex- plaining that he had chosen this name for the purpose of honouring the apothecary of Maaseik, he spelt the latter’s name with a terminal ““s”. At first sight this action gives the impression of inconsistency, OPINION 351 15 but on closer inspection it does not do so. For van Beneden no doubt knew that the spelling without a terminal “‘s’’ was as permissible as that with such a termination and he may well have taken the view that in these circumstances either spelling could properly be used for the basis of his generic name and may have considered that the spelling without the added letter constituted a more euphonious basis for a generic name than the spelling with the terminal letter “‘s”. Whether or not this is the correct explanation, the fact remains that van Beneden himself never included the letter ‘“‘s”’ after the letter “‘n” in this generic name and that on three occasions in 1835 where he referred to this name—that is, (a) in the Bull. Acad. roy. Sci. Belg., where this name was first published, (b) in the index to the volume for 1835 of the above serial, and (c) in the Amn. Sci. Nat., Bruxelles—he spelt it without the additional letter ““s”’. It may, I think, be concluded from this evidence (1) that the spellings with and without the letter “s”’ after the letter ““n” are equally acceptable, neither being more correct than the other, and (2) that the omission of the letter “‘s ”’ by van Beneden represented a deliberate decision on his part as to how his new generic name should be spelt. There is certainly no evidence to the contrary, and I now consider therefore that there are no adequate grounds for emending this name by the insertion of the letter “s” amen ine letter ““n °’. 8. For the reason set forth in the two immediately preceding para- graphs I have reached the conclusion in the light of the interesting and instructive information collected by Dr. Holthuis and Mr. Husson that the correct course would be for the Commission to accept for the generic name published by van Beneden in 1835 in the Bull. Acad. roy. Sci. Belg. as Driessena the emendation Dreissena published by van Beneden himself in the same year in the Ann. Sci. Nat. 9. I accordingly recommend that in the light of the additional information now available the Commission should substitute for the vote taken by it on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)10, a decision (1) accepting the emendation Dreissena made by van Beneden in 1835 (see paragraph 8 above), (2) placing the name Dreissena (emend. by van Beneden (1835) of Driessena) van Beneden, 1835 (gender : feminine) (type species, by monotypy: Mytulus (error for Myztilus) polymorphus Pallas, 1771) on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology, (3) placing on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology (i) the Invalid Emendation Dreissensia Bronn, 1862, and (ii) the variant spellings enumerated in paragraph 8 of the paper dated 3lst May 1954, which I submitted to the Com- mission concurrently with Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)10, other than the emendation Dreissena van Beneden, 1835, which under (1) above it is now proposed should be accepted, (4) placing on the Official 16 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS List of Specific Names in Zoology the specific name polymorphus Pallas, 1771, as published in the combination cited in (2) above. ANNEXE Extracts from letters from Dr. L. B. Holthuis, dated 28th June and 9th July 1954, respectively DOCUMENT NO. 1 Extract from a letter dated 28th June 1954 I have received some information concerning the name of the man to whom the genus Driessena was dedicated, which will be of some interest to the Commission and which might influence their decision in this question. Mr. A. M. Husson, our curator of mammals, who is an amateur malacologist, told me that several years ago he had become interested in the person of the apothecary of Maaseik for whom the genus Driessena was named. Mr. Husson in the course of his investigations had become doubtful as to whether Dreissens actually is the correct spelling of the name of this gentleman, as at present is generally accepted by malacologists (in the old Maaseik pharmacy, for instance, the name was written Dreessen). Mr. Husson also found out that the person discussed here was born in the Dutch town of Sittard. Because of lack of time Mr. Husson had discontinued his investigation, but now that the spelling of the name Driessena has come up for decision by the Commission, he and I decided to take the matter up again. Therefore we have written for information to the keeper of the archives of the municipality of Sittard. In answer to our request we recently received the information that in the administrative memorials of the province of Limburg a Mr. Henri Dreissen is mentioned as having passed the examination for apothecary on November 12, 1823 and that later the same man (his name again spelled Dreissen) is indicated as being apothecary in Maaseik. The keeper of the Sittard archives now tries to locate for us the birth registration of Dreissen or Dreissens, in order to get final certainty as to the correct spelling of his name. Also the registrar’s office in Maaseik (Belgium) is contacted. OPINION 351 17 Though it is quite immaterial to me what name is given to the genus of fresh-water mussels, it seems illogical that the Commission should revoke its former decision to place this name on the Official List in the spelling Dreissena if that indeed would prove to be the correct name, the more so as Dreissena, like Dreissensia, seems to be currently used in malacological literature. I would suggest therefore that the Commission do not take a final decision in this matter till it has more information on the correct spelling of the name of the Maaseik apothecary. Mr. Husson and I are doing all we can to solve the problem of the name of Mr. Dreissen(s) as soon as possible and we intend to go ourselves to Sittard and Maaseik if that proves to be helpful. DOCUMENT NO. 2 Letter dated 9th July 1954 Mr. Husson and I have made some progress with our investigations on the correct spelling of the name of the man for whom the Mollusc genus Driessena was named. The question proves to be quite complicated. The archives of the Dutch province of Limburg contain the certificate of baptism of the subject of our interest which reads as follows : **15ta Augusti 1782 (baptizatus est) Joannes Henricus legitimus Cornelii Henrici Driessens et Mariae Margarethae Hausmans conjugum ex Stadbroich : susceptores Henricus Hausmans et Bellarmina Houben nomine Mariae Catharinae Driessen’’. In this certificate both the names Driessens (for the father) and Driessen (for an aunt) are used. As the keeper of the archives of the town of Sittard informed us, at that time the family names were not fixed ; the fixation of these names . took place with the introduction of the registrar’s office, which in the town of Sittard was not until 1798. In the records of the registrar’s office in Sittard the family name consistently has been written Dreissen (e.g., when the death of the mother of our apothecary in 1812, and that of his father in 1831, was registered). This same name has been used in the register of apothecaries of the Dutch province of Limburg (1824—1832). When around 1832 Belgium separated itself from The Netherlands, the 18 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS town of Maaseik became Belgian. From that time the administration of the Dutch province of Limburg did not cover any longer the town of Maaseik and no mention of Dreissen is made in the Dutch archives covering the period after 1832. The death certificate of Dreissen, which is kept in the archives of Maaseik, spelled his name Dreissens (information provided by the burgomaster of Maaseik). It probably is this source which induced most authors to accept Dreissens as the correct spelling. We find thus that there are three more or less official spellings of the name of the apothecary of Maaseik : Driessens (baptismal certificate), Dreissen (Dutch registrar’s office record and provincial records), Dreissens (death certificate). It seems to me that in the light of this information both the spellings Dreissena and Dreissensia have equal rights. Taking into account the fact that van Beneden himself accepted the spelling Dreissena in his later papers and that he evidently inten- tionally omitted the third “s ” in the generic name that he proposed, while furthermore the name Dreissena is adopted by at least as many modern authors as the name Dreissensia, 1 personally would prefer the spelling Dreissena to that of Dreissensia as the officially recognised spelling of this name. I1l.—THE DECISION OF THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 7. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)20: On 21st July 1954, a revised Voting Paper (V.P.(O.M.)(54)20) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to take note “that for the reasons set out in Paper Z.N.(S.) 839 circulated simultaneously with the present Voting Paper the Secretary to the Commission has withdrawn the Voting Paper numbered V.P.(O.M.)(54)10 issued on 31st May 1954%, in the matter of the 3 See paragraph 6 of the present Opinion. OPINION 351 19 spelling to be adopted for the generic name originally published as Driessena by van Beneden in 1835, and, having studied the fresh information submitted in the foregoing paper”, to vote either for, or against, “the Revised Proposal set out in para- graph 9 of that paper” [i.e. as set out in paragraph 9 of the paper reproduced in paragraph 6 of the present Opinion]. 8. The Prescribed Voting Period : As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the One-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period would normally have closed on 21st August 1954, but the Secretary decided that, having regard to the fact that this Voting Paper had been issued at a time of year when many zoologists were away from their headquarters either on field work or on holiday, it was desirable that an extension of the normal Voting Period should be granted in order to give every member of the Commission a full opportunity of voting on the present case. Mr. Hemming accordingly executed a Minute directing that the Prescribed Voting Period be extended to 12th September 1954 or the date of the return to the Office of the Commission of the last of the Voting Papers issued to Commissioners, whichever was the earlier. The last of the Voting Papers issued was received in the Office of the Commission on 6th September 1954, on which date therefore the Voting Period was brought to a close. 9. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)20 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, extended in the manner explained in paragraph 8 above, the state of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)20 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following eighteen (18) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which votes were received) : Hemming; MHolthuis; Sylvester-Bradley; Mertens ; Hering; Boschma; do Amaral; Riley; Vokes; Bradley (J.C.); Lemche; Esaki; Stoll; Pearson ; Bonnet ; Dymond ; Cabrera ; Hanko ; 20 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (b) Negative Votes, one (1) : Jaczewski ; (c) Voting Papers not returned : None. 10. Declaration of Result of Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.) (54)20 : On 6th September 1954, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)20, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 9 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. 11. Addition to the ‘‘ Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology ’’ of further variant spellings of the generic name published in 1835 with the spelling ‘* Driessena ”’ : On 30th September 1954, Mr. Hemming executed the following Minute directing the addition to the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology of certain additional variant spellings of the generic name published by \ van Beneden in 1835 with the spelling Driessena :— Addition to the ‘* Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology ’’ of additional variant spellings of the generic name ‘* Driessena ’’ yan Beneden, 1835 By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E., Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature Since the preparation of the list of variant spellings for the generic name Driessena van Beneden, 1835, given in paragraph 8 of the paper OPINION 351 21 (numbered Z.N.(S.) 839) submitted to the Commission by myself on 31st May last*, I have received particulars of other variant spellings of the foregoing generic name from two sources, namely : (1) Professor Dr. T. Jaczewski (letter dated 8th June 1954); (2) Mr. A. M. Husson and Dr. L. B. Holthuis (a paper entitled De naam Dreissena, een nomenclatorische puzzle (published on 15th September 1954 (Basteria 18(3) : 29—36)). 2. Commissioner Jaczewski reported the following additional variants which Professor Dr. Feliksiak suggested should be included in the list of variant spellings now to be disposed of :— Dreissina Sowerby (G.B.), 1842, Conch. Manual (ed. 2) : 141 Dreyssena Hensche, 1861, Schrift. phys.-dkon. Ges., K6nigsberg 2:89 Dreyssentia Bernard, 1895, Elem. Paléont. : 561 Dreyssensia Honigmann, 1909, Z. Naturw. 81 : 300 3. The paper by Mr. Husson and Dr. Holthuis brought to light the following variant spellings that had not been cited in the list given in my paper of 3lst May 1954 and in addition had not been included in the list by Dr. Feliksiak furnished by Commissioner Jaczewski :— Dreistena Boué, 1840, Turquie d’Eur. 1 : 477 Dresseina Conrad, 1874, Proc. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad. 1874 : 29 Dressena Germain, 1931, Faun. France 22 : 775 Dreysseina Munier-Chalmas, 1864, Bull. Soc. linn. Normandie 8 : 97 4. In addition, the paper by Mr. Husson and Dr. Holthuis contained earlier references for three of the spellings included in the list drawn up by Dr. Feliksiak, namely :— Dreissina Sowerby (G.B.), 1839, Conch. Manual (ed. 1) : 40, 121 Dreyssena Philippi, 1853, Handb. Conchyliol. Malacozool. : 364 Dreysennsia Hébert & Munier-Chalmas, 1877, C. R. Acad. Sci., Paris SS 2126: 5. Having regard to the General Directives issued to the Com- mission by the International Congresses of Zoology (a) that Opinions rendered by it must cover the whole of the ground involved in any given case and (b) that any name found by the Commission to be objectively invalid is to be placed on the appropriate Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Names, I now, as Secretary to the Commission, hereby direct that the under-mentioned invalid variant spellings of the name published by van Beneden in 1835 as Driessena be added to the 4 See paragraph 5 of the present Opinion. 22 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS list of such names specified in paragraph 8 of my paper Z.N.(S.) 839 as being names to be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology, namely: (i) Dreissina Sowerby (G.B.), 1839; (ii) Dreistena Boué, 1840; (iii) Dresseina Conrad, 1874 ; (iv) Dressena Germain, 1931 ; (v) Dreysseina Munier-Chalmas, 1864; (vi) Dreyssena Philippi, 1853; (vii) Dreyssensia Hébert & Munier-Chalmas, 1877 ; (viii) Dreyssentia Bernard, 1895. 12. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 30th November 1954, Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certi- ficate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)20, subject to the amplifications specified in the Minute executed by the Secretary on 30th September 1954 (reproduced in paragraph 11 of the present Opinion). 13. The following are the original references for the names placed on Official Lists and Official Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion : Dreisena Clessin, 1880, Malak. BI. (n.s.) 2 : 148 Dreissena van Beneden, 1835, Ann. Sci. nat., Bruxelles (2)3 : 193 Dreissena Dumorttier, 1835, Bull. Acad. roy. Sci. Belg. 2 : 44—47, 166 Dreissencia Gillet, 1922, Bull. Soc. Hist. nat. Yonne 75(2) : 84 Dreissenia Bronn, 1848, Index paléont. 1(1) : 437 Dreissensa Moquin-Tandon, 1856, Hist. nat. Moll. France 2 : 598 Dreissensia Bronn, 1862, Klass. Ordn. Thier. 3(1) : 352, 360, 364, 388, 390, 406, 436, 471, 478, 486, 499, 508 Dreissina Sowerby (G.B.), 1839, Conch. Manual (ed. 1) : 40, 121 Dreistena Boué, 1840, Turquie d’Eur. 1 : 477 Dresseina Conrad, 1874, Proc. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad. 1874 : 29 Dressena Germain, 1931, Faun. France 22 : 775 Dreysseina Munier-Chalmas, 1864, Bull. Soc. linn. Normandie 8:97 Dreyssena Philippi, 1853, Handb. Conchyliol. Malacozool. : 364 Dreyssensia Hébert & Manicoerue 1877, C.R. Acad. Sci., Paris 85 : 126 OPINION 351 23 Dreyssentia Bernard, 1895, Elém. Paléont. : 561 _Driessena van Beneden, 1835, Bull. Acad. roy. Sci. Belg. 2 : 25 Driessenia van Beneden, 1835, Bull. Acad. roy. Sci. Belg. 2 : Index iil, X Driessensia Dewalque, 1863, Bull. Soc. géol. France (2) 20. : 797 polymorphus, Mytulus [ex err. pro Mytilus], Pallas, 1771, Reise Prov. russisch. Reichs 1 : 478 14. The application dealt with in the present Opinion was published in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature prior to the establishment of the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953. It has not been possible since then to deal with this aspect of the present case. This question is however now being examined on a separate File to which the Registered Number Z.N.(G.) 78 has been allotted. 15. At the time of the submission of the original application by Mr. Ellis dealt with in the present Opinion, the expression prescribed for the second portion of the binomen which con- stitutes the scientific name of a species was the expression “ trivial name” and the Official List reserved for recording such names was styled the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology, the word “trivial”? appearing also in the title of the Official Index reserved for recording rejected and invalid names of this category. Under a decision taken by the Fourteenth Inter- national Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, the expression * specific name” was substituted for the expression “ trivial name ”’ and corresponding changes were made in the titles of the Official List and Official Index of such names (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 21). The changes in terminology so adopted have been incorporated in the Ruling given in the present Opinion. 16. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is accordingly 24 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS hereby rendered in the name of the said International Com- mission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 17. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Fifty-One (351) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Thirtieth day of November, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Four. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING Printed in England by Metcatre & Cooper LimiTED, 10-24 Scrutton St., London EC 2 pry OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, C..G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 2. Pp. 25—46, 1 pl. OPINION 352 Designation, under the Plenary Powers, of a type species consistent with the intention of the original author for the genus Cummingella Reed, 1942 (Class Trilobita), a genus based upon a misidentified type species LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1955 Price Twelve Shillings and Sixpence (All rights reserved) |_ 2 En OEmAHLEAaLEa-E-See= : Issued 14th July, 1955 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 352 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts., England) President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President: Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. BOSCHMA (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (Ast January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) Dr. Joseph PEARSON (Tasmanian Museum, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia) (27th July 1948) Dr. Henning LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948) Professor Teiso ESAKI (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mr. Norman Denbigh RILEy (British Museum (Natural History), London) (9th June 1950) Professor Tadeusz JACZEWSKI (Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950) Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (5th July 1950) Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (5th July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice- President) ee J. R. DyMOND (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 53 Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. Vokes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezégazdasdgi Muzeum Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. STOLL (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) Dr. L. B. HoLtuuts (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Nether- lands) (12th August 1953) OPINION 352 DESIGNATION, UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS, OF A TYPE SPECIES CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENTION OF THE ORIGINAL AUTHOR FOR THE GENUS ** CUMMINGELLA ”? REED, 1942 (CLASS TRI- LOBITA), A GENUS BASED UPON A MISIDENTI- FIED TYPE SPECIES RULING :—(1) Under the Plenary Powers, (a) all designations or selections of type species for the genus Cummingella Reed, 1942 (Class Trilobita) made prior to the present Ruling are hereby set aside, and (b) the nominal species Phillipsia jonesii Portlock, 1843, as defined by the lectotype selected by Stubblefield (1952), is hereby designated to be the type species of the foregoing genus. (2) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 873 to 875 respectively :— (a) Cummingella Reed, 1942 (gender : feminine) (type species, by designation under the Plenary Powers under (1)(b) above: Phillipsia jonesii Portlock, 1843, as defined by the lectotype there specified) ; (b) Phillipsia Portlock, 1843 (gender : feminine) (type species, by selection by Vogdes (1890) : Phillipsia kellyi (correction of kellii) Portlock, 1843, as eo) by the lectotype selected by Stubblefield (1952)) ; (c) Weberides Reed, 1942 (gender: masculine) (type species, by original designation : Phillipsia muc- ronata M°Coy, 1844). (3) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 485 to 488 respectively :— (a) derbyensis (emend. of derbiensis) Phillips, 1836, as published in the combination Entomolithus derbiensis ; AUG 2 195) 28 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (b) jonesii Portlock, 1843, as published in the com- bination Phillipsia jonesii, as interpreted by the lectotype specified in (1)(b) above (specific name of type species of Cummingella Reed, 1942, by designation under the Plenary Powers under (1)(b) above) ; (c) kellyi (correction of kellii) Portlock, 1843, as pub- lished in the combination Phillipsia kellii, as interpreted by the lectotype specified in (2)(b) above (specific name of type species of Phillipsia Portlock, 1843) ; (d) mucronata M°Coy, 1844, as published in the combination Phillipsia mucronata (specific name of type species of Weberides Reed, 1942). (4) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 125 and 126 respectively :— (a) derbyensis Martin, 1809, as published in the com- bination Entomolithus Onicites derbyensis (a name published in a work rejected for nomen- clatorial purposes (Opinion 2314)) ; (b) kellii Portlock, 1843, as published in the com- bination Phillipsia kellii (an Invalid Original Spelling for kellyi Portlock, 1843, as published in the same combination). I.—THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 2nd March 1949, Dr. C. J. Stubblefield (Geological Survey and Museum, London) submitted a preliminary application for the use of Plenary Powers for the purpose of designating a type species in harmony with the original author’s intentions for the genus Cummingella Reed, 1942 (Class Trilobita), a genus based 1 Opinion 231 (1954, Ops. Decls. int. Comm. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 239—248). OPINION 352 29 upon a misidentified type species. Later (paragraph 3 below) this application was revised in certain respects. As finally submitted, it was as follows :— Proposed use of the Plenary Powers to vary the type species of the Genus ‘‘ Cummingella ’’ Reed, 1942 (Class Trilobita) (Carboniferous) By C. J. STUBBLEFIELD, D.Sc., F.R.S. (Geological Survey and Museum, London) The present application for the use by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature of its Plenary Powers to designate, as the type species of the genus Cummingella Reed, 1942 (Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. (11) 9 : 653) (Class Trilobita), a species, other than that which would be the type species under the Rég/es, is submitted under the procedure prescribed by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, July 1948 (see 1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 158—159) as that to be followed in the case of genera based upon misidentified type species. 2. The facts of this case are simple. Reed, when first publishing the generic name Cummingella, designated, as the type species of the genus so named, the nominal species Entomolithus (Oniscites) derbiensis Martin. This name in the form Entomolithus Onicites (Derbyensis), was published by Martin in 1809 (Petrific. derbiensia : Signature Sheets X and Y pl. 45, figs, 1, 2; pl. 45*, fig. 1). 3. The specimens on which Martin’s figures were based have not been traced and it is necessary therefore to rely exclusively upon his figures for the purpose of determining the species to which the names which he published are applicable. In a paper entitled “‘ The genotype of Cummingella Reed ”’ published in 1946 (Geol. Mag. 83 : 186—191), I discussed at length the figures given by Martin for his Entomolithus Onicites (derbyensis) and for the reasons there given came to the con- clusion that all except one of Martin’s illustrations were unrecognisable at the species level without additional evidence obtainable only from an examination of the missing original specimens. The one exception is figure 1 on Martin’s plate 45*. The specimen so figured was used by Martin himself as a standard for comparing his species derbyensis with a “very perfect specimen of the Entomolithus paradoxus from Dudley ”. Moreover, this is the only one of the four figures given by Martin which show the following features noted in his description of his derbyensis: (1) the “striated margin” of the head; (2) the ‘single minute point or tubercle’’ on the occipital ring; (3) the post-cephalic segments ‘‘ each marked with a line of minute tubercles ”’. Workers closely succeeding Martin, such as Phillips (1836, J//. Geol. Yorks. 2 : 240) and Portlock (1843, Rep. Geol. Londonderry : 312), interpreted Martin’s species on the basis of this figure. Martin, as 30 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS EXPLANATION TO PLATE 1 Illustrations of the type species of ‘‘ Cummingella ’’ Reed, 1942 (species designated by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature under its Plenary Powers) (Note : All the illustrations are three times natural size) Fig. la, 1b, lc. Phillipsia jonesii Portlock, 1843: specimen selected as the lectotype by Stubblefield (C.J.) in the application dealt with in the present Opinion. This is the specimen illus- trated by Portlock as figure 3a on plate xi in his Report on the Geology of Londonderry. ‘The locality of this specimen is “ Clonfeacle, Co. Tyrone” and the horizon Carboniferous Limestone. This specimen is preserved in the Geological Survey Museum as Specimen No. 63031. Fig. a. View of pygidium and part of thorax. Fig. b. View of cephalon. Fig. c. Side view of entire fossil. Fig. 2a, 2b, 2c. Phillipsia jonesi Portlock. Original of specimen illustrated by Portlock as Phillipsia jonesii var. seminifera? Phillips. In addition to being illustrated by Portlock as figs. 5a and 5b on pl. xi (op. cit.) in 1843, this specimen was illustrated by Woodward (1883: pl. i, figs. 2a, 2b, 6) under the name Phillipsia derbiensis Martin, 1809 from “ Longnor, Stafford- _ shire.” The horizon and locality of this specimen, however, are the same as that for the specimen here illustrated as fig. 1. This specimen is preserved in the Geological Survey Museum as Specimen No. 63037. Fig. a. View of thorax and pygidium. Fig. b. View of cephalon and part of thorax. Fig. c. Side view of entire fossil. Opinions and Declarations, Vol. 1\ Plate | For the explanation to this plate see opposite OPINION 352 31 was inevitable, having regard to the period in which he wrote, did not designate a holotype for his species. Neither has any subsequent writer selected a lectotype from among the specimens figured by “Martin, although in my paper of 1946 I made it clear that the specimen shown as figure 1 on Martin’s plate 45* was the only one, for which it was possible definitely to identify the species figured and suggested that this might appropriately serve as lectotype. Since the publication of that paper, the International Congress of Zoology has provided precise means (through its revision of Article 31) for selecting a lectotype from a series of syntypes (see 1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4: 73—77) and has defined, and incorporated in the Régles, the term “ lectotype” (1950, ibid. 4 : 184—188). In these circumstances it is essential that a lectotype should be selected for the nominal species Entomolithus Onicites derbyensis Martin, 1809, this being the only means by which to determine with precision the identity of the species which, under a strict application of the Régles, is the type species of the genus Cummingella Reed. In order to put this matter beyond reach of further argument, I accordingly hereby select the specimen shown as figure 1 on plate 45* of Martin’s Petrificata derbiensia to be the lectotype of the foregoing species. The species Entomolithus Onicites (derbyensis) Martin, 1809, as defined by the foregoing lectotype selection is con- generic with Phillipsia mucronata MCCoy, 1844 (Syn. Char. Carb. Limest. Foss. Ireland: 162, pl. iv, fig. 8), the type species by original designation of the genus Weberides Reed, 1942 (Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. (11) 9 : 653.) 4. The generic diagnosis given by Reed for his genus Cummingella was founded upon the descriptions and illustrations of Phillipsia derbyensis (Martin) published by various authors from the time of H. Woodward’s account of that species published in 1883 (Monogr. Brit. Carbonif. Trilobites (1) : 14—15) and not upon the original material described and illustrated by Martin (1809). As Ihave explained in some detail in my paper (1946) to which reference has already been made, de Koninck in 1844 (Descr. Anim. foss. Terr. carbonif. Belg. : 601) and Woodward in 1883 (op. cit. : 14) both misinterpreted Martin’s species Entomolithus Onicites (derbyensis). WWoodward’s account of that species was particularly misleading since the fossil on which he principally relied as the basis of his restoration of its structure was stated by him to have come from the Carboniferous Limestone of Longnor in Staffordshire, whereas it really came from Clonfeacle, Co. Tyrone. That specimen, which is still extant in the Geological Survey Museum (No. 63037) had moreover previously been figured by Portlock as one of the syntypes of Phillipsia jonesii (recte Jonesi)* Portlock, 1843 (Rep. Geol. Londonderry : 308, pl. Kies Se 5. Under the Régles, as clarified by the last International Congress of Zoology (see 1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4: 158—159) the author ‘ 2 As explained in paragraph 7 of the present Opinion, the form “‘ jonesii”’ has been a permissible variant for this name since 1953 (Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 54, Decision 91). By OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS of a generic name is to be deemed correctly to have identified the species placed by him in the genus so named. It follows therefore that it is the true Entomolithus Onicites (derbyensis) Martin, 1809, and not the species misidentified therewith by Reed (following Woodward, 1883) which, in the absence of special action taken by the International Commission, is the type species of Cummingella Reed, 1942. That species, as has already been noted, is referable to the genus Weberides Reed, 1942. The latter name was published on the same page as the name Cummingella Reed, and, under the page and line precedence rule introduced by the International Congress of Zoology in 1948 (see 1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 328—331), has priority over the name Cummingella.2 Accordingly, under the normal application of the Régles, the name Cummingella Reed sinks as a subjective synonym of the name Weberides Reed. On the other hand, the species which Reed intended to designate as the type species of his genus Cummingella and which he referred to under the erroneous name “‘ Entomolithus (Oniscites) derbiensis’’ Martin, i.e., the species the oldest available name for which is Phillipsia jonesi Portlock 1843, is left without an available generic name. 6. In view of the confusion which in this case would result from the maintenance of the assumption that the species designated by Reed as the type species of his genus Cummingella had been correctly identified by that author, the present is a case to which the procedure laid down for varying the type species of genera based upon mis- identified type species (see paragraph | above) is particularly applicable. I accordingly ask the International Commission under that procedure to use its Plenary Powers to designate Phillipsia jonesi Portlock, 1843, to be the type species of Cummingella Reed, 1942: As that nominal species was based upon several syntypes, none of which has ever been selected as the lectotype, it is important, as part of the proposed settlement of the present case, that such a selection should now be made. The syntype which might have been the most suitable to be so selected is that figured by Portlock as figs. 5a, and 5b on pl. xi of his Report on the Geology of Londonderry 1843, which, (as explained in paragraph 4 above is the specimen which later was erroneously figured by Woodward (1883) as Entomolithus Onicites (derbiensis) Martin, 1809. Since, however, Portlock expressed the view that that specimen showed varietal differences from the remainder of his syntype material and since he did in fact apply to it, though with doubt, the name Phillipsia jonesi var. seminiferus (Phillips, 1836), it is undesirable to select that specimen as the lectotype of Phillipsia jonesi, though it was undoubtedly used by Portlock in his original description of that species. Accordingly, I select the original of figure 3a on plate xi, 3 By a decision by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copen- hagen, 1953, the “‘ First Reviser ’’ rule was reinstated as the basis for deter- mining the relative priority to be assigned to names of identical date pub- lished in the same work (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 66—67, Decision 123). OPINION 352 33 illustrated by Portlock in 1843 (op. cit.), which is extant in the Geological Survey Museum (No. 63031) to be the lectotype of Phillipsia jonesi Portlock, 1843, and I recommend that this lectotype selection be expressly noted by the International Commission, when designating Phillipsia jonesi Portlock as the type species of Cummingella Reed. 7. Irecommend that, once the type species of the genus Cummingella Reed has been settled in the manner proposed in the preceding para- graph, that name should be placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology. 1 recommend also that there should at the same time be added to that List (1) the name Weberides Reed, 1942, and (2) the name Phillipsia Portlock, 1843. The type species of the first of these genera is (as already explained in paragraph 3 above) Phillipsia mucronata MCCoy, 1844. The type species of Phillipsia Portlock is Phillipsia kellyi Portlock, 1843 (Rep. Geol. Londonderry : 307, pl. xi, fig. 1). The trivial name cited above is an emendation of the defective form “‘kellii’’, made under the decision taken by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology (see 1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 67—68),* that species having been so selected by Vogdes in 1890 (Bull. U.S. geol. Surv. 63 : 83); the earlier selection by Miller (S.A.) in 1889 (N. Amer. Geol. Paleont. : 560) of Asaphus gemmuliferus 1836 (Phillips, I//. Geol. Yorks. 2 : 240, pl. xxii, fig. 11) is invalid, since that species was not one of those cited by Portlock, when he first published the generic name Phillipsia ; it was, in fact, a species inquirenda from the standpoint of Portlock at the time when he first published the name Phillipsia. 8. Turning to the trivial names involved in the present, case, I recommend that there should be added to the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology the trivial names of the type species both of Cummingella Reed and of Weberides Reed, each of these names being an available name and the oldest such name for the species concerned. In the case of the first of these names (jonesi Portlock), it is (as already noted) desirable that a note should be inserted in the Official List, directing that the species so named is to be interpreted in accordance with the lectotype selection made in paragraph 6 above. The trivial name (kellyi Portlock) of the type species of Phillipsia Portlock is an available name, but the nominal species so named has been sub- - jectively identified by Woodward in 1883 (Monogr. Brit. Carbonif. Trilobites (1) : 17) with the older nominal species Asaphus gemmuliferus Phillips, 1836 (for the bibliographical reference to which see paragraph 7 above). I have examined the type material of both these nominal species and in the light of this examination, I do not agree with Woodward’s opinion and consider that two distinct species are involved. Accordingly, I am of the opinion that the trivial name kellyi Portlock, 1843, is not only an available name but is also the 4 This decision ‘by the Paris (1948) Congress was confirmed by the Copenhagen (1953) Congress. See note in paragraph 7 of the present Opinion. 34 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS oldest such name for the species so named by Portlock, and I ask that the International Commission should now place this trivial name on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology. The original specimen figured by Portlock as figure 1 on his plate xi is extant in the Geological Survey Museum (No. 63045) and I hereby select it to be the lectotype of the nominal species Phillipsia kellyi Portlock, 1843. 9. In order completely to dispose of the names dealt with in the present application, it is necessary to consider the question of the name which in future should be applied to the species named Entomolithus Onicites (derbyensis) by Martin in 1809, for it is necessary at this stage to recall that at its meeting held in Paris in 1948 the International Commission gave a ruling that no names published in Martin’s Petrificata derbiensia of 1809 acquired any standing in virtue of having been so published.® The next author to use Martin’s trivial name derbyensis was Phillips who in 1836 (2 : 240) adopted this name (in the combination Entomolithus derbiensis [recte derbyensis]) and applied it in the same sense as Martin (1.e., for the species, a specimen of which Martin had illustrated as figure 1 on his plate 45*). Fortunately, therefore, it is still possible to use the trivial name derbyensis for the species so named by Martin, the only change necessary being that in future that name will need to be attributed not to Martin, 1809, but to Phillips, 1836. It is desirable that, in order to close this matter, the trivial name derbyensis Phillips, 1836, should now be placed on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology. 10. Having now completed our survey of the nomenclatorial issues involved in the present case, it is possible to summarise the action which it is desired that the International Commission on Zoological Nomen- clature should take, namely that it should :— (1) use its Plenary Powers under the procedure prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology for the determination of the type species of genera based upon misidentified type species, to set aside all designations or selections of type species for the genus Cummingella Reed, 1942, made prior to the decision now proposed to be taken and to designate Phillipsia jonesi Portlock, 1843, as defined by the lectotype selection made in the present application, to be the type species of the foregoing genus ; (2) place the under-mentioned generic names on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology :— (a) Cummingella Reed, 1942 (gender of generic name : feminine) (type species, by designation, as proposed in (1) above, under the Plenary Powers: Phillipsia jonesi® Portlock, 1843, as defined in the manner specified in (1) above) ; (b) Phillipsia Portlock, 1843 (gender of generic name: feminine) (type species, by selection by Vogdes (1890) : Phillipsia 5 See footnote 1. ® See footnote 2. OPINION 352 35 kellyi (emend. of kellii) Portlock, 1843, as defined by the lectotype selection made in the present application) ; (c) Weberides Reed, 1942 (gender of generic name: mas- culine) (type species, by original designation : Phillipsia mucronata MCCoy, 1844) ; (3) place the under-mentioned trivial names on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology :— (a) jonesi Portlock, 1843, as published in the binominal com- bination Phillipsia jonesii, since emended to jonesi,’ the Species so named to be interpreted in the manner specified in (1) above (trivial name of type species Cummingella Reed, 1942) ; (b) mucronata MCCoy, 1844, as published in the binominal combination Phillipsia mucronata (trivial name of type species of Weberides Reed, 1942) ; (c) kellyi Portlock, 1843, as published in the binominal com- bination Phillipsia kellii, since emended to kellyi,® the species so named to be interpreted in the manner specified in (2)(b) above (trivial name of type species of Philipsia Portlock, 1843) ; (d) derbyensis Phillips, 1836, as published in the binominal combination Entomolithus derbiensis ; (4) place the trivial name derbyensis Martin, 1809, as published in the combination Entomolithus Onicites (derbyensis) (a name published in a work ruled by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature to possess no status in zoological nomenclature) on the Official Index of Rejected Specific Trivial Names in Zoology. 11. A plate® is annexed to the present application illustrating the specimen here selected as the lectotype of Phillipsia jonesi Portlock, 1843, and the trilobite illustrated by Portlock as Phillipsia jonesii var. seminiferus ? Phillips and subsequently by Woodward as Phillipsia derbiensis. Both are here considered to be conspecific. Il.—THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : On the receipt in 1949 of Dr. Stubblefield’s preliminary communication, the question 7 See footnote 2. 8 See footnote 4. ® See plate 1. 36 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS of the use of the Plenary Powers for the purpose of designating a type species for the genus Cummingella Reed, 1942, was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 409. 3. Consultations in 1950/1951: At the time of the receipt of Dr. Stubblefield’s original communication the entire resources of the Office of the Commission were being directed to the preparation and publication of the Official Records of the Session held by the International Commission in Paris in 1948 and it was not until after the publication of those records in 1950! that it was possible to resume work on the preparation for publication in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature of applications in regard to individual names submitted to the Commission for decision. The present was one of the first such cases then to be examined. Like all other applications prepared prior to the publication of the decisions taken by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948, the present application required certain revisions in order to bring the proposals submitted into line with the procedural decisions taken by the Congress in regard to such matters as the placing of names on Official Lists and Official Indexes. In addition, it was deemed desirable to include in the application the selection of a lectotype for the nominal species Phillipsia jonesii Portlock, 1843, the species which it was proposed should be designated under the Plenary Powers to be the type species of the genus Cummingella Reed, 1942, and to annexe to the application a plate illustrating the lectotype so selected. These adjustments and additions were completed on 29th April 1951, when the revised application was submitted to the Commission. ; 4. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 27th May 1951 and was published on 15th April 1952 in Part 5 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoo- logical Nomenclature (Stubblefield, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 150—154, pl. 1, figs. la—lc, 2a—2c). 10 1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 3, 4, 5. OPINION 352 37 5. Issue of Public Notices: Under the revised procedure prescribed by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 50—56), Public Notice of the possible use by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature of its Plenary Powers in the present case was given on 15th April 1952 (a) in Part 5 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Dr. Stubblefield’s application was published) and (b) to the other prescribed serial publications. In addition, Public Notice was given to a number of general zoological serial publications and also to certain palaeontological serials in Europe and America. 6. Comment received from Professor Rudolf Richter (Natur- Museum und Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a.M., Germany) : On 5th September 1952, Professor Rudolf Richter (Natur-Museum und Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a.M.) addressed the following letter to the Commission in regard to the present case :— Die Vorschlage sind gut begriindet und zweckmiassig. Ihre Annahme wird einen Fortschritt im Sinne der Stabilitét der Nomenklatur bedeuten. Nur die Schreibweise der Art-Namen erfordert eine Bemerkung. Die Art jonesii 1843 wird in dem Antrag jonesi geschrieben. Das ist im strengen Sinne nicht korrekt, da der Artikel 14 IRZN, der die Endung -i statt -ii vorschreibt, erst fiir solche Namen gilt, die nach 1905 aufgestellt werden. Denn auch in der Nomenklatur sind riickwirkende Gesetze immer illegal. Es entstehen jedoch in diesem Falle keine schadlichen Folgen fiir die Nomenklatur, da nach den Gutachten zu Artikel 14 die Endungen -i und -ii zu den fakultativen Varianten gehdren, die man ohne nomenklatorische Folgen nebeneinander gebrauchen darf. Dagegen ist die nachtragliche Aenderung des Art-Namens kellii Portlock 1843 in kellyi abzulehnen, obwohl nach Artikel 34, 35 IRZN auch hierdurch nur fakultative Varianten entstehen. Aber die Duldung einer solchen Aenderung wiirde schadliche Folgen fiir die Stabilitat der Nomenklatur haben. Denn wenn man Portlock nachtraglich das Recht abspricht, den Paten-Namen Kelly in Kellius zu latinisieren und von Kellius den Art-Namen kellii (statt kellyi) zu bilden, so muss - man das logischer Weise auch in vielen anderen Fallen tun. Man 38 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS kommt dahn ohne Grenze zu immer schwereren Aenderungen : So hat z.B. De Koninck 1841 den Paten-Namen Goldfuss in Goldius latinisiert und abgektirzt ; dementsprechend hat er den Gattungs- Namen Goldius gebildet. Wollte man anfangen, “ unerlaubte”’ Latinisierugen des Paten-Namens zu “ berichtigen”’, so miisste man auch den Gattungs-Namen Goldius zu Goldfussius und einen Art- Namen goldius zu goldfussius emendieren. Das ist nur ein Probefall fiir solche unn6tigen Aenderungen von Tier-Namen.* Aber auch Tier-Namen, die nach 1905 aufgestellt worden sind, sollte man nicht nach Artikel 14c nachtraglich “ berichtigen ’’, wenn der Autor einen Paten-Namen latinisiert oder sonst in freier Weise umgebildet hat. So ist z.B. der Name des Paten Quiring (auf dessen Wunsch) von Dahmer zu Quirinus latinisiert und davon nach 1905 der Name quirini abgeleitet worden. Wird ein Revisor wirklich den Mut haben, quirini in quiringi zu 4ndern und dadurch vielleicht auch noch einen alteren Namen quiringi zu erschuttern ? Nach dem Geiste der Regeln will die philologische Vorschrift, die Artikel 14 im letzten Absatz ttber die Ableitung des Art-Namens von einem Paten-Namen nur eine Befreiung von dem Zwang zu einer lateinischen Deklination sein. Artikel 14 will keine Quelle nach- traiglicher Aenderungen sein. ; Wird der Artikel 14 dennoch zu einer Schddigung der Stabilitat missbraucht, dann miisste das durch eine eindeutige Fassung verhtitet werden, entsprechend der von grossen Gessellschaften geforderten Praambel: “‘ Wenn eine Bestimmung der Regeln mit dem Prinzip der Stabilitét in Widerspruch steht, so ist es die Pflicht der Inter- nationalen Kommission die Aenderung der betreffenden Bestimmung herbeizufiihren. Denn die Namen sind wichtiger als die Nomen- klatur ”’.+ Die Pariser Beschliisse, die obiger Antrag fiir giiltig halt, haben in Wirklichkeit keine Giiltigkeit. 7. Orthography of the specific names of two species dealt with | in Dr. Stubblefield’s application : The comment on the present application received from Professor Richter (paragraph 6 above) raised an issue of principle regarding the correction or emenda- tion of a specific name based on the modern patronymic of a * Vel. Rud. Richter: ‘‘ Schutz der Tier-Namen vor Emendation’’. Sencken- bergiana 32 : 357, 1952. + “ Antrag an die Internationale Kommission fiir Zoologische Nomenklatur ” Senckenbergiana 33 : 193, 1952. OPINION 352 39 man and formed in the genitive singular in cases where such a name was formed with a double terminal “i” (as ‘-ii”’) in contravention of the provisions of Article 14 of the Régles. In view of the fact that notice had been received in the Office of the Commission of a desire on the part of certain zoologists to raise this question at the then forthcoming Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology at Copenhagen in August 1953, it was decided to defer the submission to the Commission of a Voting Paper in respect of the present case until after the conclusion of the Copenhagen Congress. This aspect of the present case was reviewed in the early part of 1954 by Mr. Hemming, in the light of the decisions taken by the Copenhagen Congress and on 18th February 1954 he executed, as Secretary, the following Minute relating to the foregoing question and matters connected there- with :— Review of the spelling to be adopted for certain specific names cited in Dr. Stubblefield’s application relating to the generic name “* Cummingella ’’ Reed, 1942, which, when first published, were formed in contravention of the provisions of Article 14 of the ‘‘ Régles ”’ MINUTE by FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E., Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature The purpose of the present Minute is to review the position regarding two specific names cited in Dr. Stubblefield’s application relating to the generic name Cummingella Reed, 1942, which, when first published, were formed in contravention of the provisions of Article 14 of the Régles, as clarified by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948. This review is now necessary in view of the fact that the foregoing provisions were amended in certain respects by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953. 2. The two names referred to above are :— (a) the specific name jonesii Portlock, 1843, as published in the combination Phillipsia jonesii (the specific name of the nominal 40 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS species recommended by Dr. Stubblefield for designation by the Commission under its Plenary Powers to be the type species of the genus Cummingella Reed, 1942) ; (b) the specific name kellii Portlock, 1843, as published in the combination Phillipsia kellii (specific name of type species of the genus Phillipsia Portlock, 1843). 3. The two names cited above involve quite different nomenclatorial issues. The position as regards these names is discussed in turn below. 4. Position as regards a specific name based on the modern patronymic of a man and formed in the genitive singular in cases where a termination consisting of a double ‘‘i’’ was used by the original author : The Reégles, as they existed at the opening of the Paris (1948) Congress provided (Article 14, third paragraph) as follows: “ Quant il S’agit de dédier une espece 4 une personne portant un nom moderne, le genitif est toujours formé par l’addition au nom exact et complet de la personne, d’un “i”, quand celle-ci est un homme”. At Paris in 1948 the Congress, on the advice of the International Commission, inserted in the Régles a provision that names formed in contravention of certain Articles, including 14, were to be subject to automatic correction (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 68). Accordingly, a specific name such as jonesii Portlock, 1843, as published in the combination Phillipsia jonesii, became subject to automatic correction to the form “jonesi”. In conformity with the foregoing decision the above name was so corrected at the time when Dr. Stubblefield’s application was in preparation. This question was reviewed by the Fourteenth Inter- national Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, which, so far as the foregoing portion of Article 14 is concerned, substituted for the provision adopted in Paris a new provision under which in such a case “the terminations ‘-i’ and ‘-ii’ are permissible variants, the differences between them having no nomenclatorial significance ”’ (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 54, Decision Qh); Under the foregoing decision the form jonesii for the name cited above is as acceptable as the form jonesi which prior to the Copenhagen Congress was the sole permissible form for a specific name based on the modern patronymic of a man and formed in the genitive singular. Accordingly, when the Commission comes to deal with the foregoing name, the form to be adopted for it will need to be the original form Jonesii and not the form jonesi, a form which was adopted in Dr. Stubblefield’s application only for the purpose of complying with the now-repealed decision taken by the Paris (1948) Congress. 5. Position as regards a specific name based on the modern patronymic of a man and formed in the genitive singular in cases where the patronymic OPINION 352 41 concerned was incorporated into the name concerned in a wrongly spelled form: As will be seen from the passage of Article 14 of the Régles, as they existed prior to the Paris (1948) Congress quoted in paragraph 4 above, the central feature of the provision in question was that, where a specific name is based on the modern patronymic of a man and is formed in the genitive singular, that specific name is to take the form of a word consisting of the exact and complete name of the person concerned (“‘nom exact et complet de la personne ’’) to which a prescribed termination is to be attached. This part of Article 14 was re-drafted by the Paris (1948) Congress but the fore- going provision remained the central feature of the provision (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 205—206). As explained in paragraph 4 above, the Paris Congress inserted a provision in the Rég/es prescribing that infringements of Article 14 were to be subject to automatic correction. The foregoing decisions were considered in relation to the specific name kellii Portlock, 1843, as published in the combination Phillipsia kellii (specific name of type species of the genus Phillipsia Portlock, 1843) at the time when Dr. Stubblefield’s application was under consideration. The circumstances in which Portlock decided to use the word “ kellii’’ as the specific name for his new species are clearly set out in the following passage in his original description of that species (Rep. Geol. Londonderry : 307): “it [the species] will be named after the gentleman, Mr. Kelly, who supplied the beautiful specimen here figured. Mr. Kelly is employed in the preliminary Boundary Department of the Ordnance Survey, and has been a most zealous and effective assistant to Mr. Griffith, in his geological inquiries”. Thus, in the present instance we had a case where (1) a specific name consisting of a noun in the genitive singular was based upon the patronymic “‘ Kelly ” and (2) the specific name so formed was composed, apart from the termination. not of the word “ kelly’ but of the word “ kelli”’, this name appearing as “ kellii”? instead of as “‘ kellyi’’. Accordingly, at the time when Dr. Stubblefield’s application was being prepared, the spelling “‘ kellii’’ was corrected to “ kellyi”’ in conformity with the decision of the Paris (1948) Congress. This part of Article 14 was further reviewed at Copenhagen in 1953 by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology which decided to retain as a mandatory provision the portion of the Paris decision clarifying the former third paragraph of Article 14 which prescribed that, where a specific name is based upon the modern patronymic of a man and is formed in the genitive singular, the name so formed is to consist of the complete and exact name of the personage concerned to which an appropriate termination is to be added (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 52, Decision 86(b)). At the same time the Copenhagen Congress enacted a further provision prescribing the automatic correction of infringements of the mandatory provisions of Article 14. Thus, in this matter the Copenhagen Congress confirmed and re-enacted the decision taken by the Paris (1948) Congress. Accordingly, the correction of the name kellii Portlock to kellyi made in Dr. Stubble- field’s application in the present case remains a correct and obligatory 42 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS correction of the name in question. When the Commission comes to deal with this name in connection with Dr. Stubblefield’s application, it will be necessary, under the General Directive issued by the Inter- national Congress of Zoology in regard to the placing on the appro- priate Official Index of any name found to be objectively invalid, to place the spelling kellii Portlock, 1843, on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology as an Invalid Original Spelling. 6. Direction : I hereby direct that, when Dr. Stubblefield’s applica- tion is submitted to the Commission for decision by Postal Vote a note be inscribed on the Voting Paper drawing attention to the extent to which the orthography adopted for the specific names cited in Dr. Stubblefield’s application on the one hand needs to be changed in order to comply with the decisions regarding Article 14 taken by the Copenhagen Congress or on the other hand remains correct. UI.—THE DECISION OF THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE _ 8. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(54)44: On 24th March 1954 a Voting Paper (V.P.(54)44) was issued to the Members of the Commission for the purpose of obtaining a decision on the application submitted by Dr. Stubblefield. In this Voting Paper the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, the proposal “‘ relating to the name Cummingella Reed, 1942, as specified in paragraph 10 of the application printed on pages 153—154 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomen- clature [i.e. in paragraph 10 of the application reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion], subject to the amendment noted in paragraph 4 in the “ Notes relating to the present Case ”’ overleaf [i.e. the note on the orthography of the name jonesii Portlock, 1843, as published in the combination Phillipsia jonesii, which had been inscribed on the face of Voting Paper V.P.(54)44 in accordance with the direction given in the Minute executed by the Secretary on 18th February 1954 (paragraph 7 of the present Opinion). OPINION 352 43 9. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 24th June 1954. 10. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)44 : The state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)44 at the close of the Prescribed Voting Period was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following nineteen (19) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Riley ; Holthuis ; Lemche ; Hering ; Vokes ; Bonnet ; Esaki; Jaczewski; Boschma; Bradley (J.C.); do Amaral ; Sylvester-Bradley ; Hanké; Pearson; Stoll ; Hemming ; Cabrera ; Dymond ; Mertens ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) Voting Papers not returned : None. 11. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 25th June 1954, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(54)44, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 10 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. 44 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 12. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 2nd December 1954, Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certi- ficate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)44. 13. Original References : The following are the original refer- ences for the names placed on Official Lists and Official Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— Cummingella Reed, 1942, Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. (11) 9 : 653 (derbyensis), Entomolithus Onicites, Martin, 1809, Petrific. der- biens. : Signature Sheets X & Y, pl. 45, fig . 1, 2 ; pl. 45%, fig. 1 derbiensis, Entomolithus, Phillips, 1836, I//. Geol. Yorks. 2 : 240 jonesii, Phillipsia, Portlock, 1843, Rep. Geol. Londonderry : 308, folly Sal, ike, 8 kellii, Phillipsia, Portlock, 1843, Rep. Geol. Londonderry : 307, pl. vi, fig. 1 mucronata, Phillipsia, M°Coy, 1844, Syn. Char. Carb. Limest. Foss. Ireland : 162, pl. iv, fig. 8 Phillipsia Portlock, 1843, Rep. Geol. Londonderry : 305 Weberides Reed, 1942, Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. (11) 9 : 653 14. The following is the reference for the type selection for the genus Phillipsia Portlock, 1843, specified in Ruling (2)(b) given in the present Opinion :—Vogdes, 1890, Bull. U.S. geol. Surv. 63 : 83. 15. The following are the references for the selections of lectotypes for nominal species cited in the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— (1) For Entomolithus Onicites (derbyensis) Martin, 1809: Stubblefield, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 151 OPINION 352 45 (2) For Phillipsia jonesii Portlock, 1843: Stubblefield, 1952, ibid. 6 : 152 (3) For Phillipsia kellyi (correction of kellii) Portlock, 1843 : Stubblefield, 1952, ibid. 6 : 153. 16. The application dealt with in the present Opinion was published in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature prior to the establishment of the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953. It has not been possible since then to deal with this aspect of the present case. This question is however now being examined on a separate File to which the Registered Number Z.N.(G.) 122 has been allotted. 17. At the time of the submission of the application dealt with in the present Opinion, the expression prescribed for the second portion of the binomen which constitutes the scientific name of a species was the expression “trivial name” and the Official List reserved for recording such names was styled the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology, the word “ trivial ’’ appearing also in the title of the Official Index reserved for recording rejected and invalid names of this category. Under a decision taken by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, the expression “‘ specific name” was substituted for the expression “trivial name” and corresponding changes were made in the titles of the Official List and Official Index of such names (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 21). The changes in terminology so adopted have been incorporated in the Ruling given in the present Opinion. 18. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Com- mission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 46 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 19. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Fifty-Two (352) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. DOonE in London, this Second day of December, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Four. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING Printed in England by Metcatre & Cooper Limitep, 10-24 Serutton St., London EC2Z OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, c.M.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 3. Pp. 47—78 OPINION 353 Validation under the Plenary Powers of the generic name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875 (Class Cephalopoda, Order Ammonoidea) LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1955 Price Sixteen Shillings (All rights reserved) ————————————————————————————— SSS —————SS Issued Sth August, 1955 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 353 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts., England) President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President: Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. BoscHMA (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (Ast January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) Dr. ce PEARSON (Tasmanian Museum, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia) (27th July 1948 Dr. Henning LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948) Professor Teiso ESAKI (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mr. Norman Denbigh RILey (British Museum (Natural History) London) (9th June 1950) Professor Tadeusz JACZEWSKI (nstitute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950) Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (Sth July 1950) Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (Sth July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice- President) ae J. R. DYMOND (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 1953 Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. Voxes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezdgazdasagi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. STOLL (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) Dr. L. B. HoLTHuIs (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Nether- lands) (12th August 1953) OPINION 353 VALIDATION UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS OF THE GENERIC NAME ‘‘ HOPLITES ’? NEUMAYR, 1875 (CLASS CEPHALOPODA, ORDER AMMONOIDEA) RULING :—({1) The under-mentioned action is hereby taken under the Plenary Powers :— (a) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby suppressed under the Plenary Powers for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy :— (i) Hoplites Dejean, 1833 ; (ii) Hoplites Dejean, 1836 ; (iil) Hoplites Dejean, 1837 ; (iv) Hoplites, any uses additional to those speci- fied in (i) to (il) above, in the Order Coleoptera (Class Insecta), prior to the publication of Hoplites Neumayr, 1875 (Class Cephalopoda, Order Ammonoidea); (v) Hoplites Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1846 (an Invalid Emendation of Hoplitis Hiibner, [1819] ;) (vi) Hoplites Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1846 (an Invalid Emendation of Aplites Rafinesque, 1820) ; (vii) Hoplites Philippi, 1857 ; (vii) Hoplites Theobald, 1864 ; (ix) Hoplites Koch, 1869 ; (b) The generic name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, is hereby validated ; (c) All selections of type species for the genus Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, made prior to the present Ruling are hereby set aside and the nominal species Ammonites dentatus Sowerby (J.), 1821, as defined by Spath (L.F.), 1925 (Ammonoidea of the Gault 1:10) is hereby designated to be the type species of the foregoing genus. AUG 29 1955 50 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (2) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. severally specified below :— (a) Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, as validated under the Plenary Powers under (1)(b) above (gender : masculine) (type species, by designation under under the Plenary Powers under (1)(c) above: Ammonites dentatus Sowerby (J.), 1821, as de- fined under the Plenary Powers under (1)(c) above) (Name No. 876) ; (b) Enema Hope, 1837 (gender : neuter) (type species, by original designation : Scarabaeus enema Fabri- cius, 1787) (Class Insecta, Order Coleoptera) (Name No. 877) ; (c) Astrobunus Thorell, 1876 (gender: masculine) (type species, by original designation: Hoplites argentatus Koch, 1869) (Class Arachnida) (Name No. 878). (3) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. severally specified below :— (a) The nine generic names suppressed under the Plenary Powers for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy under (1)(a) above (Name Nos. 285 to 293) ; (b) Hoplites Eggers, 1923 (a junior homonym of Hoplites Neumayr, 1875) (Name No. 294) ; (c) Hoplites Kinel, 1930 (a junior homonym of Hoplites Neumayr, 1875) (Name No. 295) ; (d) Odonthoplites Breistroffer, 1947 (type species, through Rule (f) in Article 30: Ammonites dentatus Sowerby (J.), 1821) (a junior synonym of Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, as defined under the Plenary Powers under (1)(c) above) (Name No. 296) ; OPINION 353 >) | (4) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. severally specified below :— (a) dentatus Sowerby (J.), 1821, as published in the combination Ammonites dentatus (specific name of type species, by designation under the Plenary Powers under (1)(c) above, of Hoplites Neumayr, 1875) (Name No. 489) ; (b) pan Fabricius, 1775, as published in the combination Scarabaeus pan (Class Insecta, Order Coleoptera) (Name No. 490) ; (c) enema Fabricius, 1787, as published in the com- bination Scarabaeus enema (specific name of type species of Enema Hope, 1837) (for use by specialists who consider that the nominal species Scarabaeus enema Fabricius, 1787, and Scara- baeus pan Fabricius, 1775, represent different taxa) (Class Insecta, Order Coleoptera) (Name No. 491) ; (d) helleri Ausserer, 1867, as published in the com- bination Acantholophus helleri (Class Arachnida) (Name No. 492). (5) The under-mentioned family-group name is hereby placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology with the Name No. 10 :—HOPLITIDAE (correction of HOPLITIDES) Douvillé, 1890) (type genus: Hoplites Neumayr, 1875) (first published in correct form as HOPLITIDAE by Hyatt, 1900). (6) The under-mentioned family-group name is hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology with the Name No. 46 :—HOPLITIDES Douvillé, 1890 (an Invalid Original Spelling for the family name HOPLITIDAE, to which form the name was corrected by Hyatt, 1900). 52 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS I.—THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 16th April 1951 Mr. C. W. Wright (London) submitted the following application for the use by the Commission of its Plenary Powers to validate the well-known generic name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875 (Class Cephalopoda, Order Ammonoidea) with Ammonites dentatus Sowerby (J.), 1821, as type species :— Proposed use of the Plenary Powers to validate the generic name ‘* Hoplites ’? Neumayr, 1875 (Class Cephalopoda, Order Ammonoidea) and to designate a type species for this nominal genus in harmony with current nomenclatorial usage By C. W. WRIGHT (London) The object of the present application is to ask the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature to use its Plenary Powers, first, to validate the well-known generic name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875 (Class Cephalopoda, Order Ammonoidea), and, second, to designate a type species for this genus in harmony with current nomenclatorial usage. It is hoped that it will be possible for the International Com- mission to reach an early decision on these questions, as such a decision is urgently required in connection with the preparation of the forth- coming international Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology. ‘The facts relating to this case are set out in the following paragraphs. 2. The generic name MHoplites Neumayr, 1875 (Sitzber. Akad. Wiss. Wien (math. nat. Kl.) 71 (No. 1) : 681) was established for a ~ large number of species of ammonites, ranging from Kimmeridgian PERISPHINCTIDAE to Campanian PLACENTICERATIDAE. Since the publication of the name Hoplites by Neumayr in 1875, separate names have been given by various authors to most of the distinguishable groups included by Neumayr in this genus, and for the last half century the name Hoplites Neumayr has been used solely or primarily for the Albian “‘dentati’. The accepted current interpretation of this nominal genus is that by Spath, 1925 (Ammonoidea of the Gault, London (Pal. Soc. Monogr., 1922) 1 : 79). 3. Among the species of various ages included by Neumayr in his genus Hoplites, was Ammonites interrupta Bruguitre, 1789 (Ency. méth. (Vers) (1) : 41) which was regarded as representative of the Albian group of the “ dentati’’, a nominal species which can be clearly interpreted from the figures given by d’Orbigny in 1841 (Pal. frang., Terr. crét. 1: 211, pls. 31, 32) which were labelled “‘ interruptus”’. As already explained, the nominal genus Hoplites Naumayr has always been regarded as being typified by the foregoing taxonomic group, which throughout most of the nineteenth century was identified with Ammonites interrupta Bruguiére. In 1897, however, Parona & Bonarelli (Pal. ital. 2:91) demonstrated that Bruguiére’s nominal species OPINION 353 58 Ammonites interrupta represents a Jurassic Parkinsoniid and not one of the Albian “dentati’’. This conclusion was later confirmed by Jacob in 1907 (Trav. Lab. Geol. Grenoble 8(2) : 361) and by Spath in 1925 (: 80). The genus Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, as hitherto understood, rests, therefore, upon a misidentification. 4. The interpretation of Ammonites interrupta Bruguiére by d’Orbigny in 1841 to which reference has already been made itself included what are now regarded as being several distinct species of the “‘ dentati’”’. Among these was the species represented by the nominal species Ammonites dentatus Sowerby (J.), 1821 (Min. Conch. 4 : 3, pl. 308), although none of the figures given by d’Orbigny represents that species as now restricted in the sense specified by Spath in 1925 (: 101—105). 5. Jacob in 1907 (loc. cit. : 369) selected Ammonites dentatus Sowerby, 1821, to be the type species of the nominal genus Hoplites Neumayr, 1875. This selection has since been generally accepted (see Spath, 1925 : 100) by whom the species was interpreted in the sense indicated above ; Roman, 1938, Amm. jur. crét.: 364). Under the Régles, Jacob’s selection of this species as the type species of Hoplites Neumayr is invalid, for the nominal species Ammonites dentatus Sowerby, 1821, was not one of the nominal species originally included in this genus by Neumayr. That selection is however consistent with Neumayr’s conception of his genus, so far as it is now possible to make out what that was. 6. The difficulties which have arisen in regard to the name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, are not confined, however, to doubts regarding its type species, for, in addition, this generic name is invalid as a junior homonym, the name Hoplites having been applied to no less than six other nominal genera, before it was published by Neumayr for the genus of ammonites under consideration. These nominal genera are :— (1) Hoplites Dejean, 1833 (Cat. Coléopt. (ed. 2) : 150). (2) Hoplites Agassiz, 1846 (Nomencl. zool. Lep. : 36) (an emendation of the name Hoplitis Hitbner [1819], Verz. bekannt. Schmett. (10) : 147); (3) Hoplites Agassiz, 1846 (Nomencl. zool. Index univ. : 185) (an emendation of the name Aplites Rafinesque, 1820, Western Review 2(1) : 50) ; (4) Hoplites Philippi, 1857 (Arch. Naturgesch. 23 (Abt. 1) : 320) ; (5) Hoplites Theobald, 1864 (J. asiat. Soc. Bengal (Pt. 1) 33 : 244) ; (6) Hoplites Koch, 1869 (Z. Ferd. Tyrol (3)14 : 155). 7. Of the foregoing names not one is in use today in the group concerned. Hoplites Dejean, 1833, applied to a group of beetles, is a 54 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS nomen nudum (see Neave, 1939, Nomencl. zool. 2 : 691). The name Hoplites Agassiz, 1846, published as an emendation of Hoplitis Hiibner [1819] (a genus of Lepidoptera), has not been adopted ; nor has the corresponding emendation made by Agassiz in 1848 for Aplites Rafinesque, 1820, a genus of fishes. The name Hoplites Philippi, 1857, applied by its author to a genus of Crustacea, is invalid as a junior homonym of Hoplites Agassiz, 1846 ; Miss I. Gordon (British Museum (Natural History)), whom I have consulted, has kindly informed me that the animal placed in this genus by Philippi is the larval form of a species belonging to a genus of Peneida, probably Gennadas Bate, 1881 (Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. (5)8 : 191). The name Hoplites Theobald, 1864, applied by its author to a genus of slugs, is invalid as a junior homonym of Hoplites Agassiz, 1846. The nominal genus so named (as has been pointed out to me by Dr. L. R. Cox, F.R.S., of the British Museum (Natural History)) is treated by Theile (J.), 1931 (Handb. syst. Weichtierkunde 1 : 641) as identical with the nominal genus Girasia Gray, 1855 (Cat. Pulmonata Coll. Brit. Mus. : 51, 61), of which name Theile therefore treats Hoplites Theobald as a junior synonym. Finally, the name Hoplites Koch, 1869, which, like the two names discussed immediately above, is an invalid junior homonym of Hoplites Agassiz, 1846, has been replaced on this account by the name Astrobonus Thorell, 1876 (Ann. Mus. Stor. nat. Genova 8 : 466, 499). 8. In spite of the existence of the names listed above, the name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, was never challenged on the ground that it was an invalid junior homonym until 1947, when this view was put forward by Breistroffer (Trav. Lab. Géol. Grenoble 26 : 84), who considered that on this account the name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, should be rejected. He accordingly published the new generic name Odonthoplites (: 84), designating Hoplites canavarii Parona & Bonarelli, 1897, as its type species. Breistroffer called his new subgenus Odontho- plites a nom. noy. for Hoplites Neumayr, although, as will be seen, he designated a different species as its type species, thus in fact making the two genera (or subgenera) only subjectively identical with one another as the type species of the nominal genus so named are not the same. Breistroffer treated Odonthoplites Breistroffer as a subgenus of Euhoplites Spath, 1925 (Ammonoidea Gault (Pal. Soc. Monogr., 1922) (2) : 82). At the same time he applied the new name ANAHOPLITIDAE to the family hitherto universally known as HOPLITIDAE. The result is great confusion in the nomenclature of this group of ammonites. 9. The position is therefore that none of the genera to which the name Hoplites was applied prior to the publication of Neumayr’s paper in 1875 now bears that name but that, although an invalid name, the genus Hoplites Neumayr is an important genus in ammonites, having given its name not only (as mentioned above) to a family but also to a superfamily. The rejection of this name on the ground of OPINION 353 55 homonymy would serve absolutely no useful purpose, since (as has been shown) none of the earlier names are in use in the groups concerned. Such rejection would, on the other hand, give rise to quite unnecessary confusion and instability in the nomenclature of the group concerned. 10. For the reasons set forth above, I accordingly ask the Interna- tional Commission on Zoological Nomenclature :— (1) to use its Plenary Powers :— (a) to suppress the under-mentioned generic names for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and for those of the Law of Homonymy :— (i) Hoplites, as applied to any genus of the Order Coleoptera (Class Insecta) subsequent to the publication of the nomen nudum Hoplites Dejean, 1833, and prior to the publication of the name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875 ; (ii) Hoplites Agassiz, 1846 (as published as an emenda- tion of the name Hoplitis Hiibner [1819] ; (iii) Hoplites Agassiz, 1846 (as published as an emenda- tion of Aplites Rafinesque, 1820) ; (iv) Hoplites Philippi, 1857 ; (v) Hoplites Theobald, 1864 ; (vi) Hoplites Koch, 1869 ; (b) to validate the generic name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875 ; (c) to set aside all selections of type species for the genus Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, made prior to the decision now proposed to be taken, and to designate Ammonites dentatus Sowerby (J.), 1821 (as defined by Spath, 1925) to be the type species of the foregoing genus ; (2) to place the generic name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875 (gender of name : masculine) (type species, by designation, as proposed under (1)(c) above, under the Plenary Powers and as there proposed to be interpreted : Ammonites dentatus Sowerby (J.), 1821) on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology ; (3) to place the under-mentioned reputed or invalid generic names on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology :— (a) Hoplites Dejean, 1833 (a nomen nudum) ; (b) the six generic names proposed, under (1)(a) above, to be suppressed under the Plenary Powers ; 56 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (4) to place the trivial name dentatus Sowerby (J.), 1821, as published in the binominal combination Ammonites dentatus (the trivial name of the type species of Hoplites Neumayr, 1875) on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology. 11. Dr. L. F. Spath, F.R.S. (British Museum (Natural History)), whom I have consulted in the course of the preparation of the present application, kindly allows me to state that he is in agreement with the recommendations now submitted. Il—THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt of Mr. Wright’s letter of 16th April 1951, the problem involved in connection with the name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 533. 3. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 25th April 1951 and was published on 28th September of the same year in Part 4 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Wright, 1951, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 110—114). 4. Issue of Public Notices: Under the revised procedure prescribed by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 5|0—56), Public Notice of the possible use by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature of its Plenary Powers in the present case was given on 28th September 1951, both in Part 4 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Mr: Wright’s application was published) and also to the other pre- scribed serial publications. In addition, Public Notice was given OPINION 353 57 to a number of palaeontological, general zoological, and entomological serials in Europe and America. The issue of these Public Notices elicited no objection to the proposed use of the Plenary Powers for the purpose specified in the present application. 5. Support received from Mr. R. Casey (Geological Survey and Museum, London) : On 5th October 1951 Mr. R. Casey (Geo- logical Survey and Museum, London) addressed the following letter to the Commission in support of the application submitted by Mr. Wright (Casey, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 241) :— I write in support of the application submitted to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by Mr. C. W. Wright to validate the name of the nominal genus Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, and also to validate Jacob’s designation of Ammonites dentatus J. Sowerby, 1821, as the type species of the said nominal genus. As a student of Cretaceous ammonites, I am familiar with the case (see Casey, R., 1949, Geol. Mag., 86 : 333, footnote ; 1950, Proc. Geol. Assoc., 61 : 293, footnote) and am of the opinion that the decisions which Mr. Wright proposes that the International Commission should make are in the best interests of nomenclatorial stability. 6. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(52)56 : On 22nd May 1952, a Voting Paper (V.P.(52)56) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “ the proposal relating to the name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, as set out in Points (1) to (4) in paragraph 10 at the foot of page 113 and continued on page 114 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature ”’ [i.e. in paragraph 10 of the application reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion]. 7. The Prescribed Voting Period for V.P.(52)56: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 22nd August 1952. 8. Receipt during the Prescribed Voting Period of a Supple- mentary Note from the Applicant (Mr. C. W. Wright) : On 2nd 58 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS July 1952 Mr. C. W. Wright, the applicant in the present case, submitted a report drawing attention to the fact that it now transpired that, contrary to his belief at the time when he had submitted his application in the present case, Ammonites archiacianus @’ Orbigny, 1841 (Paleont. frang., Cret. 1 (Ceph.) : 144) had been selected as the type species of Hoplites Neumayr, 1875 by Lemoine in 1906, i.e. in the year previous to the selection by Jacob (1907). Mr. Wright added that, if he had been aware of the foregoing selection by Lemoine at the time when he prepared his application, he would still have asked the Commission to use its Plenary Powers to designate Ammonites dentatus Sowerby to be the type species of Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, for the species ** Ammonites archiacianus dOrb. falls within the genus Pro- tohoplites Spath (L.F.), 1923, now in general use. To accept it as type species of Hoplites would result in serious confusion and would upset the general modern usage ”’. 9. Decision by the Secretary temporarily to withdraw the proposals submitted with Voting Paper V.P.(52)56: On 14th July 1952 a note dated 9th July 1952 was received in the Office of the Commission in which Professor Chester Bradley (a) expressed the view that, contrary to that advanced in Mr. Wright’s application, some at least of the usages of the name Hoplites by Dejean in the Order Coleoptera (Class Insecta) had been duly published with an indication and therefore that there was an available name Hoplites Dejean, and (b) asked that further investigations should be made in regard to the nominal genera involved in the Class Arachnida. At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, fourteen Commissioners (Calman ; Hering; Dymond; Hank6; Bonnet; Vokes; do Amaral ; Esaki; Riley ; Lemche ; Pearson ; Stoll ; Boschma ; Cabrera) had voted in favour of the application submitted by Mr. Wright, two Commissioners (Jaczewski ; Mertens) had not returned their Voting Papers, Professor Chester Bradley, while expressing sympathy with the application, had (as explained above) asked that further investigations should be made in regard to certain aspects of Mr. Wright’s proposals, while Mr. Hemming who, as Secretary, normally withholds his vote in any given case until towards the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, had decided not to vote until at the close of the Voting Period the position as regards this OPINION 353 59 case had been reviewed in the light of the communication received from Professor Bradley. This review was carried out on Ist September 1952. In the light of this review, Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, gave a direction that, having regard to the issues on questions of fact raised by Professor Bradley in his communication of 9th July 1952, the proposals voted upon in Voting Paper V.P.(52)56 be temporarily withdrawn, pending the examination of the questions raised in the foregoing communication. 10. Arrangements made to the investigation of outstanding issues in connection with the present application prescribed by the direction issued by the Secretary on Ist September 1952: For the purpose of the investigation prescribed by the direction issued by the Secretary on Ist September 1952 (paragraph 9 above), Mr. Hemming entered into correspondence on the one hand with Mr. C. W. Wright, the applicant in the present case, and on the other hand with entomologists and arachnologists likely to be of assistance in elucidating the points involved in the prescribed investigation. Owing to the preoccupations of the Office of the Commission during the latter part of 1952 and in 1953 with the preparations for the discussions on zoological nomenclature arranged to be held at Copenhagen in connection with the meeting of the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, the required consultations occupied a considerable period. By the early summer of 1954 the portion of the investi- gation concerned with the usage of the name Hoplites by Dejean in the Order Coleoptera (Class Insecta) had been finished, while that relating to the remaining questions was approaching com- pletion. It was then decided by the Secretary that the most convenient course would be at once to submit a Report to the Commission on the portion of the investigation which had already been completed and to follow this up as soon as possible with a Second Report dealing with the remaining issues involved. The two Reports so submitted are reproduced in paragraphs 11 and 15 of the present Opinion. 11. First Report submitted by the Secretary under the Direction issued on Ist September 1952: On 9th July 1954 the Secretary submitted to the Commission the first of the two Reports which it 60 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS had been decided to prepare in compliance with the Direction issued on Ist September 1952 (paragraph 9 above). The Report so submitted, which bore the Number Z.N.(S.) 533, was as follows :— Proposed minor amplifications of the proposal relating to the generic name ‘* Hoplites ’’ Neumayr, 1875 (Class Cephalopoda, Order Ammonoidea) submitted in Voting Paper V.P.(52)56 : First Report submitted under the Direction by the Secretary issued on Ist September 1952 By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E., Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature The purpose of the present submission is to prepare the way for the final consideration by the International Commission of the proposal submitted by Mr. C. W. Wright for the validation of the generic name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875 (Class Cephalopoda, Order Ammonoidea) which formed the subject of Voting Paper V.P.(52)56 (dated 22nd May 1952). That proposal received the approval of the Commission with no negative votes, but the decision so taken was not promulgated at the close of the Prescribed Voting Period because, in view of certain additional information which had come to light during that Period, I judged it better temporarily to withdraw the proposals submitted in the foregoing Voting Paper, in order to permit of the examination of the additional information so received, and accordingly on Ist September 1952, as Secretary, I issued a Direction in the foregoing sense. 2. This application, which was submitted for the purpose of securing a valid basis for the use of the foregoing well-known generic name in the Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, was published in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (vol. 6, pp. 110—114) in September 1951. The foregoing volume is available to all members of the Commission and accordingly no more than a brief word of explanation is here required. 3. In the Voting Paper referred to above, the members of the Com- mission were asked to vote “‘ for ’’ or “ against ’’ the proposal submitted in paragraph 10 of Mr. Wright’s application, as set out at the foot of page 113 and at the top of page 114 of vol. 6 of the Bulletin. In the course of the voting on the above Voting Paper, Professor Chester Bradley expressed the view that Hoplites Dejean, 1833, which it had been stated in the application was a nomen nudum, was probably an available name under the revision of Proviso (a) to Article 25 of the OPINION 353 61 Régles carried out by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948 (see 1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 78—80), for although that generic name had been published without any indication, definition or description in words, it was likely that the names of validly published nominal species had been cited under this generic name by Dejean in 1833. Professor Bradley added that he was entirely in favour of the grant of the present application in order thereby to secure the validation of the ammonite name Hoplites Neumayr, but that he thought the position of Dejean’s Hoplites ought first to be cleared up. 4. The difficulty in the present case arose from the fact that prior to 1948 coleopterists were in the habit of treating generic names published in the foregoing manner in the various editions of Dejean’s Catalogue as being invalid names, and that since the Paris Congress of 1948 this practice has been continued, pending the submission of compre- hensive proposals to the Commission for determining the treatment to be given to these names. It was for this reason that, when, in the course of preparing his application to the Commission in regard to the name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, Mr. Wright consulted a specialist in the Coleoptera, he was assured that the name Hoplites Dejean, 1833, was a nomen nudum. Since receiving Professor Bradley’s communication in regard to this case, I have consulted with Mr. N. D. Riley and Mr. E. B. Britton (British Museum (Natural History), London), as regards the name Hoplites as published by Dejean not only in 1833 in his Catalogue, but also in the versions of the editions published in 1836 and revised in 1837. The examination of Dejean’s Catalogue so carried out shows that both in the 1833 and 1836 issues and again in the revised edition in 1837, the name Hoplites Dejean was validly published with an indication through the citation, in each case, under this generic name of the names of previously validly established nominal species. The species so cited in the issues of 1833 and 1836 were Scarabaeus enema Fabricius, 1787, (Mantissa Ins. 1 : 4) and Scarabaeus pan Fabricius, 1775 (Syst. Ent. : 5). 5. Although I do not wish at this point to enter into a discussion of the bibliographical questions which arise in connection with the various editions of Dejean’s Catalogue, the inconsistencies in the literature as to the method to be adopted for distinguishing these editions from one another are so great that a word of explanation is needed, in order to make it clear which are the editions in which the name Hoplites appears. It must first be noted (a) that in 1802 Dejean published a work entitled ‘‘ Catalogue des Coléoptéres de la Collection d’ Auguste Dejean, classés suivant le *“‘ Systema Eleutheratorum”’ de Fabricius,” (b) that later he published a work with the following very similar title ** Catalogue des Coléoptéres de la collection de M. le baron Dejean”’, and (c) that this latter work appeared in different versions—or at least with different title pages—on four occasions, namely, in 1821, 1833, 1836 and 1837. The difficulty which here arises is in connection 62 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS with the numbers to be allotted to these various editions or issues for purposes of reference. The works bearing the titles cited above are so essentially similar in content that it would not be unreasonable to look upon the second as forming a revised version of the earlier. Nevertheless, the differences between the two titles used are such that for bibliographical purposes the two must be treated as constituting separate works. ‘This view is consistent with Dejean’s own action in describing the 1836 edition as the “‘ Troisiéme Edition’’. On the other hand the 1836 edition is said to be no more than a re-issue of the 1833 edition and was indeed treated as such by Hagen (1862, Bibl. ent. 1 : 165). These difficulties have led some authors (e.g. Hagen) to treat the 1837 edition as being the Fourth Edition, Hagen arriving at this conclusion by treating the two works described above as constituting a single unit and by ignoring the 1836 issue for the purpose of arriving at a number for the 1837 edition ; other authors however have treated the last-named edition as being the Third Edition. For the present purpose all that is important is that the form of notation to be adopted shall be such as will indicate in each case what is the edition to which reference is being made. Accordingly, I have thought it best, in citing the following references for the name Hoplites Dejean, to abandon the attempt to assign numbers to the various editions and in place of that system to indicate the edition intended by placing in brackets (parentheses) immediately after the title the year of publication followed by the word “ Edition ”’. 6. In the light of the information kindly furnished by Mr. Riley and Mr. Britton, we may now look at the proposal originally submitted by Mr. Wright and determine to what extent that application now re- quires to be modified. The portion of that proposal with which we are here concerned is that set out in Sub-Point (a) (i) in Proposal (1) in paragraph 10 of Mr. Wright’s application. In Proposal (1)(a) Mr. Wright asked that the names, as there specified (i.e. the names numbered (1) to (vi)) should be suppressed for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and the Law of Homonymy. In his Sub-Point (i) Mr. Wright included the following item :—‘‘ Hoplites, as applied to any genus in the Order Coleoptera (Class Insecta) subsequent to the publication of the nomen nudum Hoplites Dejean, 1833, and prior to the publication of the name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875”. The proposal so submitted duly secured the desired suppression of the name Hoplites Dejean (a) as published in the 1836 issue of Dejean’s Catalogue and (b) as published in the revised edition of that work published in 1837. It covers also all uses of the name Hoplites in the Order Coleop- tera in the period from 1833 to the publication in 1875 of the name Hoplites Neumayr. It will be seen therefore that the only point which it does not cover is that in connection with the name Hoplites as published in the 1833 issue of Dejean’s Catalogue. 7. We may note therefore that the only action required by way of supplement to Mr. Wright’s original application, is the suppression OPINION 353 63 under the Plenary Powers of the name Hoplites as used by Dejean in the 1833 edition of his Catalogue. Now that it has been definitely established that the name Hoplites was validly published with an indica- tion in the 1836 and 1837 editions of the above work, it is desirable that these names should be expressly placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names instead of being covered indirectly (as hitherto proposed) by the provision that all uses of the name Hoplites in the Order Coleoptera between 1833 and 1875 should be suppressed. 8. The concrete proposal now submitted for approval is therefore that in place of the recommendation set out in Proposal (1)(a)(i) in paragraph 10 of Mr. Wright’s application (i.e. in place of the proposal quoted in paragraph 6 of the present note), the Commission should approve the following revised proposal, namely, that the under- mentioned generic names be suppressed under the Plenary Powers for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homo- nymy and that, after having been so suppressed, these names should be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology. (i) Hoplites Dejean, 1833, Catalogue (1833 Ed.) : 150 (ii) Hoplites Dejean, 1836, Catalogue (1836 Ed.) : 150 (iii) Hoplites Dejean, 1837, Catalogue (1837 Ed.) : 167 (iv) Hoplites, any uses additional to those specified in (i) to (ii) above, in the Order Coleoptera (Class Insecta), prior to the publication of the name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875. 12. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)17 : Simultaneously with the submission to the Commission on 9th July 1954 of the Report reproduced in the immediately preceding paragraph, a Voting Paper (V.P.(O.M.)(54)17) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, ‘“‘ the supplementary proposal in relation to the generic name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875 (Class Cephalopoda, Order Ammonoidea) specified in paragraph 8 of the Report by the Secretary numbered Z.N.(S.) 533 submitted simultaneously with the present Voting Paper” [ie. in paragraph 8 of the Report reproduced in paragraph 11 of the present Opinion]. 13. The Prescribed Voting Period for Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.) (54)17 : As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the One- Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Paper was due to close on 9th 64 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS August 1954. In view, however, of doubts which arose on the question whether two Members of the Commission (Bradley (J. C.); Dymond (J. R.)) had duly received the Voting Papers issued to them, the Secretary gave directions that the Voting Period should be extended for a period sufficient to enable the Commissioners concerned to record their Votes on the duplicate Voting Papers then issued to them. Ultimately, the Voting Period in this case was closed on 11th September 1954. 14. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)17 : At the close of the Voting Period as extended by direction of the Secretary to llth September 1954 (paragraph 13 above), the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)17 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following eighteen (18) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received)! : Holthuis; Hering; Esaki; Lemche; Hemming ; Sylvester-Bradley ; Mertens; Bonnet; Boschma ; do Amaral; Riley ; Pearson ; Vokes ; Cabrera ; Stoll ; Jaczewski ; Bradley (J. C.) ; Dymond ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) Voting Papers not returned, one (1) : Hanko. 15. Second Report submitted by the Secretary under the direction issued on Ist September 1952 : On 30th November 1954 1 In the interval between the issue of Voting Papers V.P.(52)56 and V.P.(O.M.)(54)17, the Commission suffered the loss of Dr. W. T. Calman by death. During the same interval, Mr. Sylvester-Bradley and Dr. Holthuis were elected as Members of the Commission. OPINION 353 65 the Secretary submitted to the Commission a Second (Final) Report on the matters covered by the Direction issued on Ist September 1952 (paragraph 9 above). In this report also Mr. Hemming dealt with the question of the family-group name based upon the generic name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, the only other question associated with the present case still outstanding. The first two paragraphs of Mr. Hemming’s Report were introductory in character, consisting of a brief recital of the circumstances which had led up to the investigation dealt with in that Report. The remainder of the Report was as follows :— Proposed minor amplifications of the proposal relating to the generic name ‘‘ Hoplites’’ Neumayr, 1875 (Class Cephalopoda, Order Ammonoidea) submitted in Voting Paper V.P.(52)56 : Second (Final) Report submitted under the Direction by the Secretary issued on Ist September 1952 By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E., Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature 3. The following are the points raised by Professor Chester Bradley when returning his copy of Voting Paper V.P.(52)56 :— (a) Professor Chester Bradley drew attention to the fact that Mr. Wright’s application contained no express statement as to what species (if any) had been selected under Rule (g) in Article 30 to be the type species of Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, and asked that information on this subject should be provided. In addition, attention was drawn to the statement in Mr. Wright’s application that Breistroffer had in 1947 published the generic name Odonthoplites as a nom. noy. for the name Hoplites Neumayr, but had selected for the nominal genus so established a type species different from the type species of Hoplites Neumayr. (b) Attention was drawn to various early uses of the name Hoplites by Dejean in his Catalogue, as regards which the view was expressed that, contrary to the statement contained in the application submitted in this case, some were not nomina nuda. (c) The validation of the name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, would leave the name Enema Kirby as the oldest available name for the genus in the Order Coleoptera which Dejean had named Hoplites. It was suggested that the views of coleopter- ists should be sought on this point. (d) Similarly, the suppression of Hoplites Koch, 1869, as proposed (for the purpose of validating Hoplites Neumayr, 1875) would 66 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS leave the name Astrobunus Thorell, 1876, as the oldest available name for the genus to which Koch had applied the name Hoplites. It was suggested that the views of arachnologists should be obtained on this question. 4. My inquiries regarding the- second of the foregoing points (the point regarding the various early uses of the name Hoplites by Dejean for a genus of beetles) were the first to be completed and, in view of the rather complicated nature of the issues involved, I judged that it would be convenient if I were to submit a Report on this question in advance of that on the other points raised by Professor Chester Bradley. It was for this reason that last July I dealt with this subject in a paper which I submitted concurrently with a Voting Paper (V.P.(O.M.)(54)17). On that Voting Paper the Commission decided unanimously as to the action to be taken. In the following paragraphs I submit brief reports on the three other points (points (a), (c) and (d) in paragraph 3 above) raised by Professor Chester Bradley. On each of these cases I make recommendations as to subsidiary action which it is desirable that the Commission should take in order to comply with the General Directive issued to it by the International Congress of Zoology that in its Opinions it should deal comprehensively with all aspects of problems submitted to it. 5. Question of the type species under the ‘‘ Régles ’’ of the nominal genus ‘* Hoplites ’’ Neumayr, 1875 : Mr. Wright has informed me that, apart from the invalid selection by Jacob (1907) of Ammonites dentatus Sowerby to be the type species of Hoplites Neumayr, to which he had referred in his application (: 111), he had not been aware at the time of the submission of that application of any formal type selection having been made for the foregoing genus. Later, however, he had ascertained that in 1906 (Etudes géologiques dans le Nord de Madagascar: 178) Lemoine had published the following sentence which might perhaps be regarded as constituting a type selection for this genus : “Le genre Hoplites a été crée par Neumayr en 1875. Le type serait la premiére espéce : H. archiacianus d’Orb.”. Mr. Wright proceeded as follows :—“‘Ammonites archiacianus d’Orbigny is the type species of the genus Protohoplites Spath, 1923, now in general use. To accept it as the type species of Hoplites would result in serious confusion and upset the general modern usage’’. In a later letter Mr. Wright explained that the only one of the species originally included by Neumayr in his genus Hoplites which is currently regarded as belonging to that genus is Ammonites benettianus Sowerby (J. de C.), 1826. Mr. Wright writes of this species :—‘*‘ Neumayr referred to it as A. benettianus d’Orbigny, whereas it is a species of Sowerby and was placed by d’Orbigny in the synonymy of “Am. interruptus Brug.’’. Hoplites benettianus (Sowerby) is a rare species which has usually been misinterpreted in the literature. It would be undesirable as the type species of Hoplites’’. The information furnished by Mr. Wright is of interest as completing the historical account of the genus Hoplites OPINION 353 67 Neumayr but provides no ground for believing that the application already submitted, namely the acceptance under the Plenary Powers of Ammonites dentatus Sowerby (J.), 1821, as the type species of Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, is not the best solution in the present case. This conclusion is emphasised by the fact that, although support has been received for this proposal, no objection to it has been lodged with the Commission from any source. 6. The problem presented by the generic name ‘‘ Odonthoplites ”’ Breistroffer, 1947 : It will be convenient at this point to deal with the question of the position of the nominal genus Odonthoplites Breistroffer, 1947, which was also raised by Professor Chester Bradley. This name was published as a nom. nov. pro the name Hoplites Neumayr by Breistroffer who was the first author to reject the name Hoplites Neumayr on the ground that it was a junior homonym of older generic names consisting of the same word. As explained in Mr. Wright’s application Breistroffer in addition designated as the type species of his genus Odonthoplites the nominal species Hoplites canavarii Parona & Bonarelli, 1896, a species which was not one of those originally included by Neumayr in his genus Hoplites and indeed could not have been so included, Parona & Bonarelli’s paper not having been published until twenty-one years after the publication of the name Hoplites Neumayr. The name Odonthoplites Breistroffer is thus an example of the class of hybrid names which were treated by their original authors in two quite inconsistent senses, in this case, as a substitute for an earlier but invalid generic name and in addition as the name for a genus having, as its type species, a species which was not, and could not have been, the type species of the genus, the name of which was so replaced. At the time when Mr. Wright originally submitted the present applica- tion, there existed no provision in the Régles to give guidance in the interpretation of names belonging to this class. At Copenhagen in 1953 however the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology took a decision on the question of principle involved when it decided that in a case of this sort the name is to be treated as a substitute name, regardless of any other way in which it may also have been treated by its author (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 75—76, Decision 142). Accordingly, under the foregoing decision (which, though expressed in terms of the type specimen of a nominal species, must be held to apply automatically also to the type species of a genus’), 2 It has since been judged desirable to ask the Commission to give a Ruling formally applying to the determination of the type species of a nominal genus established as a substitute for a previously established nominal genus the principle expressly laid down by the Copenhagen (1953) Congress in the decision (Decision 142) here referred to for determining the type specimen of a nominal species established as a substitute for a previously established nominal species. A request for a Declaration in this sense has accordingly been sub- mitted to the Commission (Hemming, 1955, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 11 : 35—37) (Z.N.(S.) 867). 68 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS the type species of the nominal genus Odonthoplites Breistroffer, 1947, (being a name published as a substitute name) must in all circumstances be the species (whatever that species may be) which is the type species of the genus, for the name of which it was published as a substitute. In other words, the type species of Odonthoplites Breistroffer, 1947, is automatically the species (whatever that species may be) which is the type species of Hoplites Neumayr. Thus, if, 4s proposed by Mr. Wright, the name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, is validated under the Plenary Powers with Ammonites dentatus Sowerby (J.), 1821, as type species, that species will thereupon become the type species also of Odonthoplites Breistroffer, 1947 (notwithstanding that author’s invalid designation of a different species (Hoplites canavarii Parona & Bonarelli, 1896) as type species). At the same time the name Odonthoplites Breistroffer, 1947, will become a junior objective synonym of Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, and, as such, will need to be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology. 7. The Coleoptera aspect of the present case: The suppression (under the vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)17 last July) of the generic name Hoplites Dejean (of various dates) which forms a necessary part of the proposal for the validation in the Class Cephalo- poda of the name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, automatically creates a new situation in the Order Coleoptera, for some other name will become the oldest available name for the genus to which hitherto the name Hoplites Dejean has been properly applicable. Fortunately, this presents no more than a formal difficulty, for the practice of coleopter- ists has been to ignore generic names published without diagnoses in Dejean’s Catalogue. For this reason the name Hoplites Dejean, 1833, has been generally ignored, the genus concerned being known by the next name published for it, namely Enema Hope, 1837 (Coleopt. Manual 1 : 83), the type species of which, by original designation by Hope, is Scarabaeus enema Fabricius, 1787 (Mantissa Ins. 1 : 4). (In view of the fact that names in the foregoing work have sometimes been attributed to Kirby instead of to Hope, it may usefully be noted (a) that Hope’s book was based upon manuscripts prepared by Kirby, (b) that, while in some instances the indications, definitions or descrip- tions on which names in this work depend for availability may have been provided by Kirby (being therefore attributable to “ Kirby in Hope ’’), this is not the case in the present instance where Hope is directly responsible for providing this nominal genus with a type species and for publishing the name, as is shown by the fact that later in the book Hope mentioned that Kirby had applied the name infundi- bulum to the type of this genus, meaning thereby that there was an entry to this effect in Kirby’s manuscript notes). The name Enema Hope is in current use, in spite of the existence of the available senior synonym Hoplites Dejean. Thus the suppression of the latter name will not only cause no disturbance in coleopterological literature but will have the positive merit of giving valid force to current usage. ——- ae OPINION 353 69 The name Scarabaeus enema Fabricius, 1787, was treated by Arrow in his Catalogue as the name for a variety of Scarabaeus pan Fabricius, 1775 (Syst. Ent. : 5). Iam indebted to Mr. N. D. Riley and Mr. E. B. Britton (British Museum (Natural History)) for the information on which the foregoing report has been based. In the circumstances it appears to me that the only action, additional to that recommended by Mr. Wright, that is needed in connection with this part of the case is that the Commission, when validating Hoplites Neumayr and suppressing Hoplites Dejean, should also (1) place the generic name Enema Hope, 1837 (gender : neuter) (type species, by original designa- tion : Scarabaeus enema Fabricius, 1787) on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology, (2) place on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology the specific name pan Fabricius, 1775, as published in the combination Scarabaeus pan (that being a generally accepted name). In view of Arrow’s treatment of enema Fabricius as a variety of pan Fabricius, it would, I think, be better not to place the former name on the Official List. 8. The arachnological aspect of the present case : As pointed out by Professor Chester Bradley, the effect of validating the generic name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, under the Plenary Powers, by suppressing all earlier uses of the word “‘ Hoplites ’’ as a generic name will involve a change in the status of the generic name Hoplites Koch, 1869 (Class Arachnida). The change will, however, be of a purely technical character, for the foregoing name will do no more than exchange its present position as an invalid junior homonym of Hoplites Dejean, 1833, for that of a name suppressed under the Plenary Powers. The practical effect will thus be absolutely nil. The oldest available name for this genus—and the name currently used for it—is the name Astrobunus Thorell, 1876 (Ann. Mus. Stor. nat. Genova 8 : 466, 499) which was published expressly as a nom. nov. pro the name Hoplites Koch, 1869. The type species of Astrobunus Thorell, 1876 (and, therefore, through Rule (f) in Article 30, of Hoplites Koch, 1869) is Hoplites argentatus Koch, 1869 (Z. Ferd. Tyrol. (3) 14 : 155—156). The nominal species so named is treated by specialists as a junior subjective synonym of Acantholophus helleri Ausserer, 1867 (Verh. zool.-bot. Ges. Wien 17 : 158). Iam indebted to Dr. G. Owen Evans (British Museum (Natural History)) for the information on which the foregoing report has been based. It will be seen that beyond the suppression of the name Hoplites Koch, 1869, a name which has already been rejected on other grounds, the proposal submitted by Mr. Wright in relation to the name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, has no point of con- tact with arachnological literature. In the circumstances the only action called for on the part of the Commission is that, when validating the name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, and suppressing the name Hoplites Koch, 1869, it should (1) place the generic name Astrobunus Thorell, 1876 (gender: masculine) (type species by original designation : Hoplites argentatus Koch, 1869) on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology, (2) place the specific name helleri Ausserer, 1867, as 70 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS published in the combination Acantholophus helleri on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology. 9. Proposed addition to the ‘‘ Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology ’’ of two further junior homonyms consisting of the word ‘* Hoplites ’’ : I find that in addition to the junior homo- nyms listed by Mr. Wright in his application and recommended by him for addition to the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology there are two others which should now also be placed on the foregoing Official Index. These are :—(a) Hoplites Eggers, 1923, Zool. Meded. 7 : 141 (Class Insecta, Order Coleoptera) ; (b) Hoplites Kinel, 1930, Polsk. Pismo. ent.8 : 219 (Class Insecta, Order Coleoptera). 10. ‘* Hoplites ®’ Neumayr, 1875, as the type genus of a family- group : At the time of the submission of Mr. Wright’s application there existed no means for stabilising nomenclature at the family-group level, but fortunately this defect was remedied by the revision of Articles 4 and 5 and by the establishment of the Official List of Family- Group Names in Zoology by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953. In his application (: 113) Mr. Wright referred to the importance of the family name HOPLITIDAE and in view of the decision by the Copenhagen Congress it now becomes an obligation upon the Commission to place this family-group name on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology at the same time that it places the generic name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology. The following is the original reference for the foregoing family-group name :—HOPLITIDAE Hyatt, 1900, in Zittel-Eastman, Textbook of Palaeontology (First English Ed.) 1: 584. 11. Proposal submitted : Now that the points raised by Professor Chester Bradley have been dealt with in the reports submitted in the present paper (paragraphs 4—8 above), it is possible to proceed to a final decision in the present case. On the question of procedure the position is: (1) that already (in 1952) by a vote of fourteen (14) to one (1) on Voting Paper V.P. (52)56 the Commission voted in favour of Mr. Wright’s application and it was only because of the Direction issued on Ist September 1952 by myself as Secretary that a decision was not taken on the foregoing Voting Paper, final action then being deferred in order to provide an opportunity for the study of the points raised by Professor Chester Bradley ; (2) that the most substantial of the foregoing points was put to the Commission in July of this year and an appropriate modification of Mr. Wright’s original proposal was then adopted by a unanimous vote on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)17 ; (3) that, provided that the Commission is satisfied with the information furnished in the reports now submitted on Professor Chester Bradley’s other points, the only matters still outstanding are the minor sub- OPINION 353 71 sidiary questions on which I have submitted recommendations in the present paper. In the circumstances it appears to me that the most convenient course for the Members of the Commission will be for me to incorporate into a unified proposal (a) Mr. Wright’s original proposal, (b) the amplification, and, in part, modification, of one part of that proposal adopted by the Commission in its vote on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)17, and (c) the subsidiary proposals submitted in the present paper. I have accordingly drawn up a revised proposal on the foregoing lines and have annexed it as an Appendix to the present paper. It is this proposal which is now submitted to the Commission for final disposal. APPENDIX Consolidated Proposal relating to the name ‘‘ Hoplites ”’ Neumayr, 1875, and associated questions prepared in the form of a Draft Ruling DRAFT RULING :—(1) The under-mentioned action is hereby taken under the Plenary Powers :— (a) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby suppressed for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy :— (i) Hoplites Dejean, 1833 ; (ii) Hoplites Dejean, 1836 ; (iii) Hoplites Dejean, 1837 ; (iv) Hoplites, any uses additional to those specified in (i) to (iti) above, in the Order Coleoptera (Class Insecta), prior to the publication of the name Hoplites Neumayr, Sia (v) Hoplites Agassiz, 1846 (an Invalid Emendation of Hoplitis Hiibner, [1819] ; (vi) Hoplites Agassiz, 1846 (an Invalid Emendation of Aplites Rafinesque, 1820) ; (vii) Hoplites Philippi, 1857 ; (viii) Hoplites Theobald, 1864 ; (ix) Hoplites Koch, 1869 ; (b) The generic name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, is hereby validated ; NZ OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (c) All selections of type species for the genus Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, made prior to the present Ruling are hereby set aside and the nominal species Ammonites dentatus Sowerby (J.), 1821 (as defined by Spath (L.F.), 1925 (Ammonoidea of the Gault 1 : 101) is hereby designated to be the type species of the foregoing genus. (2) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby Bee on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology :— (a) Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, as validated under the Plenary Powers under (1)(b) above (gender: masculine) (type species, by designation under the Plenary Powers under (1)(c) above: Ammonites dentatus Sowerby (J.), 1821, as defined under the Plenary Powers under (1)(c) above) ; (b) Enema Hope, 1837 (gender : neuter) (type species, by original designation ; Scarabaeus enema Fabricius, 1787) ; (c) Astrobunus Thorell, 1876 (gender : masculine) (type species, by original designation : Hoplites argentatus Koch, 1869) ; (3) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology :— (a) The nine generic names suppressed under the Plenary Powers under (1)(a) above ; (b) Hoplites Eggers, 1923 (a junior homonym of Hoplites Neumayr, 1875) ; (c) Hoplites Kinel, 1930 (a junior homonym of Hoplites Neumayr, LS) (d) Odonthoplites Breistroffer, 1947 (type species, through Rule (f) - in Article 30: Ammonites dentatus Sowerby (J.), 1821) (an objective junior synonym of Hoplites Neumayr, 1875). (4) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology :— (a) dentatus Sowerby (J.), as published in the combination Ammon- ites dentatus (specific name of type species, by designation under the Plenary Powers under (1)(c) above, of Hoplites Neumayr, 1875) ; (b) pan Fabricius, 1775, as published in the combination Scarabaeus pan ; (c) helleri Ausserer, 1867, as published in the combination Acantholo- phus helleri. OPINION 353 73 (5) The under-mentioned family-group name is hereby placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology :—HOPLITIDAE Hyatt, 1900 (type genus : Hoplites Neumayr, 1875). Ill.—_THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 16. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)27 : Simultaneously with the submission of the Report reproduced in paragraph 15 above, there was issued on 30th November 1954 a Voting Paper (V.P.(O.M.)(54)27) in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “‘ the adoption of the proposal relating to the name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, set out in the Appendix to the Report bearing the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 533 submitted by the Secretary simultaneously with the present Voting Paper (consolidated proposal containing (a) the proposals already approved by the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(52)56 and Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)17 respectively and (b) the minor adjustments specified in the Report by the Secretary referred to above ”’ [i.e. the Consolidated Proposal set out in the Appendix to the Report reproduced in paragraph 15 of the present Opinion]. 17. The Prescribed Voting Period for Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.) (54)27: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the One-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period was due to close -on 30th December 1954, but by a Direction issued by the Secretary on 28th December 1954 this Period was extended to 15th January 1955 in view of the delays consequent upon the exceptionally heavy calls on the postal services at the Christmas Season. 18. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)27 : At the close of the Voting Period as extended by direction of the 74 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Secretary to 15th January 1955 (paragraph 17 above), the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)27 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following twenty (20) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which votes were received? : Lemche ; Hering; Vokes; Dymond; Stoll; SEsakum do Amaral; Kiihnelt ; Bodenheimer* ; Bradley (J.C.) ; Bonnet ; Key; Hemming; Sylvester-Bradley ; Riley ; Jaczewski ; Hanko ; Boschma; Miller ; Cabrera ; (b) On leave of Absence, two (2) : Holthuis ; Mertens ; (c) Voting Paper not returned, one (1)? : Prantl ; (d) Negative Votes : None. 19. Declaration of Resuit of Vote : On 15th January 1955, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P. (O.M.)(54)27, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as 3 The following zoologists who were Members of the Commission at the time of the issue of Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)27 were not Members of the Commission at the time of the issue of Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)17 :— Dr. K. H. L. Key (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisa- tion, A.C.T., Australia) Dr. Alden H. Miller (Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California, Berkeley, California, U.S.A.) Doc. Dr. Ferdinand Prantl (Ndrodni Museum v Praze, Prague, Czechoslovakia) Professor Dr. Wilhelm Kiithmelt (Zoologisches Institut der Universitat, Vienna, Austria) Professor F. S. Bodenheimer (The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel) Commissioner Bodenheimer exercised in this case the right conferred by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948, under which a Commissioner may, if he so desires, signify his willingness to support the view, or the majority view, of other Members of the Commission (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 50—51). OPINION 353 75 set out in paragraph 18 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. 20. A Supplementary Direction on two points : On 25th January 1955, Mr. Hemming, as Secretary placed the following Minute on the Commission’s File Z.N.(S.) 533 :— Authorship to be attributed to the family-group name based on the generic name ‘* Hoplites ’’ Neumayr, 1875, and addition of the specific name ‘‘ enema ”’ Fabricius, 1787, as published in the combination ‘‘ Scarabaeus enema ”’ to the ‘‘ Official List of Specific Names in Zoology ”’ MINUTE by FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E., Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature The purpose of the present Minute is to draw attention to two procedural questions arising in the Hoplites-case which call for further consideration. 2. Since the vote taken by the Commission on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)27 Mr. C. W. Wright, the original applicant, has drawn attention to the fact that, as he has now realised, the acceptance of the family-group name based upon the generic name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, from so late a date as Hyatt, 1900, as proposed in that Voting Paper, would give rise to serious confusion and name-changing at the superfamily level. The following is the letter received from Mr. Wright on this subject :— Now that family-group names for all categories are co-ordinate with one another, the superfamily name should be that of the oldest included family. When I wrote my “Classification of the Cretaceous Ammonites”? in 1952 (J. Paleont.), of the families then included in HOPLITACEAE, the families PULCHELLIDAE, and HOPLITIDAE were the oldest, being attributed to Douvillé, 1890 (Bull. Soc. géol. France (3) 18 : 290). However, Douvillé used French ter- minations which are now disallowed for dating family-group names. Thus, PULCHELLIDAE now dates from Hyatt, 1903, and HOPLITIDAE from Hyatt, 1900. All would be well but for the fact that two other included families, namely DOUVILLEICERA- TIDAE and SCHLOENBACHIDAE, which were attributed by me in 1952 to Spath, 1922 (Trans. Roy. Soc. Edinb. 53 : 112) and Spath, 1925 (Ann. Mus. Hist. nat. Marseilles 20 : 97) respectively, now turn out both to date from Parona & Bonarelli, [1897] (Pal. ital. 2 : 101 and 89 respectively). It would be most unfortunate and con- fusing if it were necessary to call the superfamily after either Douvilleiceras or Schloenbachia, since it has been known by terms, either latinised or vernacular, based on the generic name Hoplites for over half a century. 3. The difficulty now brought to light by Mr. Wright is purely technical, arising from the discovery that Spath’s action in establishing family-group taxa based upon the genera Douvilleiceras and Schloen- bachia was anticipated by Parona and Bonarelli. For it is this alone which has displaced HOP_ITIDAE Hyatt, 1900, from being the oldest nominal 76 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS family included in the superfamily concerned. Even now it would have priority if it could be accepted as from Douvillé, 1890. The only defect in the latter’s action is that he did not form the name HOPLITIDES in latinised form. The Copenhagen Congress (Decision 53(2)) has provided, however, for the acceptance of names such as Douvillé’s where this is necessary in the interests of nomenclatorial stability. The Commission has clearly shown its intention that in the present case Hoplites Neumayr (as validated under the Plenary Powers) is to be taken as the type genus of the family-group taxa involved. Accordingly, the present appears to me, as also to Mr. Wright with whom I have discussed this matter, to be a case where the special provision of the Copenhagen Congress cited above must be held to apply. 4. The second point which calls for consideration arises in con- nection with the name of the type species of the genus Enema Hope, 1837 (Class Insecta, Order Coleoptera) discussed in paragraph 7 of the Report which I submitted to the Commission on 30th November 1954.5 I there noted that the nominal species concerned, Scarabaeus enema Fabricius, 1787, had been treated by Arrow in his Catalogue as representing a variety of Scarabaeus pan Fabricius, 1775, and I recommended that the specific name pan Fabricius should therefore be placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology. In making this recommendation, I overlooked the fact that under the Regulations governing the foregoing Official List, the name enema Fabricius should also be placed thereon, since it is not treated by specialists as a junior synonym of pan Fabricius. As in other similar cases the entry so made should be endorsed by a note stating that this name is placed on the Official List for use by those specialists who take the taxonomic view that the nominal species discussed above represent different taxa at least at the infra-specific level. 5. Accordingly, as Secretary to the Commission, I hereby direct that in the Ruling to be prepared to give effect to the decisions taken by the Commission in relation to the name Hoplites Neumayr and associated names :—(1) the family-group name based upon the generic name Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, be attributed to Douvillé, 1890, the Invalid Original Spelling used by that author being at the same time placed on the Official Index ; (2) the name enema Fabricius, 1787, as published in the combination Scarabaeus enema, be included among the names so to be placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology, subject to the endorsement of the entry to be made in relation to this name in the manner specified in paragraph 4 of the present Minute. 21. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘* Opinion ”’ : On 26th January 1955 Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certificate 5 See pp. 68—69. OPINION 353 ah that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)27, subject to the formal adjust- ments specified in the Minute executed by the Secretary on 25th January 1955. The text of the Minute here referred to has been given in paragraph 20 of the present Opinion. 22. Original References: The following are the original references for the generic and specific names placed on Official Lists and Official Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— Astrobunus Thorell, 1876, Ann. Mus. Stor. nat. Genova 8 : 466, 499 dentatus, Ammonites, Sowerby (J.), 1821, Min. Conch. 4: 3, pl. 308 Enema Hope, 1837, Coleopt. Manual 1 : 83 enema, Scarabaeus, Fabricius, 1787, Mantissa Ins. 1 : 4 helleri, Acantholophus, Ausserer, 1867, Verh. zool.-bot. Ges. Wien 17 : 158 Hoplites Dejean, 1833, Cat. Coléopt. Coll. Dejean (1833 Ed.) : 150 Hoplites Dejean, 1836, Cat. Coléopt. Coll. Dejean (1836 Ed.) : 150 Hoplites Dejean, 1837, Cat. Colgopt. Coll. Dejean (1837 Ed.) : 167 Hoplites Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1846, Nomencl. zool., Lep. : 36 Hoplites Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1846, Nomencl. zool. Index univ. : 185 Hoplites Philippi, 1857, Arch. Naturgesch. 23(Abt. 1) : 320 Hoplites Theobald, 1864, J. asiat. Soc. Bengal (Pt. 1) 33 : 244 Hoplites Koch, 1869, Z. Ferd. Tyrol (3) 14 : 155 Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, SitzBer. Akad. Wiss. Wien, Math- naturw. KI. 71(1) : 681 (also Neumayr, 1875, Z. dtsch. geol. Ges. 27 : 925 Hoplites Eggers, 1923, Zool. Meded. 7 : 141 Hoplites Kinel, 1930, Polsk. Pismo ent. 8 : 219 Odonthoplites Breistroffer, 1947, Trav. Lab. Geol. Grenoble 26 : 84 pan, Scarabaeus, Fabricius (J.C.), 1775, Syst. Ent. : 5 23. The following is the reference for the family-group name which by the Ruling given in the present Opinion has been placed in the corrected form HOPLITIDAE on the Official List of Family- Group Names in Zoology and in its Invalid Original Spelling 78 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS HOPLITIDES on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family- Group Names in Zoology :— HOPLITIDES Douvillé, 1890, Bull. Soc. géol. France (3) 18 : 290 (first published in due Latinised form as HOPLITIDAE by Hyatt, 1900, in Zittel-Eastman, Textb. Palaeont. (First English Ed.) 1 : 584). 24. At the time of the submission of the original application dealt with in the present Opinion, the expression prescribed for the second portion of the binomen which constitutes the scientific name of a species was the expression “trivial name” and the Official List reserved for recording such names was styled the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology, the word “ trivial ” appearing also in the title of the Official Index reserved for recording rejected and invalid names of this category. Under a decision taken by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, the expression “ specific name’ was sub- stituted for the expression “trivial name” and corresponding changes were made in the titles of the Official List and Official Index of such names (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 21). The changes in terminology so adopted have been incor- porated in the Ruling given in the present Opinion. 25. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Commission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him.in that behalf. 26. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Fifty-Three (353) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twenty-Sixth day of January, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Five. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING Printed in England by Mrtcatre & Cooper Limitep, 10-24 Scrutton St., London EC2 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, c.™.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 1i. Part 4. Pp. 79—90 OPINION 354 Addition to the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology of the specific name fasciata Poiret, 1789, as published in the combination Laplysia [recte Aplysia] fasciata (Class Gastropoda) LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1955 Price Six Shillings (All rights reserved) Issued 12th August, 1955 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 354 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts., England) President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President: Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. BoscHMA (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (Ast January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) DE eee (Tasmanian Museum, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia) (27th uly Dr. Henning LeMcHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948) Professor Teiso Esaki (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Me a Denbigh RiLty (British Museum (Natural History) London) (9th une 195 Professor Tadeusz JACZEWSKI (Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950) Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a.M., Germany) (Sth July 1950) Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (Sth July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice- President) Bros J. R. DyMonpD (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 5 Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (42th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. Voxes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezogazdasagi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. STOLL (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) Dr. L. B. Hortuuis (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (12th August 1953) OPINION 354 ADDITION TO THE ‘“ OFFICIAL LIST OF SPECIFIC NAMES IN ZOOLOGY ” OF THE SPECIFIC NAME “*FASCIATA”’? POIRET, 1789, AS PUBLISHED IN THE COMBINATION ‘‘ LAPLYSIA [RECTE ‘“* APLYSIA ”] FASCIATA ” (CLASS GASTROPODA) RULING :—The under-mentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name No. 493: fasciata Poiret, 1789, as published in the combination Laplysia [recte Aplysia] fasciata. I. THE ORIGIN OF THE PRESENT CASE The present case has its origin in an application for the use of the Plenary Powers for the validation of the generic names Tethys Linnaeus, 1767, and Aplysia Linnaeus, 1767, submitted to the Commission in 1934 by Dr. H. Engel (Zoologisch Museum, Amsterdam, The Netherlands). The problem involved in connec- tion with the name dealt with in the present Opinion was dis- cussed at length in Dr. Engel’s application!. That application was 1 Dr. Engel’s application is reproduced in Opinion 200 (the Opinion embodying the Ruling given by the Commission in regard to the generic names Tethys Linnaeus, 1767, and Aplysia Linnaeus, 1767) (1954, Ops. Decls. int. Comm. zool. Nomene : 239—266). SEP? 1955 82 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS considered by the Commission at its Session held in Paris in 1948, and the main portion of the application, namely that relating to the foregoing generic names, was then granted by the Com- mission (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 301—304). At the same time the Commission took decisions regarding the names to be used for two of the four species, the nomenclature of which was involved in Dr. Engel’s application. As regards the names to be used for the two remaining species, the Commission then agreed as follows (ibid. 4 : 303—304) :— (4) without prejudice to the general principle that decisions should be given by the Commission on all questions raised in any given application and on the strict understanding that the action now to be taken should not be held available to be cited on any future occasion as a precedent in favour of dilatory procedure, to postpone for further consideration the question of fixing, under the Plenary Powers, the identity of the species to which the under-mentioned specific trivial names should apply :— fasciata Poiret, 1789, as published in the binominal com- bination Laplysia [recte Aplysia] fasciata Poiret, 1789 ; punctata Cuvier, 1803, as published in the binominal combina- tion Laplysia [recte Aplysia] punctata Cuvier, 1803 ; (5) to request the Secretary to the Commission to re-submit the portion of Dr. Engel’s application relating to the names specified in (4) above as soon as possible after the close of the present Session, with a view to a decision being taken by the Commission thereon without further delay. Il. THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE PRESENT CASE 2. Registration of the present application : Consequent upon the decision by the Commission that a special investigation should be OPINION 354 83 undertaken in connection with the specific name fasciata Poiret, 1789, as published in the combination Laplysia [recte Aplysia] fasciata, the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 610 was allotted to the present case. 3. Report by Mr. Hemming on the issues involved in the present case : It was not possible to make any progress with this case until after the publication in 1950 of the Official Record of the Proceedings of the Commission at its Session held in Paris, for it was not until then that its decisions on the main aspects of the Tethys/Aplysia problem were made public. Following certain preliminary inquiries regarding the present case, including a detailed re-examination of the documents in regard thereto submitted by Dr. Engel, Mr. Hemming prepared in the autumn of 1951 a Report in which he dealt jointly with the problem raised in the present case and in the other portion of Dr. Engel’s original application which he had been asked by the Commission to investigate, namely that relating to the names punctata Cuvier, 1803, as published in the combination Laplysia [recte Aplysia] punctata, and rosea Rathke, 1799, as published in the combination Aplysia rosea. The following is an extract from Mr. Hemming’s Report of the portion concerned with the present case :— Future status to be accorded to the trivial names ‘‘ fasciata ’’ Poiret, 1789, as published in the combination ‘‘ Laplysia [recte ‘‘ Aplysia ’”] fasciata ’’ and ‘‘ punctata ’’ Cuvier, 1803, as published in the combination ‘‘Laplysia [recte ‘‘Aplysia’’] punctata’’ (Class Gastropoda) By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E., Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature 46. At its Session held in Paris in 1948 the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature had under consideration an application? submitted by Dr. H. Engel (Zoologisch Museum, Amsterdam) for the use of the Plenary Powers for the purpose of determining the future use of the generic names Tethys and Aplysia, each of which had been used by some authors for a well-known genus of Tectibranchs and by 2 See Footnote 1. 84 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS other authors for an equally well-known genus of Nudibranchs. All cases of this kind turn upon what species should under the Régles be recognised as the type species of the nominal genus concerned. The present case is greatly complicated however by doubts regarding the taxonomic species represented by the various nominal species concerned and by the existence of several nominal species which are either unrecognisable or bear trivial names, which despite their undoubted rights under the Law of Priority, are not in use and have virtually never been used. ‘The present problem was originally brought to the attention of the International Commission by the inclusion of the names in question in the list of suggested nomina conservanda brought forward by the late Commissioner Karl Apstein (Berlin) but rejected by the Commission on the ground that the Plenary Powers could not be used for validating long lists of names submitted en bloc, it being necessary to submit each such case individually with adequate supporting data (see Opinion 74, published in 1922, Smithson. misc. Coll. 73(No. 1) : 32—34). Later, the names were in fact so submitted by Dr. Engel but, as at that time the Commission possessed no means of giving publicity for so long a paper as that prepared by Dr. Engel, it was arranged that as a first step that paper should be published elsewhere. Under this arrangement Dr. Engel’s application was published under the title “On the names of the genera Tethys and Aplysia’? in 1936 (Engel, 1936, Temminckia 1 : 221—266). In that application Dr. Engel submitted proposals, involving an extensive use of the Plenary Powers ; these proposals dealt with (1) the stabilisa- tion of the names Tethys and Aplysia and the designation, as the respective type species of those genera, of species in harmony with current usage, and (2) the determination of the trivial names to be used for the three Tectibranch species and the one Nudibranch species involved in this complex problem. The greater part of the subject dealt with in Dr. Engel’s application formed the subject of decisions taken by the International Commission at its Paris Session, but two of the constituent problems were then left over for further consideration. The purpose of the present note is to draw the attention of interested specialists to the two problems which the Commission at Paris referred back for further consideration, and, in accordance with the decision taken in Paris, to seek the views of specialists as to the solution which it is desirable should be adopted in regard to these names. 47. The history of the names given to, and used by later authors for, each of the four species (three Tectibranchs and one Nudibranch) involved in the Tethys/Aplysia problem is set out in great detail in Dr. Engel’s Temminckia paper, to which reference is necessary for the purpose of examining the full bibliographical history of the two names with which the present inquiry is concerned. We have first to note that in Paris the International Commission used its Plenary Powers for the purpose of determining the name to be used for the first of the three Tectibranch species dealt with in Dr. Engel’s paper (which we may conveniently refer to as Species T.1) and for the Nudibranch OPINION 354 85 species (here called species N.1). Under that decision the name Aplysia depilans Gmelin, 1791, became the correct name for species T.1, the species so named becoming the type species of the genus Aplysia Linnaeus, 1767, while the name Tethys fimbria Linnaeus, 1767, became the correct name for species N.1, the species so named becoming the type species of the genus Tethys Linnaeus, 1767 (the name Tethys Linnaeus, 1758, being at the same time suppressed under the Plenary Powers). The two species, the names for which were left over for further consideration were the species T.2 and the species T.3. It is the names to be used for these species that the present Report is con- cerned to ascertain. The data submitted to the Commission on this subject are briefly summarised in the following paragraphs. 48. The name to be used for the Tectibranch species ‘‘ 1.2 ”’ : Dr. Engel pointed out in his application (: 246) that the nominal species Aplysia depilans Linnaeus, 1767, was, when its name was first published, a nominal species comprising both species T.1 and species T.2. The existence of species T.2, as a species, distinct from species T.1, was however recognised by Poiret, who in 1789 applied to it the name Laplysia [recte Aplysia] fasciata (Poiret, 1789, Voy. Barbarie 2 : 2). In the following year Gmelin (1790, in Linnaeus, Syst. Nat. (ed. 13) 1 : 3103) adopted the trivial name fasciata Poiret, 1789, for species T.2, while (on the same page) applying the trivial name depilans Linnaeus, 1767 (as published in the binominal combination Laplysia depilans) exclusively to species T.1. Gmelin’s treatment of the trivial name depilans Linnaeus as the name for species T.1 was, Dr. Engel noted (: 246), followed by all subsequent authors (in 111 publications at the time when Dr. Engel’s application was written) ; but there was unfor- tunately no such unanimity in the subsequent practice followed as to the name to be applied to species T.2._ From the full particulars given by Dr. Engel (: 245—246) it appears that in the period from 1790 up to the date on which Dr. Engel’s application was compiled (a period of about 145 years) there are 116 references to species T.2 in the litera- ture ; in these this species was referred to under the trivial name fasciata Poiret 1789, on sixty-one occasions ; was misidentified as limacina Vinnaeus, 1758 (i.e. the nominal species Tethys limacina Linnaeus, 1758) on fifty-one occasions ; and was identified on four occasions with Tethys leporina Linnaeus, 1758, and therefore called by the trivial name Jeporina. Elsewhere in his application (: 246, 247) Dr. Engel drew attention to the large number of occasions on which the trivial name Jeporina Linnaeus, 1758, had been applied to the Nudibranch species N.1, and asked that, in view of the confusion which would attend the continued use of that trivial name, the Inter- national Commission should use its Plenary Powers to suppress it. Dr. Engel concluded therefore that the trivial name fasciata Poiret, 1789, which had been used for species T.2 by the majority of the authors who had published papers dealing with the species concerned (61 references as against 55 papers in which either the name /Jimacina 86 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS or the name /eporina had been used), was the oldest available trivial name, and the most widely used trivial name, for this species. Dr. Engel accordingly asked the International Commission formally to recognise the trivial name fasciata Poiret, 1789, as the correct name for species. 50. Questions put to specialists for advice: When we compare the position as regards the names Laplysia [recte Aplysia] fasciata Poiret, 1789, and Aplysia punctata Cuvier, 1803 ; as submitted to the International Commission by Dr. Engel (as summarised in paragraphs 48 and 49 above?) with the decision taken by the Commission at its Paris Session (1950, Joc. cit. 4 : 303), we find : (1) that the decisions then taken to suppress all uses of the trivial names Jeporina and limacina in the genus Tethys leave the trivial name fasciata Poiret, 1789 (as published in the combination Laplysia [sic] fasciata) as indisputably the oldest available name for the species T.2 ; (2) that none of the decisions taken in Paris have any bearing on the status to be accorded to the trivial name punctata Cuvier, 1803, in relation to the species T.3. On the basis of the information supplied by Dr. Engel there appears to be strong grounds in favour of the use of the Plenary Powers (as proposed in the application) for the purpose of suppressing the long-neglected (and not currently used) trivial name rosea Rathke, 1799, as published in the combination Aplysia rosea, thereby making the trivial name punctata Cuvier, 1803, as published in the combination Laplysia [sic] punctata, the name which is currently applied to the species T.3 and which has been almost consistently so applied ever since 1803, the oldest trivial name available, either subjectively or objectively, for that species. To sum up (a) there no longer seems to be any point of substance to put to specialists as regards the trivial name to be used for the species T.2 and the question now put to specialists is therefore whether there is any reason not so far brought to light why the trivial name fasciata Poiret, 1789, should not now be stabilised as correct trivial name for the species T.2 by being placed on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology ; (b) as regards the species T.3, the question now put to specialists is whether it is desirable that the trivial name rosea Rathke, 1799, should be suppressed under the Plenary Powers in order, to render the customary name punctata Cuvier, 1803, the oldest available name for the species T.3. 4. Publication of Mr. Hemming’s Report : Mr. Hemming’s Report in the present case was sent to the printer on Ist October 1951 and was published in Double Part 7/8 of volume 7 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature on 15th April 1952 (Hemming, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 7 : 212—215). a Paragraph 49 _is concerned with the name to be used for the Tectibranch species “ T.3°’. It is quoted in full in paragraph 3 of Opinion 355 (see page 97 of the present volume). OPINION 354 87 5. Appeal to specialists for comments on the action recom- mended in the present case : The appeal to specialists for comments in the present case made at the close of Mr. Hemming’s Report (paragraph 3 above) elicited comments from two specialists, each of whom supported the action recommended by Dr. Engel, as summarised in Mr. Hemming’s Report. The specialists in question were :—(1) Dr. Joshua L. Baily, Jr. (San Diego, California, U.S.A.); (2) Dr. Henning Lemche (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen). The comments so received are reproduced in the immediately following paragraphs. No objection to the action proposed was received from any source. 6. Support received from Dr. Joshua L. Baily, Jr. (San Diego, California, U.S.A.) : On 24th June 1952 the following letter of support was received from Dr. Joshua L. Baily, Jr. (San Diego, California, U.S.A.) :— Z.N.(S.) 610 and 611: I agree completely with the arguments advanced, and recommend action to stabilise the names Aplysia fasciata and Aplysia punctata. 7. Support received from Dr. Henning Lemche (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen): On 18th July 1952, Dr. Henning Lemche (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen) in a letter dealing both with this case and with that of the name Aplysia punctata, wrote :—“‘As a specialist in the Opisthobranchs, I have found the names of the Aplysiids of the Northern Atlantic most confusing, and I fully support Dr. Engel’s proposals for putting an end to the troubles.” lll. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 8. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(54)20: On 6th March 1954, a Voting Paper (V.P.(54)20) was issued in which the Members 88 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “‘the proposal that the specific name fasciata Poiret, 1789, as published in the combination Laplysia [recte Aplysia] fasciata, be now placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology ” 9. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting Paper was isused under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 6th June 1954. 10. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)20 : The state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)20 at the close of the Prescribed Voting Period was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following eighteen (18) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Holthuis ; Hering ; Riley ; Lemche ; Vokes ; do Amaral ; Esaki; Dymond; Bonnet; Boschma; Hemming ; Mertens ; Pearson ; Bradley (J.C.) ; Hanko ; Sylvester- Bradley ; Stoll ; Cabrera ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) Voting Paper not returned, one (1) : Jaczewski‘. 11. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 7th June 1954, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper 4 After the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, an affirmative vote was received (on 12th June 1954) from Commissioner Jaczewski. OPINION 354 89 V.P.(54)20, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 10 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. 12. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 29th January 1955, Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)20. 13. Original reference : The following is the original reference for the specific name placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— fasciata, Laplysia, Poiret, 1789, Voy. Barbarie 2 : 2. 14. As the present case is concerned only with a specific name, no question of placing names on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology arises for consideration. 15. At the time of the submission of the application dealt with in the present Opinion, the expression prescribed for the second portion of the binomen which constitutes the scientific name of a species was the expression “ trivial name ”’ and the Official List reserved for recording such names was styled the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology, the word “ trivial ” appearing also in the title of the Official Index reserved for recording rejected and invalid names of this category. Under a decision taken by the Fourteenth International Congtess of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, the expression “‘ specific name” was substituted for the expression “ trivial name ” and corresponding changes were made in the titles of the Official List and Official Index of such names (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 21). The changes in terminology so adopted have been incorporated in the Ruling given in the present Opinion. 90 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 16. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Commission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 17. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Fifty-Four (354) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. © Done in London, this Twenty-Ninth day of January, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Five. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING Printed in England by Mrercatre & Cooper LimitepD, 10-24 Scrutton St., London EC 2 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON LOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, cM.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 5. Pp. 91—102 OPINION 355 Validation, under the Plenary Powers, of the specifte name punctata Cuvier, 1803, as published in the combina- tion Laplysia [recte Aplysia] punctata (Class Gastropoda) LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1955 Price Six Shillings (All rights reserved) Issued 12th August, 1955 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 355 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts., England) President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President: Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor "H. BoscHMA (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (Ast January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) Dr. ee PEARSON (Zasmanian Museum, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia) (27th July 1948) Dr. Henning LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948) Professor Teiso Esaki (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mr. Norman Denbigh Ritey (British Museum (Natural History) London) (9th June 1950) Professor Tadeusz JACZEWSKI (Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950) Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (5th July 1950) Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (Sth July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice- President) ee J. R. DymMonbD (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 1953 Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. VoKEs (Johns Hopkins University, Balan! Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezogazdasdgi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. Stott (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, _N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) - Mr. P. C. SyLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield TEESE Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) Dr. L. B. Hoituuis (Rijksmuseum van aruuninee Historie, Leiden, The Nether- lands) (12th August 1953) OPINION 355 VALIDATION, UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS, OF THE SPECIFIC NAME “PUNCTATA’” CUVIER, 1803, AS PUBLISHED IN THE COMBINATION “ LAPLYSIA [RECTE “ APLYSIA ”] PUNCTATA ” (CLASS GASTROPODA) RULING :—(1) Under the Plenary Powers the specific name rosea Rathke, 1799, as published in the com- bination Aplysia rosea, is hereby suppressed for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy. (2) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name No. 494 :—punctata Cuvier, 1803, as published in the combination Laplysia [recte Aplysia] punctata. (3) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology with the Name No. 127 :— rosea Rathke, 1799, as published in the combination Aplysia rosea and as suppressed under the Plenary Powers under (1) above. I—THE ORIGIN OF THE PRESENT CASE The present case has its origin in an application for the use of the Plenary Powers for the validation of the generic names Tethys Linnaeus, 1767, and Aplysia Linnaeus, 1767, submitted to the Commission in 1934 by Dr. H. Engel (Zoologisch Museum, Amsterdam, The Netherlands). The problems involved in con- nection with the names dealt with in the present Opinion were SEP7 1955 94 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS discussed at length in Dr. Engel’s application!. That application was considered by the Commission at its Session held in Paris in 1948, and the main portion of the application, namely that relating to the foregoing generic names, was then granted by the Commission (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 301—304). At the same time the Commission took decisions regarding the names to be used for two of the four species, the nomenclature of which was involved in Dr. Engel’s application. As regards the names to be used for the two remaining species, the Commission then agreed as follows (ibid. 4 : 303— (4) without prejudice to the general principle that decisions should be given by the Commission on all questions raised in any given application and on the strict understanding that the action now to be taken should not be held available to be cited on any future occasion as a precedent in favour of dilatory procedure, to postpone for further consideration the question of fixing, under the Plenary Powers, the identity of the species to which the under-mentioned specific trivial names should apply :— fasciata Poiret, 1789, as published in the binominal combina- tion Laplysia [recte Aplysia] fasciata Poiret, 1789 ; punctata Cuvier, 1803, as published in the binominal com- bination Laplysia [recte Aplysia] punctata Cuvier, 1803 ; (5) to request the Secretary to the Commission to re-submit the portion of Dr. Engel’s application relating to the names specified in (4) above as soon as possible after the close of the present Session, with a view to a decision being taken by the Commission thereon without further delay. Il.—The SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE PRESENT CASE 2. Registration of the present application : Consequent upon the decision by the Commission that a special investigation should be + Dr. Engel’s application is reproduced in Opinion 200 (the Opinion embodying the Ruling given by the Commission in regard to the generic names Tethys Linnaeus, 1767, and Aplysia Linnaeus, 1767) (1954, Ops. Decls. int. Comm. zool. Nomencl. 3: 239—266). OPINION 355 95 undertaken in connection with the specific name punctata Cuvier, 1803, as published in the combination Laplysia [recte Aplysia] punctata and the earlier name rosea Rathke, 1799, as published in the combination Aplysia rosea, the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 611 was allotted to the present case. 3. Report by Mr. Hemming on the issues involved in the present case: It was not possible to make any progress with this case until after the publication in 1950 of the Official Record of the Proceedings of the Commission at its Session held in Paris, for it was not until then that its decisions on the main aspects of the Tethys/Aplysia problem were made public. Following certain preliminary inquiries regarding the present case, including a detailed re-examination of the documents in regard thereto submitted by Dr. Engel, Mr. Hemming prepared in the autumn of 1951 a Report in which he dealt jointly with the problem raised in the present case and in the other portion of Dr. Engel’s original application which he had been asked by the Commission to investigate, namely that relating to the name fasciata Poiret, 1789, as published in the combination Laplysia [recte Aplysia] fasciata. The following is an extract from Mr. Hemming’s Report of the portion concerned with the present case. Future status to be accorded to the trivial names ‘“‘ fasciata ’’ Poiret, 1789, as published in the combination ‘‘ Laplysia [recte ‘‘Aplysia ’’] fasciata ’’ and ‘‘ punctata ’’ Cuvier, 1803, as published in the combination ‘‘ Laplysia [recte ‘‘ Aplysia’’] punctata ”’ (Class Gastropoda) By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. (Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature) 46. At its Session held in Paris in 1948 the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature had under consideration an application? submitted by Dr. H. Engel (Zoologisch Museum, Amsterdam) for the use of the Plenary Powers for the purpose of determining the future use of the generic names Tethys and Aplysia, each of which had been used by some authors for a well-known genus of Tectibranchs and by other authors for an equally well-known genus of Nudibranchs. All cases 2 See footnote 1. 96 - OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS of this kind turn upon what species should under the Régles be recognised as the type species of the nominal genus concerned. The present case is greatly complicated, however, by doubts regarding the taxonomic species represented by the various nominal species concerned and by the existence of several nominal species which are either unrecognisable or bear trivial names which, despite their undoubted rights under the Law of Priority, are not in use and have virtually never been used. The present problem was originally brought to the attention of the International Commission by the inclusion of the names in question in the list of suggested nomina conservanda brought forward by the late Commissioner Karl Apstein (Berlin) but rejected by the Commission on the ground that the Plenary Powers could not be used for validating long lists of names submitted en bloc, it being necessary to submit each such case individually with adequate supporting data (see Opinion 74, published in 1922, Smithson. misc. Coll. 73(No. 1) : 32—34). Later, the names were in fact so submitted by Dr. Engel but, as at that time the Commission possessed no means of giving publicity for so long a paper as that prepared by Dr. Engel, it was arranged that as a first step that paper should be published elsewhere. Under this arrangement Dr. Engel’s application was published under the title ““On the names of the genera Tethys and Aplysia’’ in 1936 (Engel, 1936, Temminckia 1 : 221—266). In that application Dr. Engel submitted proposals, involving an extensive use of the Plenary Powers ; these proposals dealt with (1) the stabilisa- tion of the names Tethys and Aplysia and the designation, as the res- pective type species of those genera, of species in harmony with current usage, and (2) the determination of the trivial names to be used for the three Tectibranch species and the one Nudibranch species involved in this complex problem. The greater part of the subject dealt with in Dr. Engel’s application formed the subject of decisions taken by the International Commission at its Paris Session, but two of the con- stituent problems were then left over for further consideration. The purpose of the present note is to draw the attention of interested specialists to the two problems which the Commission at Paris referred back for further consideration, and, in accordance with the decision taken in Paris, to seek the views of specialists as to the solution which it is desirable should be adopted in regard to these names. 47. The history of the names given to, and used by later authors for, each of the four species (three Tectibranchs and one Nudibranch) involved in the Tethys/Aplysia problem is set out in great detail in Dr. Engel’s Temminckia paper, to which reference is necessary for the purpose of examining the full bibliographical history of the two names with which the present inquiry is concerned. We have first to note that in Paris the International Commission used its Plenary Powers for the purpose of determining the name to be used for the first of the three Tectibranch species dealt with in Dr. Engel’s paper (which we may conveniently refer to as Species T.1) and for the Nudibranch OPINION 355 97 species (here called species N.1). Under that decision the name Aplysia depilans Gmelin, 1791, became the correct name for species T.1, the species so named becoming the type species of the genus Aplysia Linnaeus, 1767, while the name Tethys fimbria Linnaeus, 1767, became the correct name for species N.1, the species so named becoming the type species of the genus Tethys Linnaeus, 1767 (the name Tethys Linnaeus, 1758, being at the same time suppressed under the Plenary Powers). The two species, the names for which were left over for further consideration were the species T.2 and the species T.3. It is the names to be used for these species that the present Report is concerned to ascertain. The data summitted to the Commission on this subject are briefly summarised in the following paragraphs. 49. The name to be used for the Tectibranch species ‘‘ T.3’? : Dr. Engel pointed out ( : 246) that, as first noted by Odhner (in 1907), the oldest available name for species T.3 was Aplysia rosea Rathke, 1799 (Skr. Nat. Selsk. 5(1) : [85], 147) but that the great majority of subsequent authors (92 papers) had used the name Aplysia punctata Cuvier, 1803 (Ann. Mus. Hist. nat., Paris 2(10) : 310); Dr. Engel added that there were some trivial names of later date which were subjective synonyms of punctata Cuvier but these had been used by only a few authors and had been dropped as soon as their synonymy with punctata Cuvier had been established. Dr. Engel accordingly asked for an Opinion prescribing the use of the name punctata Cuvier in place of the name rosea Rathke as the trivial name of species T.3. 50. Questions put to specialists for advice : When we compare the position as regards the names Laplysia [recte Aplysia] fasciata Poiret, 1789, and Aplysia punctata Cuvier, 1803 ; as submitted to the Inter- national Commission by Dr. Engel (as summarised in paragraphs 48 and 49 above?) with the decisions taken by the Commission at its Paris Session (1950, Joc. cit. 4 : 303), we find: (1) that the decisions then taken to suppress all uses of the trivial names /Jeporina and limacina in the genus Tethys leave the trivial name fasciata Poiret, 1789 (as published in the combination Laplysia [sic] fasciata) as indisputably the oldest available name for the species T.2; (2) that none of the decisions taken in Paris have any bearing on the status to be accorded to the trivial name punctata Cuvier, 1803, in relation to the species T.3. On the basis of the information supplied by Dr. Engel there appears to be strong grounds in favour of the use of the Plenary Powers (as proposed in the application) for the purpose of suppressing the long-neglected (and not currently used) trivial name rosea Rathke, 3 Paragraph 48 is concerned with the name to be used for the Tectibranch species T.2. It is quoted in full in paragraph 3 of Opinion 354 (see pages 85—86 of the present volume). 98 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 1799, as published in the combination Aplysia rosea, thereby making the trivial name punctata Cuvier, 1803, as published in the combination Laplysia [sic] punctata, the name which is currently applied to the species T.3 and which has been almost consistently so applied ever since 1803, the oldest trivial name available, either subjectively or objectively, for that species. To sum up (a) there no longer seems to be any point of substance to put to specialists as regards the trivial name to be used for the species T.2 and the question now put to specialists is therefore whether there is any reason not so far brought to light why the trivial name fasciata Poiret, 1789, should not now be stabilised as the correct trivial name for the species T.2 by being placed on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology ; (b) as regards the species T.3, the question now put to specialists is whether it is desirable that the trivial name rosea Rathke, 1799, should be suppressed under the Plenary Powers in order to render the customary name punctata Cuvier, 1803, the oldest available name for the species T.3. 4. Publication of Mr. Hemming’s Report: Mr. Hemming’s Report in the present case was sent to the printer on Ist October 1951 and was published in Double Part 7/8 of volume 7 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature on 15th April 1952 (Hemming, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 7 : 212—215). 5. Issue of Public Notices : Under the revised arrangements prescribed by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 51—56) Public Notice of the possible use by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature of its Plenary Powers in the present case was given on 15th April 1952 both in Double Part 7/8 of volume 7 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Mr. Hemming’s Report was published) and also to the other pre- scribed serial publications. In addition, such Public Notice was given to a number of general zoological serial publications. 6. Comments received in the present case: The appeal to specialists for advice made at the end of Mr. Hemming’s Report (paragiaph 3 above), coupled with the issue of the Prescribed Public Notices (paragraph 5 above) elicited comments from two specialists, each of whom supported the action recommended by Dr. Engel, as summarised in Mr. Hemming’s Report. The specialists in question were: (1) Dr. Joshua L. Baily, Jr. (San OPINION 355 99 Diego, California, U.S.A.) ; (2) Dr. Henning Lemche (Univer- sitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen). ‘The comments so received are reproduced in the immediately following paragraphs. No objection to the action proposed was received from any source. 7. Support received from Dr. Joshua L. Baily, Jr. (San Diego, California, U.S.A.) : On 24th June 1952 the following letter of support was received from Dr. Joshua L. Baily, Jr. (San Diego, California, U.S.A.) :— Z.N.(S.) 610 and 611: I agree completely with the arguments advanced, and recommend action to stabilise the names Aplysia fasciata and Aplysia punctata. 8. Support received from Dr. Henning Lemche (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen): On 18th July 1952 Dr. Henning Lemche (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen) addressed the following letter to the Commission in support of Dr. Engel’s proposals :— The name Aplysia rosea Rathke, 1799, has been so little used in the literature that it would seem to me—even as a countryman to Rathke —as confusing and at least not worth while, to try to reinforce that name. So, I am in favour of Dr. Engel’s proposal to suppress it in order to validate the name punctata Cuvier, 1803. As a specialist in Opisthobranchs, I have found the names of the Aplysiids of the Northern Atlantic most confusing, and I fully support Dr. Engel’s proposals for putting an end to the troubles. I1l—THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 9. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(54)21 : On 6th March 1954 a Voting Paper (V.P.(54)21) was issued in which the Members of 100 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “ the proposal relating to the name punctata Cuvier, 1803, as published in the combination Laplysia punctata, set out at the foot of the present Voting Paper’’. The proposal so set out was the following :— Draft Ruling (1) Under the Plenary Powers the specific name rosea Rathke, 1799, as published in the combination Aplysia rosea, is hereby suppressed for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy. (2) The specific name punctata Cuvier, 1803, as published in the combination Laplysia punctata, is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology. (3) The specific name rosea Rathke, 1799, as published in the combination Aplysia rosea and as suppressed under the Plenary Powers under (1) above, is hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology. 10. The Prescribed Voting Period : As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 6th June 1954. 11. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)21 : The state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)21 at the close of the Prescribed Voting Period was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following eighteen (18) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) ; Holthuis; Hering; Riley; Lemche; Vokes; do Amaral; Esaki; Dymond; Bonnet; Boschma ; Hemming; Mertens; Pearson; Bradley (J.C.) ; Sylvester-Bradley ; Hank6é ; Stoll; Cabrera ; OPINION 355 101 (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) Voting Paper not returned, one (1) : Jaczewski!. 12. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 7th June 1954, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer-for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(54)21, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in para- graph 11 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. 13. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 29th January 1955 Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)21. 14. Original references: The following are the original references for the names placed on Official Lists and Official Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— punctata, Laplysia, Cuvier, Aug. 1803, Ann. Mus. Hist. nat., Paris 2(10) : 310.. rosea, Aplysia Rathke, 1799, Skr. Nat. Selsk. 5(1) : 85, 147 15. As the present case is concerned only with certain specific names, no question of placing names on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology arises for consideration. 4 After the close of the Prescribed Voting Period a negative vote was received (on 12th June 1954) from Commissioner Jaczewski who wrote: “I do not see sufficient reason to suppress the name rosea Rathke, 1799. Prof. Dr. St. Feliksiak is of the same opinion ”’. 102 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 16. At the time of the submission of the application dealt with in the present Opinion, the expression prescribed for the second portion of the binomen which constitutes the scientific name of a species was the expression “ trivial name” and the Official List reserved for recording such names was styled the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology, the word “trivial ’ appearing also in the title of the Official Index reserved for recording rejected and invalid names of this category. Under a decision taken by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, the expression “specific name ” was substituted for the expression “trivial name” and corres- ponding changes were made in the titles of the Official List and Official Index of such names (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 21). The changes in terminology so adopted have been incorporated in the Ruling given in the present Opinion. 17. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing withthe present case, and the present Opinion is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Commission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 18. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Fifty-Five (355) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twenty-Ninth day of January, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Five. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING Printed in England by Mercatre & Cooper LimiTep, 10-24 Scrutton St., London EC2 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 6. Pp. 103—112 OPINION 356 Addition to the Official List of Family-Group Names Yk Zoology of the names of the family-group taxa having Ostrea Linnaeus, 1758, and Gryphaea Lamarck, 1801 (Class Pelecypoda) as their respective type genera (Opinion supplementary to Opinion 338) LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1955 Price Five Shillings (All rights reserved) Issued 12th August, 1955 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 356 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President: Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts., England) President: Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President : Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. Boschma (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (ist January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel Cabrera (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) Dr. Henning Lemche (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948). Professor Teiso Esaki (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre Bonnet (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mr. Norman Denbigh Riley (British Museum (Natural History), London) (9th June 1950) Professor Tadeusz Jaczewski Unstitute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950) Professor Robert Mertens (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (Sth July 1950) Professor Erich Martin Hering (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (Sth July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice-President) Professor J. R. Dymond (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 1953) One J. vis Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) President Professor Harold E. Vokes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla Hanko (Mezdgazdasagi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. Stoll (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Mr. P. C. Sylvester-Bradley (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) Dr. L. B. Holthuis (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (12th August 1953) Dr. K. H. L. Key (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Canberra, A.C.T., Australia) (15th October 1954) Dr. Alden H. Miller (Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California, Berkeley, California, U.S.A.) (29th October 1954) Doc. Dr. Ferninand Prantl (Ndrodni Museum vy Praze, Prague, Czechoslovakia) (30th October 1954) Professor Dr. Wilhelm Kiihnelt (Zoologisches Institut der Universitat, Vienna, Austria) (6th November 1954) Professor F. S. Bodenheimer (The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel) (11th November OPINION 356 ADDITION TO THE ‘* OFFICIAL LIST OF FAMILY-GROUP NAMES IN ZOOLOGY” OF THE NAMES OF THE FAMILY-GROUP TAXA HAVING “ OSTREA ” LINNAEUS, 1758, AND ‘‘ GRYPHAEA ”? LAMARCK, 1801 (CLASS PELECYPODA) AS THEIR RESPECTIVE TYPE GENERA (‘‘ OPINION ”’ SUPPLEMENTARY TO ‘OPINION ” 338) RULING :—(1) The under-mentioned family-group names are hereby placed on the Official List of Family- Group Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 11 and 12 respectively :— (a) OSTREIDAE (correction of OSTREACIA) Rafinesque, 1815 (type genus: Ostrea Linnaeus, 1758) ; (b) GRYPHAEINAE Vialov, 1937 (type genus: Gryphaea Lamarck, 1801, as defined in Opinion 338) (for use by those specialists who place Gryphaea Lamarck, 1801, in a family-group taxon different from that in which they place Ostrea Linnaeus, 1758, the type genus of the family-group taxon OSTREIDAE (correction of OSTREACIA) Rafinesque, 1815). (2) The under-mentioned family-group names, each of which has Ostrea Linnaeus, 1758, as its type genus, are hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 29 to 31 respectively :— (a) OSTREACIA Rafinesque, 1815 (an Invalid Original Spelling for OSTREIDAE) ; SEP” 1955 106 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (b) OSTRACEA Blainville, 1825 (an invalidly-formed junior synonym of OSTREIDAE (correction of OSTREACIA) Rafinesque, 1815) ; (c) OSTREADAE Fleming (J.), 1828 (an invalidly-formed junior synonym of OSTREIDAE (correction of OSTREACIA) Rafinesque, 1815). (3) The words “ gender: feminine” are hereby in- serted in the entry relating to the generic name Ostrea Linnaeus, 1758, made on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology by the Ruling given in Opinion 94. (4) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name No. 495 :—edulis Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the combination Ostrea edulis (specific name of type species of Ostrea Linnaeus, 1758). I.—THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE In its Opinion 338 (1955, Ops. Decls. int. Comm. zool. Nomencl. 10 : 125—151) relating to the species to be accepted as the type species of the genus Gryphaea Lamarck, 1801 (Class Pelecypoda), the International Commission reserved for further consideration the family-group-name aspects of the problem involved in connection with the foregoing generic name, noting (in paragraph 18) that this matter was then under examination in a separate File, to which the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 865 had been allotted. Following the foregoing decision, this question was investigated by the Secretary to the Commission in consultation with Dr. L. R. Cox (British Museum (Natural History), London). On the completion of these imvestigations, Mr. Hemming on OPINION 356 107 30th November 1954 submitted the following paper (numbered Z.N.(S.) 865) to the Commission for consideration :— The family-group name based on the generic name ‘‘ Gryphaea ”’ Lamarck, 1801 (Class Pelecypoda) By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. (Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature) In the earlier part of the present year by its vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)11, the Commission decided that the Rules should be strictly applied in the case of the generic name Gryphaea Lamarck, 1801, and therefore the Liassic fossil species Gryphaea arcuata Lamarck, 1801, be accepted as the type species of this genus. At the time when that vote was taken, there existed no Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology and in consequence no consideration was then given to the question of the treatment of the foregoing generic name as the basis of a family-group name. Now that such an Official List has been established by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, it is desirable that this aspect of the Gryphaea prob- lem should be cleared up as quickly as possible. 2. I have accordingly been in correspondence on this subject with Dr. L. R. Cox (British Museum (Natural History), London) who informs me that by most palaeontologists the genus Gryphaea Lamarck, 1801, defined as indicated above, is not placed in a different subfamily from the genus Ostrea Linnaeus, 1758, i.e., that the genus Gryphaea Lamarck, is, treated as belonging to the nominate subfamily of the family OSTREIDAE. Dr. Cox has, however, drawn my attention to a paper entitled “‘Sur la Classification des Ostréidés et leur Valeur strati- graphique” by the Soviet palaeontologist Dr. Oleg Vialov (Leningrad), in which Dr. Vialov recognised four subfamilies for the family OSTREIDAE, Of which the second was the new subfamily GRYPHAEINAE (‘‘ Valve supérieure plate ou concave (operculiforme) lisse (dépourvue de cétes)) (Vialov, 1937, C.R. XII® Congres international de Zoologie, Lisbonne, 1935 (3) : 1627—1639 ; new name GRYPHAEINAE on page 1631). 3. The name GRYPHAEINAE Vialov, 1937, is an available name, being the oldest family-group name based upon the nominal genus Gryphaea 108 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Lamarck, 1801. Owing to the comparatively recent date of this name and to the interruptions caused by the recent World War, it seems likely that this subfamily has not yet become widely recognised by taxonomists but that offers no obstacle to its being placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names. Indeed, under a General Directive issued by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948, in relation to the placing of names on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 268, Point (b)), as confirmed, and extended to the Official List of Family- Group Names in Zoology by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953 (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 37, Decision 58(1)), the Commission is bound in cases where opinions differ, or may differ, among specialists as to the taxonomic limits of particular taxa to place on the Official List not only the name most commonly recognised but also the available names of the second or other associated taxa with a note that these names are placed on the Official List for use by those workers who are of the opinion that on taxonomic grounds more than one taxon should be recognised. When we apply the foregoing Directive to the present case, we find that in compliance therewith the family-group name GRYPHAEINAE Vialoy, 1937, should now be placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology with a note as follows :—“‘ for use by those workers who place Gryphaea Lamarck, 1801, in a subfamily different from Ostrea Linnaeus, 1758, the type genus of the family (and subfamily) OSTREIDAE (correction of OSTREACIA) Rafinesque, 1815’. 4. As the generic name Ostrea Linnaeus, 1758, has been placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology (with Ostrea edulis Linnaeus, 1758, as type species) by a Ruling given in Opinion 94, I suggest that the present is a convenient opportunity to clear up out- standing points in regard to this item on the Official Lists in accordance with the General Directives issued to the Commission by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948, namely (a) that the specific name of the type species of every nominal genus, the name of which is placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology, shall, if the oldest available name for the species concerned, be placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 270) and (b) that the gender for each generic name placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology shall be specified in the entry to be made on that List in regard to that name (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4: 341). In the present case, compliance with the first of the foregoing Directives will be secured by the addition of the specific name edulis Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the combination Ostrea edulis to the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology, while compliance with the second of those Directives will be secured by a decision that the words “‘ gender : feminine ”’ be inserted in the entry to be made on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology in regard to the generic name Ostrea Linnaeus, 1758. OPINION 356 109 5. The concrete proposal which I now submit for consideration is that, in accordance with the General Directives cited in paragraphs 3 and 4 of the present note, the International Commission should :— (1) place the under-mentioned names on the Official List of Family- Group Names in Zoology :— (a) OSTREIDAE (correction of OSTREACIA) Rafinesque, 1815, Analyse Nature : 148 (type genus: Ostrea Linnaeus, 1758): (b) GRYPHAEINAE Vialov, 1937 (reference as given in para- graph 2 above) (type genus: Gryphaea Lamarck, 1801), with an explanatory note as proposed at the end of para- graph 3 above ; (2) place the under-mentioned names on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology :— (a) OSTREACIA Rafinesque, 1815 (an Invalid Original Spelling for OSTREIDAE) ; (b) OSTRACEA Blainville, 1825 (Manuel Malacolog. : 519) (an invalidly-formed junior synonym of OSTREIDAE (correc- tion of OSTREACIA) Rafinesque, 1815) ; (c) OSTREADAE Fleming (J.), 1828 (Hist. brit. Anim. : 392 (an invalidly-formed junior synonym of OSTREIDAE (correc- tion of OSTREACIA) Rafinesque, 1815) ; (3) insert the words “ gender: feminine” in the entry on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology relating to the name Ostrea Linnaeus, 1758 (a name placed on the foregoing Official List by the Ruling given in Opinion 94) ; (4) place the under-mentioned specific name on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology :—edulis Linnaeus, 1758 (Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1 ; 699), as published in the combination Ostrea edulis (specific name of type species of Ostrea Linnaeus, 1758). ? Il—THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 2. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)26 : On 30th November 1954 a Voting Paper (V.P.(O.M.)(54)26) was issued in which each 110 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Member of the Commission was asked! to state whether, having regard to the decision already taken in Opinion 338, he agreed “that, in conformity with the General Directive relating to the recording on the Official List and Official Index of decisions in regard to family-group names issued to the International Com- mission by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, the entries in relation to the family-group name GRYPHAEINAE Vialov, 1937, and associated names specified in Points (1) to (4) in paragraph 5 of the statement bearing the number Z.N.(S.) 865 submitted by the Secretary simultaneously with the present Voting Paper [i.e., in paragraph 5 of the paper reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion], should be made, as proposed, in the Official List and in the Official Index of family-group names and in the other Official Lists there specified ’’, and (2), if he did not so agree as regards any given item, to indicate the item concerned. 3. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the One-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period was due to close on 30th December 1954, but by a Direction issued by the Secretary on 28th December 1954 this Period was extended to 15th January 1955 in view of the delays consequent upon the exceptionally heavy calls on the postal services at the Christmas Season. 4. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)26 : At the close of the Voting Period as extended by direction of the Secretary to 15th January 1955 (paragraph 3 above), the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)26 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following nineteen (19) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which votes were received) : Lemche ; Hering; Vokes; Dymond; Stoll; Esaki; do Amaral; Ktihnelt; Jaczewski; Bradley (J.C.) ; Bonnet ; Key; Hemming; Sylvester-Bradley ; Riley ; Hanko ; Boschma; Miller ; Cabrera ; OPINION 356 111 (b) On Leave of Absence, two (2) : Holthuis ; Mertens ; (c) Voting Papers not returned, two (2)! : Bodenheimer ; Prantl ; (d) Negative Votes : None. 5. Declaration of Result of Vote : On 15th January 1955, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)26, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 4 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. 6. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘* Opinion ”’ : On 8th February 1955, Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certificate 1 The following zoologists who were Members of the Commission at the time of the issue of Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)26, were not Members of the Com- mission at the time when by its vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)11 the Commission gave the Ruling regarding the species to be accepted as the type species of the genus Gryphaea Lamarck, 1801, which has since been promulgated in Opinion 338 :— Dr. K. H. L. Key (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Canberra, A.C.T., Australia) Dr. Alden H. Miller (Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California, Berkeley, California, U.S.A.) Doc. Dr. Ferdinand Prantl (Ndrodni Museum v Praze, Prague, Czechoslovakia) Professor Dr. Wilhelm Kiihnelt (Zoologisches Institut der Universitat, Vienna, Austria) Professor F. §. Bodenheimer (The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel) 112 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)26. 7. Original references : The following are the original references for the family-group names placed by the Ruling given in the present Opinion on the Official List or, as the case might be, the Official Index, established for recording valid and invalid family- group names respectively :— GRYPHAEINAE Vialov, 1937, C.R.XII* Congrés int. Zool., Lisbonne, 1935 (3) : 1631 OSTRACEA Blainville, 1825, Manual Malacalog. : 519 OSTREACIA (an Invalid Original Spelling for OSTREIDAE) Rafinesque, 1815, Analyse Nature : 148 OSTREADAE Fleming (J.), 1828, Hist. brit. Anim. : 392 8. The following is the original reference for the under- mentioned specific name placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— edulis, Ostrea, Linnaeus, 1758, Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1 : 699 9. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is accord- ingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Commission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 10. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Fifty-Six (356) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Eighth day of February, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Five. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING Printed in England by Metcatre & Cooper LimitTepD, 10-24 Scrutton St., London EC 2 —— OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, c.M.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 7. Pp. 113—128 OPINION 357 Designation under the Plenary Powers (a) of a type species in harmony with accustomed usage, for the genus Chortoicetes Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1893, and (b) of the gender to be attributed to the name of that genus and to the name Austroicetes Uvarov, 1925 (Class Insecta, Order Orthoptera) LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1955 Price Eight Shillings (All rights reserved) Issued 12th August, 1955 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 357 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts., England) President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President: Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. BoscHMA (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (Ast January 1947). Senor Dr. Angel CaBRERA (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948). Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary). Dr. Joseph PEARSON (Tasmanian Museum, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia) (27th July 1948). Dr. Henning LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948). Professor Teiso Esaki (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950). Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950). Mr. Norman Denbigh RiLey (British Museum (Natural History) London) (9th June 1950). Professor Tadeusz JACZEWSKI (Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950). Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (Sth July 1950). Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (5th July 1950). Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice- President). Professor J. R. DyMOND (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 1953). Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President). Professor Harold E. Voxes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953). Professor Béla HANKO (Mezdgazdasdgi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953). Dr. Norman R. STOLL (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953). Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953). Dr. L. B. Hottuuts (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Nether- lands) (12th August 1953). OPINION 357 DESIGNATION UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS (a) OF A TYPE SPECIES IN HARMONY WITH ACCUSTOMED USAGE FOR THE GENUS ‘“ CHORTOICETES ” -BRUNNER VON WATTENWYL, 1893, AND (b) OF THE GENDER TO BE ATTRIBUTED TO THE NAME OF THAT GENUS AND TO THE NAME “ AUS- TROICETES ” UVAROY, 1925 (CLASS INSECTA, ORDER ORTHOPTERA) RULING :—(1) The original spellings shown below for the under-mentioned generic names are Valid Original Spellings and are therefore not subject to emendation :— (a) Chortoicetes Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1893; (b) men Uvarov, 1925 (Class Insecta, Order Orthop- tera). (2) The following action is hereby taken under the Plenary Powers :— (a) The feminine gender is hereby attributed to each of the generic names specified in (1) above ; (b) All designations or selections of type species for the genus Chortoicetes Brunner von Wattenwy], 1893, made prior to the present Ruling are hereby set aside, and the nominal species Epa- cromia_ terminifera Walker, 1870, is hereby designated to be the type species of the foregoing genus. : (3) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 879 and 880 respectively :— (a) Chortoicetes Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1893 (gender : feminine) (type species, by designation under the Plenary Powers under (2)(b) above : Epacromia terminifera Walker, 1870) ; CEP? 1955 116 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (b) Austroicetes Uvarov, 1925 (gender: feminine) (type species, by original designation : Epacromia pusilla Walker, 1870). (4) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 496 and 497 respectively :— (a) terminifera Walker, 1870, as published in the combination Epacromia terminifera (specific name of type species, by designation under the Plenary Powers under (2)(b) above of Chortoicetes Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1893) ; (b) pusilla Walker, 1870, as published in the combina- tion Epacromia pusilla (specific name of type species of Austroicetes Uvarov, 1925). (5) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with the Name No. 297 :— Calataria Sjostedt, 1921 (a junior objective synonym of Chortoicetes Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1893, as deter- mined under the Plenary Powers under (2)(b) above). I.—THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 6th August 1951 Dr. K. H. L. Key (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization, Division of Entomology, Canberra, A.C.T., Australia) addressed to the Commission a communication in which he raised various matters relating to the generic name Chortoicetes Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1893 (Class Insecta, Order Orthoptera) and, consequent upon OPINION 357 117 correspondence with the Secretary, he followed this up on Sth November 1951 by submitting the following application :— Proposed use of the Plenary Powers to validate the generic names ‘* Chortoicetes ’’ Brunner, 1893, and ‘‘ Austroicetes ’’ Uvarov, 1925 (Class Insecta, Order Orthoptera), and to direct that these names be treated as of the feminine gender By K. H. L. KEY, DSc. (Division of Entomology, Commonwealth Scientific & Industrial Research Organization, Canberra, Australia) 1. The nominal genus Chortoicetes Brunner, 1893 (Ann. Mus. Stor. nat. Genova 33 : 123) was established to include “‘ species Asiaticae, Africanae et Australicae’’, none of which was cited by name. The first author to refer a nominal species to this genus was Brancsik, who in 1896 so referred the new nominal species Chortoicetes yorketownensis Brancsik, 1896 (Jh. Naturw. Ver. (MusVer.) Trencsin 17—18 : 249). Kirby (1910: Syn. Cat. Orth. 3(2) : 194) showed that this is a subjective synonym of Epacromia terminifera Walker, 1870 (Cat. Derm. Salt. Br. Mus. 4 : 777), which he formally selected as the type species of Chortoicetes. The nominal genus Austroicetes Uvarov, 1925 (Trans. ent. Soc. Lond. 1924 : 271) was established to contain certain species formerly placed in Chortoicetes, with Epacromia pusilla Walker, 1870 (Cat. Derm. Salt. Br. Mus. 4 : 778) as type species by original designation. 2. The names Chortoicetes and Austroicetes are based upon the Greek word ofxeves, an inhabitant (Brunner, Joc. cit.). According to section F of the Appendix to the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, the Greek 0. is to be transliterated as oe. Under the interpretation of Article 19 agreed upon by the International Com- mission and adopted by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology (see Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 142), failure to follow the rules of transliteration given in the Appendix constitutes in certain circum- stances an “‘ error of transcription’. If this ruling were to apply to the present case it would this involve the emendation of the universally accepted original orthography of Chortoicetes to “‘ Chortoecetes”’, and of Austroicetes to ‘‘ Austroecetes’’. Further, oiketes is masculine, so that, especially in the light of the provisions adopted by the Thirteenth Congress for determining the gender of generic names (see Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 248), strict application of the rules would require both of the names in question to take that gender. According to Article 14 of the Code, adjectival trivial names must agree in gender with the generic name, and provisions adopted by the Thirteenth Congress (see 118 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4:68) make it clear that, under the amended rules, names formed in contravention of that Article are to be automatically corrected. Now the names Chortoicetes and Austroicetes have almost always been treated as feminine. Only Rehn (1907: Chortoicetes pusillulus) and Uvarov (1930 : Austroicetes pusillus) have combined them with trivial names in the masculine form, and Uvarov elsewhere uses “* Chortoicetes terminifera”’’ and ‘“‘ Austroicetes pusilla”’. Strict application of the new rules would thus involve the emendation of a number of specific trivial names in the two genera. 3. Two of the species whose names would thus have to be emended, both as to the orthography of the generic name and the gender of the trivial name, are those long known under the names Chortoicetes terminifera Walker (the type species of Chortoicetes) and Austroicetes cruciata Saussure. These are the two most serious acridid pests of Australia ; a considerable literature has developed around both of them, extending back, in the first, to 1900, and in the second, to 1938. There can be no question but that a strict application of the rules to the names of these species would cause confusion and resentment, and would tend to bring the International Code, as well as the practice of taxonomy, into disrepute among zoologists in Australia. As against these disadvantages, it is difficult to see that any compensating useful result could accrue from the changes. 4. In view of the fact that, under the present proposal if approved, the International Commission will in any case need to use its Plenary Powers in connection with the generic name Chortoicetes Brunner, I consider that the economic importance of this genus and of the species Epacromia terminifera Walker, 1870, is such that, in the interest of nomenclatorial stability and to prevent any future misunderstanding, it is desirable that the Commission should use the foregoing Powers also for the purpose of designating the above species as the type species of this genus in place of the subjectively identical but later established nominal species Chortoicetes yorketownensis Brancsik, 1896. 5. For the reasons set out above, I ask the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature :— _(1) to use its Plenary Powers :— (a) to validate the generic names Chortoicetes Brunner, 1893, and Austroicetes Uvarov, 1925, in their original orthography ; (b) to direct that the generic names Chortoicetes Brunner, 1893, and Austroicetes Uvarov, 1925, are both to be treated as being of the feminine gender ; OPINION 357 119 (c) to set aside all type designations or selections for Chor- toicetes Brunner, 1893, made prior to the decision now proposed to be taken and to designate Epacromia terminifera Walker, 1870 to be the type species of the foregoing genus ; (2) to place the under-mentioned generic names on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology :— (a) Chortoicetes Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1893 (type species, by designation as proposed in (1)(c) above under the Plenary Powers ; Epacromia terminifera Walker, 1870) (gender of generic name ; feminine, as proposed to be so declared under (1)(b) above) ; (b) Austroicetes Uvarov, 1925 (type species, by original designation ; Epacromia pusilla Walker, 1870) (gender of generic name; feminine, as proposed to be so declared in (1)(b) above) ; (3) to place the under-mentioned trivial names on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology : (a) terminifera Walker, 1870, as published in the binominal combination Epacromia terminifera (trivial name of type species of Chortoicetes Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1893) ; (b) pusilla Walker, 1870, as published in the binominal combination Epacromia pusilla (trivial name of type species of Austroicetes Uvarov, 1925). Il.—THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application: On receipt of Dr. Key’s application the problems raised therein in regard to the generic names Chortoicetes Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1893, and Austroicetes Uvarov, 1925, were allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 595. 120 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 3. Support received for the present application prior to its publication in the ‘* Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature ”’ : Shortly after the receipt of Dr. Key’s application and before it had been published in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature letters of support for Dr. Key’s proposals were received from the following specialists :—(1) A. G. Andrewartha (University of Adelaide, Wade Agricultural Research Institute, Adelaide, South Australia); (2) D. C. Swan (also of the Wade Agricultural Research Institute, Adelaide). The communications so received are reproduced in the immediately following paragraphs. 4. Support received from Dr. A. G. Andrewartha (University of Adelaide, Wade Agricultural Research Institute, Adelaide, South Australia): On 22nd November 1951 Dr. A. G. Andrewartha (University of Adelaide, Wade Agricultural Institute, Adelaide, South Australia) addressed the following letter to the Commission in support of the present application :— I have read a copy of an application, which I understand will be submitted to you by Dr. K. H. L. Key, asking your Commission to exercise its Plenary Powers to prevent confusion in the nomenclature of species of the genera Chortoicetes and Austroicetes. I would like to take this opportunity of supporting Dr. Key’s application. I worked for a number of years, studying the ecology and general biology of two of the species concerned, namely Chortoicetes terminifera and Austroicetes cruciata, and have published a number of papers on this subject. I feel therefore that I am in a good position to appreciate the argument which Dr. Key has advanced in his application to your Commission, and I would like to add my full and strong support for his application. 5. Support received from Dr. D. C. Swan (Wade Agricultural Research Institute, Adelaide, South Australia) : On 17th January 1952 Dr. D. C. Swan (Wade Agricultural Research Institute, Adelaide, South Australia) addressed the following letter to the Commission in support of the present application :— You have, I believe, received recently from Dr. K. H. L. Key, a communication for submission to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature concerning the status of the generic names OPINION 357 121 Chortoicetes and Austroicetes and asking that these be validated in their original orthography and as being of feminine gender. Dr. Key has asked me whether I was prepared to support these proposals and if so to write to you in your capacity as Secretary of the Commission. This I am glad to do for the reasons that follow. Each genus contains a species of considerable economic importance in South Australia and, indeed, widely in Australia. C. terminifera is the Australian plague locust, while A. cruciata is the Plague Grasshopper. Their distributions in Australia overlap completely and each species tends to swarm independently. Their superficial resemblances in the field have caused much confusion among farmers and administrators as to the efficiency of control measures due to apparent rapid recurrence (which may be in fact an appearance of the other species) and so on. An extensive research programme by the respective organizations of Key and his associates, and ourselves, from 1934 onwards, has defined the position precisely, and the names of the two insects and their relative standing, one as a sedentary swarming grasshopper, the other as a migrating locust, have become well known throughout Australia. It would, I think, create great confusion among the large group of non-biologists who now understand and use the names Chortoicetes and Austroicetes, if these and the relevant specific trivial names should be modified in conformity with Article 19 of the Rules. I would like therefore to support as strongly as possible the submission of Dr. Key on this matter. 6. Publication of the present application : Dr. Key’s application and the comments on that application received from Dr. A. G. Andrewartha and Dr. D. C. Swan were sent to the printer on 7th April 1952 and were published on 6th May 1952 in Part 6 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Key, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 163—165; Andrewartha, 1952, ibid. 6 : 166 ; Swan, 1952, ibid. 6 : 166). 7. Supplementary statement submitted by Dr. K. H. L. Key in May 1952 : On 6th May 1952 Dr. Key submitted a supplementary statement regarding the generic name Chortoicetes Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1893, in which he drew attention to a paper in which in 1921 Sjdstedt had published the generic name Calataria which was at present a junior subjective synonym of Chortoicetes Brunner 122 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS and would under the proposal submitted to the Commission become a junior objective synonym of that name. Dr. Key suggested therefore that the name Calataria Sjdstedt should be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology at the same time that the Commission took the other action which he had recommended, if it were to decide to approve the application submitted in the present case. Dr. Key’s letter, which was received at a time when the page proof of his main application had already been passed for publication, was as follows :— It has occurred to me, somewhat belatedly I am afraid, that there are certain additional facts that I ought to put before the Commission in connection with the above application. I did not consider that these were relevant to the application in its original form, but they become relevant now that the application includes the proposal that Epacromia terminifera Walk. should be declared the type species of Chortoicetes in place of Chortoicetes yorketownensis Brancs. These facts are as follows: Sjdstedt (1921) (K. Svenska Vetensk Akad. Handl. 62(3) : 40. 1921) in his proposal to split the genus Chortoicetes Brunn. into two (the genera referred to in the application by the names Chortoicetes Brunn. and Austroicetes Uv.) apparently considered that, since yorketownensis Brancs. was a synonym of terminifera Walk., neither the former nor the latter nominal species could be accepted as the type species of Chortoicetes (see also Sj6stedt, 1931, Ark. Zool. 23A(11)). He designated Chortoicetes plena Karny as the type species of Chortoicetes, and erected the new genus Calataria Sjést. with terminifera Walk. as type species. This procedure was disputed by Uvarov (Trans. Ent. Soc. Lond. (1924) : 271), who stated that terminifera should be accepted as the type species of Chortoicetes, of which Calataria was a synonym, and proposed the name Austroicetes Uv., with Epacromia pusilla Walk. as type species, to replace Chortoicetes SjOst. (nec. Brunn.). Sj6stedt’s procedure was, of course; quite unjustified, and was dealt with quite adequately by Uvarov under the provisions of the Code. Nevertheless the first valid citation of terminifera as a type species of any genus was Sjéstedt’s (as type species of Calataria) ; for, as you have pointed out, the citations of terminifera as type species of Chortoicetes given by both Kirby and Uvarov (loc. cit.) were made in error, the nominal species concerned being yorketownensis Brancs. Thus I assume that in declaring terminifera to be the type species of Chortoicetes the Commission would need, at the same time, to take some action in regard to the designation of that species as the type OPINION 357 123 species of Calataria, and to place Calataria on the list of Rejected Generic Names in Zoology. Presumably no change need be made to my application in order that cognisance of the above facts may be taken by the Commission. 8. Issue of Public Notices : Under the revised arrangements prescribed by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 51—56), Public Notice of the possible use by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature of its Plenary Powers in the present case was given on 22nd May 1952 (a) in Part 6 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Dr. Key’s application was published) and also (b) to the other prescribed serial publica- tions. In addition, such Notice was given also to certain general zoological serial publications and to a number of entomological serials in Europe and America. 9. No objections received : The issue of the Public Notices specified in paragraph 8 above elicited no objection to the action proposed to be taken in this case. Ill—THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 10. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(54)22 : On 6th March 1954 a Voting Paper (V.P.(54)22) in regard to the present case was issued to the Members of the Commission. In Note 4 of the Notes issued with this Voting Paper attention was drawn to the supplementary proposal that the name Calataria Sjéstedt, 1921, be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology, submitted by Dr. Key in his letter of 6th May 1952 (paragraph 7 above). In this Voting Paper the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against “ the proposal relating to the names Chortoicetes and Austroicetes set out in paragraph 124 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 5 on page 165 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomen- clature [i.e. in paragraph 5 of the application reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion], with the addition of the proposal specified in Note 4 overleaf” [i.e. the note relating to the name Calataria Sjéstedt, 1921]. 11. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 6th June 1954. 12. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)22 : The state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)22 at the close of the Prescribed Voting Period was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following eighteen (18) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Holthuis; Hering; Riley; Lemche; Vokes; do Amaral ; Sylvester-Bradley ; Esaki ; Dymond ; Bonnet ; Boschma ; Mertens ; Jaczewski; Pearson ; Hemming ; Bradley (J.C.) ; Stoll; Cabrera ; (b) Negative Votes, one (1): Hanko ; (c) Voting Papers not returned : None. 13. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 7th June 1954, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(54)22, OPINION 357 125 signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in para- graph 12 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Com- mission in the matter aforesaid. 14. Supplementary Direction issued by the Secretary on 14th February 1955 : The form of the Ruling to be prepared to give effect to the decision taken by the Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)22 was reviewed by the Secretary on 14th February 1955 in the light of the decisions regarding the emenda- tion of names taken by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953. In consequence, the Secretary then placed the following Minute on the Commission’s File (Z.N.(S.) 595) relating to the present case :— Effect on the proposal relating to the orthography of the generic name ‘* Chortoicetes ’’ Brunner, 1893 and ‘‘ Austroicetes ’’ Uvaroy, 1925, submitted by Dr. K. H. L. Key of the decisions relating to the emendation of names taken by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953 MINUTE by FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. (Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature) One of the principal points in the application relating to the generic name Chortoicetes Brunner, 1893, and Austroicetes Uvarov, 1925, submitted by Dr. K. H. L. Key was to secure a Ruling that, although the foregoing generic names were defectively formed by reason of being mistransliterations from the Greek, the original orthography should be preserved from emendation, having regard to the general acceptance in the literature of the spelling for these names used by the original authors. At that time the interpretation of Article 19 of the Régles (the Article relating to the emendation of names) was a matter of doubt and arrangements had already been made for the whole of the provisions of that Article to be the subject of detailed review by the next International Congress of Zoology, when it should meet at Copenhagen in 1953. In order to ensure that, whatever the decision of the Copenhagen Congress, this aspect of the present case should be expressly brought to the attention of the Commission, Dr. Key decided to ask that the Plenary Powers should secure that the original ortho- 126 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS graphy of the foregoing generic names be the valid orthography of those names. 2. The Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, when reviewing the provisions of Article 19, decided inter alia, that a zoolo- gical name shall not be subject to emendation by reason of “an error of transliteration into the Latin alphabet from some other alphabet” (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 43, Decision 71 (1)(a)(i)). Since the only defect in the original orthography of the generic names Chortoicetes and Austroicetes is that those names were incorrectly transliterated into the Latin alphabet from the Greek alphabet, the original orthography adopted in the case of these generic names is, under the foregoing decision by the Copenhagen Congress, the Valid Original Spelling of those names and is not subject to emendation. 3. The Copenhagen Congress decided further that, although the amendments made by it in the Rég/es should not formally come into force until the first day of January in the calendar year following the promulgation of the text, as amended by the Paris (1948) and Copen- hagen (1953) Congresses (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. :103, Decision 196), the Commission is to guide itself in the discharge of its day-to-day work in relation to the interpretation of the Régles by the amendments made therein by the Paris and Copenhagen Congresses (1953, ibid. : 103, Decision 199). Accordingly, under the foregoing decision by the International Congress of Zoology, the amendment to Article 19 specified in paragraph 2 of the present Minute is already binding upon the International Commission. 4. Having regard to the decisions taken by the Fourteenth Inter- national Congress of Zoology in relation to the emendation of names (paragraph 2 above) and to the procedure to be followed by the Commission in the period between the close of that Congress and the formal promulgation of revised text of the Régles (paragraph 3 above), the use of the Plenary Powers is not required to secure that the original spellings of the generic names Chortoicetes Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1893, and Austroicetes Uvarov, 1925, shall, as asked for in the present application, be accepted as the Valid Original Spellings for these names. Accordingly, as Secretary to the Commission, I hereby direct that, notwithstanding the vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(54)22, that the Plenary Powers be used to preserve the original orthography of the generic names cited above, the Ruling to be prepared to give effect to the decision taken by the Commission in this case shall state merely that the original spellings for each of the foregoing names are the Valid Original Spellings therefor and in consequence that those spellings are not subject to emendation. 15. Preparation of the Ruling to be given in the present ‘* Opinion ’? : On 15th February 1955 Mr. Hemming prepared OPINION 357 127 the Ruling given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)22, subject to the formal modification thereof made by the Direction given in the Minute by the Secretary dated 14th February 1955 (paragraph 14 above). 16. Family-group-name aspect: Dr. K. H. L. Key (the applicant in the present case) has reported that neither the generic name Chortoicetes Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1893, nor the generic name Austroicetes Uvarov, 1925, has been taken as the base of a family- group name and that both the genera so named are currently placed in the family ACRIDIDAE. 17. Original references: The following are the original references for the names placed on Official Lists and Official Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— Austroicetes Uvarov, 1925, Trans. ent. Soc. Lond. 1924 : 271 Calataria Sjostedt, 1921, K. svensk. VetenskAkad. Handl. 62 (No. 3) : 40 Chortoicetes Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1893, Ann. Mus. Stor. nat. Genova 33 : 123 pusilla, Epacromia, Walker, 1870, Cat. Derm. Salt. Brit. Mus. 4:778 terminifera, Epacromia, Walker, 1870, Cat. Derm. Salt. Brit. Mus. 4: 777 18. At the time of the submission of the application dealt with in the present Opinion, the expression prescribed for the second portion of the binomen which constitutes the scientific name of a species was the expression “ trivial name” and the Official List reserved for recording such names was styled the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology, the word “ trivial” appearing also in the title of the Official Index reserved for recording rejected and invalid names of this category. Under a decision taken by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, 128 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Copenhagen, 1953, the expression “ specific name’? was sub- stituted for the expression “trivial name” and corresponding changes were made in the titles of the Official List and Official Index of such names (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 21). The changes in terminology so adopted have been incor- porated in the Ruling given in the present Opinion. 19. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Commission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 20. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Fifty-Seven (357) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. DoNE in London, this Fifteenth day of February, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Five. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING a eee ed Printed in England by Metcatre & Cooper Limitep, 10-24 Scrutton St., London EC2 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 8. Pp. 129—138 OPINION 358 Designation, under the Plenary Powers, of a type species in harmony with accustomed usage for the genus Mortonella Pomel, 1883 (Class Echinoidea), a genus based on a misidentified type species LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1955 Price Five Shillings (All rights reserved) Issued 12th August, 1955 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 358 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President: Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts., England). President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953). Vice-President: Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953). Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948). B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology.) Professor H. BOSCHMA (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (Ast January 1947). Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948). Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary). Dr. Joseph PEARSON (Tasmanian Museum, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia) (27th July 1948). Dr. Henning LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948). Professor Teiso ESAKI (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950). Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950). Mr. Norman Denbigh RILEy (British Museum (Natural History) London) (9th June 1950). Professor Tadeusz JACZEWSKI (Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950). Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (5th July 1950). Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (Sth July 1950). Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice- President). ee J. R. DYMOND (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 53). Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President). Professor Harold E. Vokes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953). Professor Béla HANKO (Mezdgazdasdgi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953). Dr. Norman R. STOLL (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953). Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953). Dr. L. B. HoLtuuts (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Nether- lands) (12th August 1953), OPINION 358 DESIGNATION, UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS, OF A TYPE SPECIES IN HARMONY WITH ACCUSTOMED USAGE FOR THE GENUS ‘*‘ MORTONELLA ”’ POMEL, Tee (CLASS ECHINOIDEA), A GENUS BASED UPON A MISIDENTIFIED TYPE SPECIES RULING :—(1) Under the procedure prescribed for determining the type species of genera established with misidentified type species the Plenary Powers are hereby used (a) to set aside all designations or selections of type species for the nominal genus Mortonella Pomel, 1883 (Class Echinoidea) made prior to the present Ruling, and (b) to designate the nominal species Scutella quinquefaria Say, 1825, to be the type species of the foregoing genus. (2) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name No. 881 :—WMortonella Pomel, 1883 (gender : feminine) (type species, by designation under the Plenary 185, under (1)(b) above: Scutella quinquefaria Say, 1825). (3) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name No. 498 :—quinquefaria Say, 1825, as published in the combination Scutella quinquefaria (specific name of type species of Mortonella Pomel, 1883, by designation under the Plenary Powers under (1)(b) above). (4) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with the Name No. 298 :—Mortonia Desor, 1858 (a junior homonym of Mortonia Gray (J.E.), [1852]). SEP7 1955 132 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS I.—THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 21st December 1951 Professor J. Wyatt Durham (University of California, Berkeley, California, U.S.A.) submitted, through Professor Raymond C. Moore (University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, U.S.A.) a preliminary enquiry as to the species to be accepted as the type species of the genus Mortonella Pomel, 1883 (Class Echinoidea), a genus considered to have been based upon a misidentified type species. Following correspondence with the Secretary, Professor Durham on 3rd March 1952 sub- mitted the following application for the consideration of the Commission :— Proposed use of the Plenary Powers to designate as the type species of the genus ‘‘ Mortonella ’’ Pomel, 1883 (Class Echinoidea), a genus based upon a misidentified type species, the species intended as such by the original author By J. WYATT DURHAM 2 (University of California, Department of Paleontology, Berkeley, California, U.S.A.) 1. The purpose of the present application is to ask the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature to use its Plenary Powers, under the procedure laid down by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 158—159), for the purpose of designating, as the type species of the genus Mortonella Pomel, 1883 (Class Echinoidea), a genus based upon a misidentified type species, the species intended to be the type species by the original author of the genus. A decision on this case is urgently required in connection with the preparation of the forthcoming Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, and it is particularly hoped, therefore, that the International Commission will give all practicable priority to the consideration of this case. 2. The facts of this case are as follows. In 1858 (Syn. Echin. foss. : 231) Desor established a new nominal genus to which he gave the name Mortonia. Desor placed in this genus one species only, which is, therefore, the type species by monotypy. That species was cited by Desor as Mortonia rogersi Morton (=Scutella rogersi Morton, 1834, Syn. organ. Remains cret. : 77, pl. 13, fig. 3). It is perfectly clear that the species to which Desor applied the above name was not the true Scutella rogersi Morton, 1834, but the quite distinct species Scutella quinquefaria Say, 1825 (J. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad. (1)5 : 228), which OPINION 358 133 already in 1841 (Mon. echinoid., Sec. Mon. des Scutelles : 85, pl. 19a, figs. 1—4) had been misidentified by Agassiz with Morton’s Scutella rogersi. That the same misidentification was made by Desor in 1858 is clear (a) from the diagnosis (reading in part “‘ sillons ambulacraires de la face inférieure anastomosés deux fois ’’—, (b) from his reference to Agassiz’ figures, and (c) from his description (reading in part “‘ cing tubes buccaux venant s’ouvrir sur le pourtout du peristome ’’) which he gave for the single included species, a description which is appropriate for Scutella quinquefaria Say but is quite unsuitable for Scutella rogersi Morton, which has unbranched ambulacral food grooves and no apparent buccal tubes. 3. In 1883 (Class. méth. gén. Echin. viv. foss. : 70) Pomel recognised that the name Mortonia Desor, 1858, was invalid, it being a junior homo- nym of Mortonia Gray [1851] (Proc. zool. Soc. Lond. 19 : 38), and he accordingly gave to Desor’s Mortonia the new name Mortonella. 4. Clark and Twitchell (1915, U.S. Geol. Survey, Mon. 54 : 136— 138) were the first authors to recognise that two species had hitherto been confused under the name ‘* Scutella rogersi Morton”. They accordingly separated these two species in their monograph, placing the species which Agassiz (1841) and Desor (1858) had misidentified as Scutella rogersi Morton in the genus Mortonella Pomel, and the true Scutella rogersi Morton in the genus Clypeaster Berthold, 1827. 5. All systematists who have recognised the genus Mortonella Pomel (Mortonia Desor) have treated it in the sense of Desor, that is, as a genus having as its type species the species for which the proper name is Scutella quinquefaria Say, 1825. 6. If it were necessary under the Régles to assume that Desor’s determination of Scutella rogersi Morton was correct, the genus Mortonella Pomel, auct. would be left without a name, while the name Mortonella Pomel (Mortonia Desor) would be applicable to a clype- astroid echinoid, in a sense in which it has never been used by any systematist. Such action would run directly counter to Desor’s intentions and would be open to the strongest objection, in that it would involve the acceptance as the type species of this genus of a species agreeing neither with the original generic diagnosis nor with Desor’s description of the sole species included by him in the genus. 7. The generic name Mortonella Pomel (Mortonia Desor) has been widely used by systematists (see Mortensen, 1948, Mon. Echinoidea 4(2) : 391) who have considered the Tertiary echinoids of the South- eastern United States, for the species figured (incorrectly) by Agassiz (1841) as Scutella rogersi Morton and its relatives, and it has never been 134 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS used in any other sense. Consequently, confusion rather than uniformity would result if it were now necessary to assume that Desor correctly identified Morton’s species. 8. The International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature is therefore now asked :— (1) under the procedure prescribed by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology for determining the type species of a genus based upon a misidentified type species, to use its Plenary Powers (a) to set aside all designations or selections of type species for the genus Mortonella Pomel, 1883, made prior to the proposed decision, and (b) to designate Scutella quinque- faria Say, 1825, to be the type species of the foregoing genus ; (2) to place the generic name Mortenella Pomel, 1883 (gender of generic name: feminine) (type species, as proposed in (1) above to be designated under the Plenary Powers: Scutella quinquefaria Say, 1825) on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology ; (3) to place the trivial name quinquefaria Say, 1825, as published in the combination Scutella quinquefaria, on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology ; (4) to place the generic name Mortonia Desor, 1858 (a junior homo- nym of Mortonia Gray [1852], on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology. Il—THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt of Professor Durham’s preliminary communication, the question of the species to be accepted as the type species of the genus Mortonella Pomel, 1883, was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 639. 3. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 7th April 1952 and was published OPINION 358 135 on 22nd May 1952 in Part 6 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Durham, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 168—169). 4. Issue of Public Notices: Under the revised procedure prescribed by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 51—56), Public Notice of the possible use by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature of its Plenary Powers in the present case was given on 22nd May 1952 (a) in Part 6 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Professor Durham’s application was published) and (b) to the other prescribed serial publications. In addition, such Public Notice was given also to certain general zoological serial publications and to a number of palaeontological serials in Europe and America. 5. No objection received: The issue of the Public Notices specified in paragraph 4 above elicited no objection to the action proposed to be taken in the present case. 1Il—THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 6. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(54)23 : On 6th March 1954, a Voting Paper (V.P.(54)23) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “ the proposal that the Commission should express itself as satisfied that the genus Mortonella Pomel, 1883 (= Mortonia Desor, 1858) was based upon a misidentified type species and therefore that approval should be given to the proposals set out in paragraph 8 on page 169 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomen- clature”’ [i.e. in paragraph 8 of the application reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion]. 136 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 7. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 6th June 1954. 8. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)23 : The state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)23 at the close of the Prescribed Voting Period was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following eighteen (18) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Holthuis; Hering; Riley; Lemche; Vokes; do Amaral ; Esaki ; Sylvester-Bradley ; Dymond ; Bonnet ; Boschma ; Mertens; Pearson; Hemming; Bradley (J.C.) ; Hank6é; Stoll; Cabrera ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) Voting Paper not returned, one (1) : Jaczewski.! 9. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 7th June 1954 Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(54)23, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in para- graph 8 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. 10. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘* Opinion ”’ : On 16th February 1955 Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling 1 After the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, an affirmative vote was received (on Ist July 1954) from Commissioner Jaczewski. OPINION 358 137 given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)23. 11. Original References: The following are the original references for the names placed on Official Lists and Official Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— Mortonella Pomel, 1883, Class. méth. gén. Echin. viv. foss. : 70 Mortonia Desor, 1858, Syn. Echin. foss. : 231 quinquefaria, Scutella, Say, 1825, J. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad. (1) 5 : 228 12. Family-group-name aspects: It has been ascertained that the generic name Mortonella Pomel, 1883, has not been taken as the base for a family-group name. Accordingly, no family- group-name problem arises in the present case. 13. At the time of the submission of the application dealt with in the present Opinion, the expiession prescribed for the second portion of the binomen which constitutes the scientific name of a species was the expression “ trivial name”’ and the Official List reserved for recording such names was styled the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology, the word “trivial ” appearing also in the title of the Official Index reserved for recording rejected and invalid names of this category. Under a decision taken by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, the expression “ specific name” was substituted for the expression “trivial name’ and corres- ponding changes were made in the titles of the Official List and Official Index of such names (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl.: 21). The changes in terminology so adopted have been incorporated in the Ruling given in the present Opinion. 14. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in 138 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Commission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 15. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Fifty-eight (358) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Sixteenth day of February, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Five. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING liinted in England by h.vrcarrr & Coorir Lrurrrp, 10-24 Serutton St., London EC 2 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, c.M.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 9. Pp. 139—150 OPINION 359 Suppression, under the Plenary Powers, of the generic name Miersia Kingsley, 1879, for the purpose of render- ing the generic name Acanthephyra Milne Edwards (A.), 1881 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda) the oldest available name for the genus concerned. LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1955 Price Six Shillings (All rights reserved) 2 Issued 12th August, 1955 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 359 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts, England) : President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President: Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission {Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. BOSCHMA (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (Ast January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) Dr. Joseph PEARSON (Tasmanian Museum, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia) (27th July 1948) Dr. Henning LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Capenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948) Professor Teiso’Esaki (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mr. Norman Denbigh RILEY (British Museum (Natural History) London) (9th June 1950) Professor Tadeusz JACZEWSKI (Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950) Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (Sth July 1950) Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (Sth July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice- President) Professor J. R. DYMOND (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 1953) Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. Vokes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezégazdasadgi Muzeum Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. STOLL (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) Dr. L. B. Hottuuts (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Nether- lands) (12th August 1953) OPINION 359 SUPPRESSION, UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS, OF THE GENERIC NAME ‘“‘ MIERSIA ” KINGSLEY, 1879, FOR THE PURPOSE OF RENDERING THE GENERIC NAME ‘* ACANTHEPHYRA ” MILNE EDWARDS (A.), 1881 (CLASS CRUSTACEA, ORDER DECAPODA) THE OLDEST AVAILABLE NAME FOR THE GENUS CONCERNED RULING :—(1) Under the Plenary Powers the generic name Miersia Kingsley, 1879, is hereby suppressed for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy. _ (2) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name No. 882 : Acanthephyra Milne Edwards (A.), 1881 (gender : feminine) (type species, by original designation : Acanthephyra armata Milne Edwards (A.), 1881) (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda). (3) Theunder-mentioned genericnamesarehereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 299 and 300 respectively : (a) Miersia Kingsley, 1879, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers under (1) above ; (b) Ephyra Roux (P.), iT junior homonym of Ephyra Péron & Lesueur, 1810). (4) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name No. 499 : armata Milne Edwards (A.), 1881, as published in the combination Acanthephyra armata (specific name of type species of Acanthephyra Milne Edwards (A.), 1881). SEP.7 1955 142 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS I.—THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 21st September 1951 Dr. L. B. Holthuis (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) submitted the following application to the Commission for the validation under the Plenary Powers of the generic name Acanthephyra Milne Edwards (A.), 1881 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda) :— Proposed use of the Plenary Powers to validate the generic name “‘Acanthephyra ’? A. Milne Edwards, 1881 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda) By L. B. HOLTHUIS (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) The present application relates to a generic name Acanthephyra A. Milne Edwards, 1881 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), which is in general use, but which is not the oldest available name for the genus concerned. The ruthless application of the Rég/es in the present case would give rise to much quite unnecessary confusion, and I accordingly ask the International Commission on Zoological Nomen- clature to prevent this confusion by using their Plenary Powers in such a way as to permit the continued use of the above generic name. 2. The following are the original references to the generic names dealt with in the present application :— Acanthephyra A. Milne Edwards, 1881, Ann. Sci. nat. (Paris) (Zool.) (6) 11(4) : 12 (type species, by original designation : Acanthe- phyra armata A. Milne Edwards, 1881, Ann. Sci. nat. (Paris) (Zool.) (6) 11(4) : 12). Miersia Kingsley, 1879, Proc. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad. 1879 : 416 (sub- stitute name for Ephyra P. Roux, 1831 (Mém. Class. Crust. Salic. : 24) an invalid junior homonym of Ephyra Péron & Lesueur, 1810, Ann. Mus. Hist. nat., Paris 14(83) : 354) (type species, by original designation by Kingsley, 1879 (Proc. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad. 1879 : 416): Alpheus pelagicus Risso, 1816, Hist. nat. Crust. Nice : 91). 3. The name Acanthephyra at present is in universal use for a large genus of deep-sea shrimps. This genus consists of about 28 species and is distributed throughout the Atlantic, Indian and Pacific Oceans. Several of the species are common and all the larger deep-sea expeditions brought home considerable quantities of specimens belonging to this OPINION 359 143 genus. In the zoological reports of practically all the deep-sea expedi- tions (e.g., Albatross, Ara, Atlantide, Atlantis, B.A.N.Z. Antarctic, Bermuda Oceanographic, Caudan, Challenger, Discovery, German South Polar, Helga, Ingolf, Investigator, John Murray, Michael Sars, Pawnee, Pickle, Pieter Faure, Plankton, Pola, Princesse Alice, Siboga, Thor, Valdivia, Washington) these shrimps have been described under the generic name Acanthephyra. In his revision of the family in which this genus belongs, Chace (1936, J. Wash. Acad. Sci. 26 : 24—31) also used that generic name. 4. Now Alpheus pelagicus Risso, 1816, the type species of the genus Miersia Kingsley, 1879, proves to belong to the genus Acanthephyra (see Holthuis, 1947, Zool. Meded., 27 : 315). Thus Miersia Kingsley, 1879, is a subjective synonym of Acanthephyra A. Milne Edwards, 1881. The latter name, being the more recent of the two, according to the Law of Priority, has to be replaced by the former. _ 5. The name Miersia was proposed by Kingsley to replace the pre- occupied generic name Ephyra P. Roux, 1831. Kingsley placed three species in this genus :— (1) Alpheus pelagicus Risso, 1816, which was indicated by Kingsley as the type species of Miersia, (2) Pandalus punctulatus Risso, 1826 (Hist. nat. Europ. mérid. 5 : 80, fig. 7), a species incerta, and (3) Ephyra compressa De Haan, 1844 (Fauna japon., Crust. (5) : pl. 46, fig. 7), the type species of the genus Paratya Miers, 1882 (family ATYIDAE). 6. As far as I know only three authors besides Kingsley have used the name Miersia for Acanthephyra. First, S. I. Smith in Bull. Mus. comp. Zool. 10 : 66—73. Two years later Smith (1884, Rep. U.S. Fish Comm. 10 : 372) abandoned Miersia in favour of Acanthephyra. In his 1884 paper Smith stated that he could not find any differences between the two genera, “‘ but as Milne-Edwards probably had access to typical species of Miersia, Acanthephyra is most likely a distinct genus’’. Carus (1885, Prodr. Faun. Medit. 1: 481) in his rather uncritical compilation of the Mediterranean fauna mentions Miersia with two species M. pelagica and M. punctulata. Bate (1888, Rep. Voy. Challenger, Zool.24 : 732, 733) in his large report on the Challenger Macrura, rejected the name Miersia on account of the fact that Kingsley, who had placed the genus in the family ATYIDAE, in the diagnosis of this family mentioned characters not present in Acanthephyra. Fowler (1912, Ann. Rep. New Jersey State Mus. 1911 : 548, 549) in his com- pilation of the New Jersey Crustacea correctly considered Miersia 144 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS and Acanthephyra to be identical and accordingly adopted the former name as being the older. 7. The name Miersia furthermore has been used by some authors for species of the family ATYIDAE, obviously because Kingsley placed the Atyid shrimp Paratya compressa (De Haan) in this genus. Ortmann (1894, Proc. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad. 1894 : 400), who in two previous publications had used the name Miersia for species of the genus Paratya, identified Miersia Kingsley, 1879, with Paratya Miers, 1882 and Xiphocaris Von Martens, 1872, using the latter name for the genus. Ortmann excluded Alpheus pelagicus from Miersia, placing it in Acanthephyra. Holmes (1895, Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci. (2) 4 : 577) described a new Atyid under the name Miersia pacifica. In 1900 the same author (Holmes, 1900, Occ. Pap. Calif. Acad. Sci. 7 : 211) erected a new genus (Syncaris) for his species and at the same time remarked that the name Miersia could not be used for Atyid shrimps, since its type species was Alpheus pelagicus. Finally, Bouvier (1925, Encycl. entomol. (A) 4 : 55) cited Miersia Kingsley as a synonym of Paratya Miers. 8. We thus see that the generic name Acanthephyra is in general use for a genus of deep-sea shrimps ; at least 60 authors have used that name and it may be found in practically all reports dealing with the Decapoda Macrura of deep-sea expeditions. On the other hand the name Miersia, which is nomenclatorially the correct name for that genus, has been used for it by only four authors, one of whom later abandoned it in favour of Acanthephyra, while the publications of the other three authors have been of relatively very little importance for the study of this group. Moreover the name Miersia has been used by a number of authors for shrimps belonging to the family ATYIDAE. It is clear therefore that the change of the name Acanthephyra to Miersia is highly undesirable as it would involve the change of many well-known specific names and thus cause quite unnecessary confusion in carcinological literature. The concrete proposals which I accordingly submit for consideration are that the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature should :— (1) use its Plenary Powers :— (a) to suppress the generic name Miersia Kingsley, 1879, for the purposes of the Law of Priority, but not for those of the Law of Homonymy, and (b) to validate the generic name Acanthephyra A. Milne Edwards, 1881 ; (2) place on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology the generic name Acanthephyra A. Milne Edwards, 1881 (gender of generic name: feminine) (type species, by original designation : Acanthephyra armata A. Milne Edwards, 1881) as validated in (1)(b) above ; OPINION 359 145 (3) place the generic names Miersia Kingsley, 1879, as suppressed under (1)(a) above, and Ephyra Roux, 1831 (junior homonym of Ephyra Péron & Lesueur, 1810) on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology ; (4) place on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology the trivial name armata A. Milne Edwards, 1881, as published in the binominal combination Acanthephyra armata (trivial name of type species of Acanthephyra A. Milne Edwards, 1881). Il—THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application: Upon the receipt of Dr. Holthuis’s application, the question of the validation of the generic name Acanthephyra Milne Edwards (A.), 1881, under the Plenary Powers was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 617. 3. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 30th January 1952 and was published on 22nd May 1952 in Part 7 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Holthuis, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 195—197). 4. Issue of Public Notices: Under the revised procedure prescribed by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 51—56), Public Notice of the possible use by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature of its Plenary Powers in the present case was given on 22nd May 1952 (a) in Part 7 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Dr. Holthuis’s application was published) and (b) to the other prescribed serial publications. In addition, Public Notice was given to a number of general zoological serial publications. 146 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 5. Comments received: The issue of the foregoing Public Notices elicited a letter of support from Dr. Ricardo Zariquiey (Enfermedades de la Infancia, Barcelona, Spain), which is repro- duced in the immediately following paragraph. No objection to the action proposed was received from any source. 6. Support received from Dr. Ricardo Zariquiey (Enfermedades de la Infancia, Barcelona, Spain): On 25th February 1953 Dr. Ricardo Zariquiey (Enfermedades de la Infancia, Barcelona) addressed a letter to the Commission intimating his support for a number of applications, including the present application, which had then recently been published in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature. The following is an extract from Dr. Zariquiey’s letter :— He recibido las Commission’s References Z.N.(S.) 616 (Euryrhynchus), Z.N.(S.) 617 (Acanthephyra) . . . propuestas por el Dr. L. B. Holthuis, estando en todo conforme con las proposiciones del citado Doctor. IIl.—THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 7. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(54)26 : On 6th March 1954 a Voting Paper (V.P.(54)26) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “the proposal relating to the name Acanthephyra Milne Edwards (A.), 1881, as set out at the top of page 197 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature” [i.c. in paragraph 8 of the application reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion]. 8. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 6th June 1954. OPINION 359 147 9. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)26 : The state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)26 at the close of the Prescribed Voting Period was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following nineteen (19) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Holthuis; Hering; Riley; Lemche; Vokes; do Amaral ; Esaki ; Sylvester-Bradley ; Dymond ; Bonnet ; Boschma ; Hanko; Hemming; Mertens; Pearson ; Bradley (J. C.) ; Stoll ; Jaczewski; Cabrera ; (b) Negative votes : None ; (c) Voting Papers not returned : None. 10. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 7th June 1954, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(54)26, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 9 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the fore- going Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. 11. Family-group names : On 22nd September 1954 Dr. L. B. Holthuis (the applicant in the present case) notified the Com- mission that the genus Acanthephyra Milne Edwards is not currently considered to be the type genus of a family-group taxon. Accordingly no action at the family-group-name level is called for in the present case. 148 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 12. Note on the relative status of the generic names ‘‘ Miersia ”’ Kingsley, 1879, and ‘‘ Acanthephyra ’’ Milne Edwards : On 15th February 1955 Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, placed on the Commission’s File Z.N.(S.) 617 the following Minute relating to the relative status of the generic names Miersia Kingsley, 1879, and Acanthephyra Milne Edwards (A.), 1881 :— In his application regarding the names Miersia Kingsley, 1879, and Acanthephyra Milne Edwards (A.), 1881, Dr. Holthuis asked for the suppression under the Plenary Powers of the name Miersia Kingsley for the purpose of validating the use of the name Acanthephyra Milne Edwards. At the same time Dr. Holthuis pointed out that these nominal genera had different type species and that it was only through the subjective (taxonomic) identification of the species so named that the foregoing generic names were synonyms of one another. This situation has ceased to exist in consequence of the action taken by the Com- mission when in its vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)26 it suppressed the generic name Miersia Kingsley. For by that action the name Acanthe- phyra Milne Edwards ceased to be a subjective synonym of an older name. It always was a nomenclatorially available name and it now becomes the oldest available name for the genus in question. Thus, the use of the Plenary Powers to suppress the subjective senior synonym Miersia Kingsley is all that is required to meet the object sought in the present case. The Plenary Powers are not needed to secure an objectively available basis for the name Acanthephyra Milne Edwards, since, as shown above, that name always possessed such a basis. Its only defect prior to the decision just taken by the Commission was that it was considered to be a junior subjective synonym of Miersia Kingsley and that defect has been removed by the suppression of Kingsley’s generic name under the Plenary Powers. To sum up, the name Acanthe- phyra Milne Edwards required to be “ validated’ only in the sense that, until the name Miersia Kingsley had been suppressed, the name Acanthephyra could not be used as the name for the genus concerned by any taxonomist who regarded the species which are the respective type species of these two genera as being congeneric with one another. 2. In the light of the considerations set out above, I now, as Secretary direct that in the Ruling to be prepared to give effect to the decision taken by the Commission in the present case the record to be made of the use of the Plenary Powers be confined to a record of the use of those Powers for the suppression of the name Miersia Kingsley, this being the only use of those Powers required for the purpose of giving effect to the application submitted in this case and to the decision of the Commission thereon. 13. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ’’ Opinion ”’ : On 16th February 1955 Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given OPINION 359 149 in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)26, as clarified by the Minute by the Secretary dated 15th February 1955 (paragraph 12 above). 14. Original References: The following are the original references for the names placed on Official Lists and Official Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— Acanthephyra Milne Edwards (A.), 1881, Ann. Sci. nat., Paris (Zool.) (6) 11(4) : 12 armata, Acanthephyra, Milne Edwards (A.), 1881, Ann. Sci. nat., Paris (Zool.) (6) 11(4) : 12 Ephyra Roux (P.), 1831, Mém. Class. Crust. Salic. : 24 Miersia Kingsley, 1879, Proc. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad. 1879 : 416 15. At the time of the submission of the application dealt with in the present Opinion, the expression prescribed for the second portion of the binomen which constitutes the scientific name of a species was the expression “ trivial name’ and the Official List reserved for recording such names was styled the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology, the word “ trivial’ appearing also in the title of the Official Index reserved for recording rejected and invalid names of this category. Under a decision taken by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, the expression “ specific name ” was substituted for the expression “trivial name” and corresponding changes are made in the titles of the Official List and Official Index of such names (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. :21). The changes in terminology so adopted have been incorporated in the Ruling given in the present Opinion. 16. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is accord- ingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Commission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary 150 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 17. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Fifty-Nine (359) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Sixteenth day of February, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Five. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING Printed in England by Mretcatre & Cooper Limitep, 10-24 Scrutton St., London EC2 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, c.M.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 10. Pp. 151—160 OPINION 360 Validation under the Plenary Powers of the specific name knorrii Voltz, 1828, as published in the combination Ostrea knorrii (Class Pelecypoda) LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1955 Price Five Shillings (All rights reserved) Issued 4th November, 1955 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 360 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts., England) President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President: Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. BOSCHMA (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (Ast January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) Dr. Joseph PEARSON (Tasmanian Museum, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia) (27th July 1948) Dr. Henning LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948) Professor Teiso Esaki (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mr. Norman Denbigh RILEY (British Museum (Natural History), London) (9th June 1950) Professor Tadeusz JACZEWSKI (Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950) Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (5th July 1950) Professor Erich MARTIN HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (Sth July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice- President) Professor J. R. DYMOND (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 1953) Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (A2th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. Vokes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezédgazdasdgi Muzeum Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. STOLL (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A. (12th August 1953) Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) : Dr. L. B. HoLtuuts (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Nether- lands) (12th August 1953) OPINION 360 VALIDATION UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS OF THE SPECIFIC NAME ‘“KNORRII’? VOLTZ, 1828, AS PUBLISHED IN THE COMBINATION ‘* OSTREA KNORRII”’? (CLASS PELECYPODA) RULING :—(1) Under the Plenary Powers (a) the specific name knorri Defrance, 1821, as published in the combination Ostrea knorri, is hereby suppressed for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy, and (b) the junior homonym knorrii Voltz, 1828, as published in the combination Ostrea knorrii, 1s hereby validated. (2) The under-mentioned specific name 1s hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology with the Name No. 128 :— knorri Defrance, 1821, as published in the combination Ostrea knorri, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers under (1) (a) above. (3) The under-mentioned specific name 1s hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name No. 500 :—knorrii Voltz, 1828, as pub- lished in the combination Ostrea knorrii, as validated under the Plenary Powers under (1) (b) above. I.—THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 5th October 1951, Mr. P. C. Sylvester-Bradley (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) submitted the following application for the validation of the specific name knorrii Voltz, 1828, as OV 28 1955 154 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS published in the combination Ostrea knorrii, a name very widely applied to an abundant oyster in the Bathonian of Western Europe :— Proposed use of the Plenary Powers to validate the trivial name ** knorri’’ Voltz, 1828, as published in the combination ‘‘ Ostrea knorrii ’’ (Class Pelecypoda) By P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY, B.Sc. (University of Sheffield, Department of Geology, Sheffield, England) The small ribbed oyster, abundant in the Bathonian of Switzerland, Germany, France and England, and known as Ostrea knorri, has been extensively quoted under that name in the palaeontological and stratigraphical literature of all four countries for 120 years, as also in geological textbooks (for examples, see Arkell, 1934 : 18—23). 2. In Lorraine, in Switzerland, and in Germany, the oyster has been used as a stratigraphical index, such terms as “‘ couches a knorri ” or “‘ Knorrischichten ”’ occurring frequently in stratigraphical literature. 3. In 1887 de Grossouvre (: 516) pointed out that the name Ostrea knorri Voltz, 1828, was a junior homonym of O. knorri Defrance 1821. He proposed the new name O. lotharingica for “‘ Ostrea knorri Voltz in Zieten’’. De .Grossouvre’s name has been adopted very seldom since its publication. 4. Lissajous (1923 : 143) agreed that O. knorri Voltz was invalid, but considered the name O. gibriaci Martin, 1863, to be synonymous and therefore used it in preference to O. lotharingica de Grossouvre, 1887. Most previous and subsequent authors believed O. gibriaci to be distinct from O. knorri. The name has therefore not been adopted as a Substitute for O. kunorri. 5. Rollier (1911 : 272) made O. knorri Voltz the type of a new sub- genus, Catinula. 6. The oyster O. knorri Defrance, 1821, has long been recognised as a synonym of O. gryphoides Schlotheim, 1813. Consequently the the name is never used, and no nomenclatural confusion could arise if it were to be suppressed. 7. Arkell (1934: 17) stated the nomenclatorial position as here set out, and continued to use the name O. knorri Voltz. ss — = OPINION 360 155) 8. Cox and Arkell (1948 : 20), in a nomenclatural revision of Bathonian mollusca, were bound by the Rules to adopt the name O. lotharingica for this oyster, but Dr. Arkell supports the present application to validate O. knorri Voltz. 9. In view of the fact that this oyster has such stratigraphical importance over so wide an area, I would urge that the name by which it is universally known stands in special need of protection. Hence I am proposing that the Commission use their Plenary Powers to suppress the name O. knorri Defrance, thus validating O. kuorri Voltz. 10. The name O. Jotharingica de Grossouvre was proposed, not as a substitute for ‘* O. knorri Voltz’’, but for ‘* O. knorri Voltz in Zieten ”’. The oysters described by Zieten (1832 : 60, pl. xlv) under this name, from Geisingen in Germany, while close to the types of O. knorri from Muttenz in Switzerland, possess certain morphological differences, and may come from a different horizon. Should the name O. knorri Voltz be validated, therefore, it would be possible to argue that the name O. lotharingica applied to an allied but different species, when both names would stand. Hence it is not proposed that the name O. lotharingica be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Trivial Names in Zoology. 11. The recommendations that I now submit are, therefore, that the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature should :— (1) use the Plenary Powers to suppress the trivial name knorri Defrance, 1821, as published in the combination Ostrea knorri ; (2) place the foregoing trivial name on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Trivial Names in Zoology ; and (3) place the trivial name knorri Voltz, 1828, as published in the combination Ostrea knorrii, on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology. References Arkell, W. J., 1934. The Oysters of the Fuller’s Earth ; and on the Evolution and Nomenclature of the Upper Jurassic Catinulas and Gryphaeas. Proc. Cottesw. Nat. F.C., 25 : 21—68. Cox, L. R. and Arkell, W. J., 1948. A Survey of the Mollusca of the British Great Oolite Series. Palaeont. Soc. : 20. Defrance, M. J. L., 1821. MHuitre, Ostrea. Dict. Sci. Nat. 22 : 1—33. Grossouvre, A. de, 1887. Sur le systeme oolithique inférieur dans la partie occidentale du bassin de Paris. Bull. Soc. géol. France, GMS *s 516: 156 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Lissajous, M., 1923. Etude sur la faune du Bathonien des environs de Macon. Tray. Lab. Géol. Fac. Sci. Lyon., Mém. 3. Martin, J., 1863. Notes sur quelques fossiles nouveaux ou peu connus de Pétage bathonien de la Cote-d’Or. Mém. Acad. Imp. Dijon, (2) 10, Sect. Sci: 66, 67, pl. 5, figs. 16—23. Roller, L., 1911. Les faciés du Dogger ou Oolithique dans de Jura et les regions voisines. Mém. publié par la fondation Schuyder von Wartensee a Zurich. Voltz, P. L., 1828. Topographische Uebersicht der Mineralogie der beiden Rhein-Departemente; in Aufschlager, Das _ Elsass, Supplement : 60. Zieten, C. H. von, 1832. Die Versteinerungen Wiirttembergs : 60, pl. 45, figs. 2 a-d d. Il—THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt of Mr. Sylvester-Bradley’s application the question of the use of the Plenary Powers for the purpose of validating the specific name knorrii Voltz, 1828, as published in the combination Ostrea knorrii, was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 626. 3. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 30th January 1952 and was published in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature on 22nd May of that year (Sylvester-Bradley, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 201—202). 4. Issue of Public Notices: Under the revised procedure prescribed by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 51—56), Public Notice of the possible use by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature of its Plenary Powers in the present case was given on 22nd May 1952 (a) in Part 7 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Mr. Sylvester- Bradley’s application was published) and (b) to the other pre- scribed serial publications. In addition, such Public Notice was given also to a number of general zoological serial publications and to certain palaeontological serials in Europe and America. OPINION 360 Si 5. No objections received : The issue of the Public Notices specified in paragraph 4 above elicited no objection to the action proposed. 6. Two supplementary points submitted to the Commission in March 1954: When preparing on 8th March 1954 the ex- planatory notes to be submitted to the Commission concurrently with the issue of a Voting Paper on the present case, Mr. Hemming as Secretary, included the following note (as Note 4), in which he drew attention to two supplementary points which would need to be considered by the Commission when voting on the present case :-— 4. Two minor points to be noted: It must be noted (1) that the proposed suppression of the name knorrii Defrance is “for the pur- poses both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy ”’ (a point not stated in express terms in the application), and (2) that, in view of the decision on page 54 of Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl., regarding specific names based on modern patronymics, the name published by Voltz must be cited as “‘ knorrii’’ and not as “ knorri’’.+ 111.—THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 7. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(54)28 : On 17th March 1954, a Voting Paper (V.P.(54)28) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “the proposal relating to the name knorrii Voltz, 1828, as 1 At the time of the submission of the application dealt with in the present Opinion the Régles provided, under a decision taken by the Thirteenth Inter- national Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 68) that an infringement of the provisions of Article 14, such as the addition of a double letter ““i’’ in place of a single ‘““i’’ to a modern patronymic when forming a specific name in the genitive singular, was to be subject to automatic correction by later authors. Accordingly, in the present application the specific name kuorrii published by Voltz in 1828 was corrected to knorri. The foregoing provision was amended by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, which substituted for it a provision that “ in such a case the terminations ‘-i’ and ‘-ii’ are permissible variants, the differences between them having no nomenclatorial significance ’’ (Decision 91). 158 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS published in the combination Ostrea knorrii, as set out in para- graph 11 on page 202 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature [i.e. in paragraph 11 of the application reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion], subject to the two adjustments noted in paragraph 4 overleaf” [i.e. in the note reproduced in paragraph 6 of the present Opinion]. 8. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 17th June 1954. 9. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)28 : The state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)28 at the close of the Prescribed Voting Period was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following nineteen (19) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Riley ; Sylvester-Bradley ; Holthuis; Vokes; Hering ; Bonnet ; Boschma ; Lemche ; Dymond; do Amaral ; Esaki; Mertens; Jaczewski; Hemming; Bradley (J.C.) ; Hanko ; Pearson ; Stoll ; Cabrera. (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) Voting Papers not returned : None. 10. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 18th June 1954, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper OPINION 360 159 V.P.(54)28, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 9 above and declaring that the proposal sub- mitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. 11. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 17th February 1955, Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Com- mission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)28. 12. Original references : The following are the original refer- ences for the names placed on Official Lists and Official Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— knorri, Ostrea, Defrance, 1821, Dict. Sci. Inst. 22 : 27 knorrii, Ostrea, Voltz, 1828, Topograph. Uebersicht Min. beid. Rhein-Depart. : 60 13. As the present Opinion is concerned only with a specific name, no question relating to family-group names arises in the present case. 14. At the time of the submission of the application dealt with in the present Opinion, the expression prescribed for the second portion of the binomen which constitutes the scientific name of a species was the expression “trivial name” and the Official List reserved for recording such names was styled the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology, the word “ trivial ”’ appearing also in the title of the Official Index reserved for recording rejected and invalid names of this category. Under a decision taken by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, the expression “specific name” was substituted for the expression “trivial name” and corre- sponding changes were made in the titles of the Official List 160 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS and Official Index of such names (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl.: 21). The changes in terminology so adopted have been incorporated in the Ruling given in the present Opinion. 15. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Com- mission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 16. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Sixty (360) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Seventeenth day of February, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Five. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING Printed in England by Mretcatre & Cooper LimitTep, 10-24 Scrutton St., London EC 2 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, c.M.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part il. Pp. 161—172 OPINION 361 Validation under the Plenary Powers of the generic name Antalis Adams (H.) & Adams (A.), [1854] (Class Scaphopoda) ae, — a YAWN HSO; ZN f ‘fj ." j ‘y dy ' rn G 9 WPS e \\ \ US| ba Be i955 }} Ji ee IRDARYV of ee 2 ie 2 “y LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1955 Price Six Shillings (All rights reserved) Issued 4th November, 1955 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 361 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts., England) President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President: Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. BoscHMA (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) ({st January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) Dr. Joseph PEARSON (Tasmanian Museum, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia) (27th July 1948) Dr. Henning LEMCHE (Univer sitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948) Professor Teiso Esaki (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mr. Norman Denbigh Ritey (British Museum (Natural History) London) (9th June 1950) Professor Tadeusz JACZEWSKI (Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (A5th June 1950) Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (5th July 1950) Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (Sth July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice- President) Professor J. R. DyMOND (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 1953) Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. VoKes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezogazdasdgi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. STOLL (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Mr. P. C. SyLvesSTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) Dr. L. B. HoLtuuis (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Nether- lands) (12th August 1953) OPINION 361 VALIDATION UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS OF THE GENERIC NAME “ANTALIS ” ADAMS (H.) & ADAMS (A.), [1854] (CLASS SCAPHOPODA) RULING :—(1) Under the Plenary Powers the generic name Dentale da Costa, 1778, is hereby suppressed for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy. (2) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name No. 883 :—Antalis Adams (H.) & Adams (A), [1854] (gender : feminine) (type species, by selection by Pilsbry & Sharp (1897) : Dentalium entalis Linnaeus, 1758) (Class Scaphopoda). (3) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name No. 501 :—entalis Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the combination Dentalium entalis (specific name of type species of Antalis Adams (H.) & Adams (A), [1854)). (4) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 301 and 302 respectively :— (a) Dentale da Costa, 1778, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers under (1) above ; (b) Antalis Herrmannsen, 1846 (a nomen nudum). ROV 28 1955 164 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS I. THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 25th March 1952 Mrs. N. H. Ludbrook (Canberra, A.C.T., Australia) submitted the following application prepared jointly by Mr. William K. Emerson (University of California, Museum of Paleontology, Berkeley, California, U.S.A.) and herself, asking for the use of the Plenary Powers for the suppression of the generic name Dentale da Costa, 1778, in order to validate the generic name Antalis, attributed by the applicants to Herrmann- sen, 1846, (Class Scaphopoda) for use in its accustomed sense :— Proposed use of the Plenary Powers to preserve the use of the name ‘* Antalis ®’ Herrmannsen, 1846 (Class Scaphopoda) in its accustomed sense By N. H. LUDBROOK, M.A., Ph.D. (Canberra, Australia) and W. K. EMERSON, M.S. (Museum of Paleontology, University of California, Berkeley, California, U.S.A.) | The purpose of the present application is to ask the International Commission to use its Plenary Powers in such a way as to preserve the name Antalis Herrmannsen, 1846 (ndicis Gen. Malacoz. Primordia 1 : 63) (Class Scaphopoda) for use in its accustomed sense, with Dentalium entalis Linneaus, 1758 (Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1 : 785) as type species. The problem raised in the present application requires to be decided in connection with the preparation of the forthcoming Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology; it is particularly hoped therefore that the International Commission will be able to give this application all practicable priority. 2. The name Antalis Herrmannsen, 1846, is now universally employed for the subgenus of Dentalium Linnaeus, 1758, typified by the species Dentalium entalis Linnaeus. Herrmannsen in 1846, who cited no nominal species for Antalis, defined this genus as follows : “Tubulorum genus a Dentaliis notis levissimis distinctum’’. This may be regarded as sufficient to constitute an “indication ”’ for the purpose of Article 25 of the Rég/es. 3. The name Antalis was next published with a description by H. and A. Adams in 1853 (Gen. rec. Moll. 1 : 45)!, by whom “ A. semistriolata Goulding ”’ and “‘ A. entalis Linnaeus ’”’ were cited and figured as examples of the genus, in which sixteen species were listed. 1 For a correction of the reference here given for the name Antalis as published by Adams (H.) & Adams (A.) and of the date assigned to this name see para- graph 13 of the present Opinion. OPINION 361 165 4. In 1897 Pilsbry & Sharp (Tryon’s Man. Conch. 17 : 37) specified Dentalium entalis Linnaeus, 1758, as the type species of Antalis, which they treated as a subgenus of Dentalium Linnaeus, 1758. Ever since that date, the name Antalis has been consistently employed in this sense. 5. In 1778, however, da Costa (Hist. nat. Test. Brit. : 24) used the vernacular name “‘ Dentale’”’ validly as a generic name (Dentale), using it in his description of the British scaphopod Dentale vulgare r “Dentale Commun’’. This name was introduced by da Costa to replace the name Dentalium entalis Linnaeus, which was placed in synonymy. 6. The species vulgare da Costa and entalis Linnaeus are now con- sidered to be specifically distinct, but are considered to belong to the same subgenus. Thus, Antalis Herrmannsen, 1846 (type species : Dentalium entalis Linnaeus, 1758) becomes a junior subjective synonym of Dentale da Costa, 1778 (type species : Dentale vulgare da Costa). 7. Except for the single occasion in 1778, when it was introduced by da Costa, and one recent occasion, when it was used by one of us (Emerson, 1951, Nautilus 65 (1): 1720), the name Dentale has never been employed in a valid generic or subgeneric sense. It has, however, been widely employed in French literature as the vernacular equivalent of Dentalium. 8. If the name Dentale da Costa were now to be reintroduced to replace the name Antalis Herrmannsen, the nominal genus Dentalium Linnaeus, 1758 (sensu lato) would have two subgenera with virtually identical names, namely Dentale da Costa (type species: Dentale vulgare da Costa) and the nominotypical subgenus Dentalium Linnaeus (type species : Dentalium elephantinum Linnaeus). 9. It is felt that needless confusion would arise from the concurrent use of the word “* Dentale ’’ as the vernacular equivalent of Dentalium (sensu lato) and as the valid name for a subgenus of Dentalium distinct from Dentalium (sensu stricto). 10. Accordingly, the proposal is hereby submitted that the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature should :— (1) use its Plenary Powers to suppress the generic name Dentale da Costa, 1778, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy ; (2) place the generic name Antalis Herrmannsen, 1846 (gender of generic name: feminine) (type species, by selection by Pilsbry & Sharp (1897): Dentalium entalis Linnaeus, 1758) on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology ; 166 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (3) place the trivial name entalis Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the combination Dentalium entalis (trivial name of type species of Antalis Herrmannsen, 1846) on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology ; (4) place the generic name Dentale da Costa, 1778, as proposed, in (1) above, to be suppressed under the Plenary Powers, on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology. Il. THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt of the application prepared jointly by Mrs. Ludbrook and Mr. Emerson the question of the validation under the Plenary Powers of the generic name Antalis Herrmannsen, 1846, was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 665. 3. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 7th April 1952 and was published in volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature on 22nd May 1952 (Ludbrook & Emerson, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 203—204). 4, Issue of Public Notices : Under the revised procedure pre- scribed by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 51—56), Public Notice of the possible use by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature of the Plenary Powers in the present case was issued on 22nd May 1952 (a) in Part 7 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which the Ludbrook/ Emerson application was published) and (b) to the other pre- scribed serial publications. In addition, such Public Notice was given also to a number of general zoological serial publications. 5. Comment received from Dr. Henry A. Pilsbry (The Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.) : The issue of the Public Notices specified in paragraph 4 above elicited no objection to the general purpose of the present application but in a letter dated 19th December 1952 Dr. Henry OPINION 361 167 A. Pilsbry (Zhe Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia) objected to the acceptance of the name Antalis as from Herrmannsen, 1846. The portion of Dr. Pilsbry’s letter dealing with this subject was as follows :— In the proposal to preserve the name “ Antalis Herrmannsen ”’ (Bull. Zool. Nomencl. Vol. 6, p. 203), I would call the attention of the Commission to the fact that Herrmannsen cannot properly be given as authority. He listed the name as of Aldrovandus, gave no definition whatever and mentioned no species. He says of it: “A genus of tubule shells distinguished from Dentalium by very slight characters”’. This remark is incorrectly mentioned by Ludbrook and Emerson as “ sufficient to constitute an ‘ indication ’ for the purpose of Article 25 of the Régles”’. 6. Action taken in the light of the comment received from Dr. Henry A. Pilsbry : The criticism by Dr. Henry A. Pilsbry of the acceptance, as proposed, of the name Antalis as from Herr- mannsen (1846) was examined by Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, who on 25th October 1953 informed Mrs. Ludbrook and Mr. Emerson that on reflection he had come to the conclusion that Dr. Pilsbry’s criticism was well-founded and that the name Antalis Herrmannsen, 1846, ought therefore to be regarded as a nomen nudum. Mr. Hemming went on to say that in these circumstances he had been considering how it would be possible to secure the end sought in the application submitted, while at the same time treating the above name as possessing no status in zoological nomenclature. Mr. Hemming thereupon put forward the suggestion that the only modifications required were (1) the substitution of Antalis H. & A. Adams, 1853, for the Antalis Herrmannsen, 1846, as the name to be placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology, and (2) the addition of Herr- mannsen’s Antalis to the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology. This action would ensure that the generic name Antalis would be available for use in its accustomed sense. The only possible objection to this-course, Mr. Hemming added, would be if on some date between the publication of the name Antalis by Herrmannsen in 1846 and the re-publication of that name by H. & A. Adams, some other generic name had been published for the genus in question ; there was no evidence to suggest that anything of the sort had happened, and, so far as he (Mr. Hemming) was aware, the danger described above was purely theoretical Mr. Hemming concluded by saying that, 168 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS subject to any observations which the applicants might wish to raise, he proposed to submit to the Commission the revised proposal which he had outlined. By letters dated respectively 2nd and 12th November 1953 Mrs. Ludbrook and Mr. Emerson intimated their acquiescence in the revised action proposed. 7. Preparation for the consideration of the Commission of revised proposals prepared in the light of the criticisms advanced by Dr. Henry A. Pilsbry : On 9th March 1954 Mr. Hemming pre- pared for submission to the Commission a brief report on the action which he had taken in this case (paragraph 6 above). Annexed to this Report was the following draft of a revised Ruling which he commended to the attention of the Com- mission :— Draft Ruling (1) Under the Plenary Powers, the generic name Dentale da Costa, 1778, is hereby suppressed for the purposes of the Law of of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy ; (2) The generic name Antalis H. & A. Adams, 1853 (gender : feminine) (type species, by selection by Pilsbry & Sharp (1897) : Dentalium entalis Linnaeus, 1758) is hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology ; (3) The specific name entalis Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the combination Dentalium entalis, is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology ; (4) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology : (a) Dentale da Costa, 1778, as suppressed under (1) above ; (b) Antalis Herrmannsen, 1846 (nomen nudum). lil. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 8. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(54)29 : On 17th March 1954, a Voting Paper (V.P.(54)29) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “ the proposal relating to the name Antalis H. & A. Adams, 1853, OPINION 361 169 as set out in the draft Ruling at the foot of the present Voting Paper’ [i.e. the draft Ruling reproduced in paragraph 7 of the present Opinion]. 9. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 17th June 1954. 10. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)29 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)29 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following nineteen (19) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Riley ; Holthuis ; Vokes ; Hering ; Bonnet ; Boschma ; Lemche ; Dymond; do Amaral; Esaki; Mertens ; Hemming ; Sylvester-Bradley ; Bradley (J.C.) ; Hanko ; Pearson ; Stoll ; Cabrera ; Jaczewski ; (b) Negative Votes: None ; (c) Voting Papers not returned : None. 11. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 18th June 1954, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(54)29, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 10 above and declaring that the proposal sub- mitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International ~Commission in the matter aforesaid. 170 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 12. Correction of the date attributed to the generic name **Antalis ?’ Adams (H.) & Adams (A.) : In a letter dated 8th June 1954 Commissioner Jaczewski, when returning his completed Voting Paper, drew attention to a printing error in the application submitted in this case where it had been stated incorrectly that the name Antalis Adams (H.) & Adams (A.) had been published on page 45 of vol. 1 of the Genera of Recent Mollusca, whereas the correct page reference was page 457. At the same time Com- missioner Jaczewski expressed the view that the date “ 1853”. assigned to this name in the present application was almost certainly incorrect and asked that this matter should be investi- gated before an Opinion was prepared in regard to this case. 13. The question raised by Commissioner Jaczewski in his letter of 8th June 1954 was investigated by Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, who on 10th July 1954 placed the following Minute on the Commission’s File Z.N.(S.) 665 :— Correction of the date and page reference attributed to the name ‘* Antalis ’? Adams (H.) & Adams (A.) In the application submitted in this case by Mrs. N. H. Ludbrook and Mr. William K. Emerson the generic name Antalis Adams (H.) & Adams (A.) was treated as having been published in the year 1853, and in the revised proposal submitted by myself in Voting Paper V.P.(54)29 [i.e. in the proposal reproduced in paragraph 7 of the present Opinion] the same date was adopted. On the receipt of Commissioner Jaczewski’s letter of 8th June 1954, in which he questioned the accuracy of the foregoing date, I investigated the question of the date properly attributable to the work by Henry and Arthur Adams entitled The Genera of Recent Mollusca, the work in which the generic name Antalis was published by those authors. I found that the criticism advanced by Commissioner Jaczewski was well-founded and that the date ‘“‘ 1853 ”’ attributed to the name Antalis Adams (H.) & Adams (A.) was incorrect. This work which was published in three volumes (two volumes, each with separate pagina- tion, and one volume of plates) was examined critically by S. P. Woodward, whose manuscript notes were published in 1903 in volume 1 of the Catalogue of the Library of the British Museum (Natural History) (: 11). Woodward’s notes show that the text of this work was pub- lished in 36 Parts issued between 1853 and 1858. Volume | was published in 15 Parts as follows :— Parts 1—8 Vol. 1, pp. 1—256 1853 » 9—15 9» 99 -297—484 1854 OPINION 36] 171 2. The name Anfalis was published on page 457 (not page 45 as inadvertently appeared in the application) of volume 1 of the fore- going work and accordingly, as the evidence provided by Woodward shows, was published in 1854. The date to be attributed to this name in the Ruling to be prepared in relation to the present case is therefore to be amended accordingly. 14. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 22nd February 1955, Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Com- mission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)29, subject to the correction of the date assigned to the name Antalis Adams (H.) & Adams (A.), as specified in the Secretary’s Minute of 10th July 1954 (paragraph 13 above). 15. Original References: The following are the original ° references for the names placed on Official Lists and Official Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— - Antalis Herrmannsen, 1846, Indicis Gen. Malacozool. Primordia 63 Antalis Adams (H.) & Adams (A.), [1854], Gen. rec. Moll. 1 : 457 Dentale da Costa, 1778, Hist. nat. Test. Brit. : 24 entalis, Dentalium, Linnaeus, 1758, Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1 : 785 16. The following is the reference for the selection of a type species for the nominal genus Antalis Adams (H.) & Adams (A.), [1854], specified in the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— Pilsbry & Sharp, 1897, Tryon’s Man. Conch. 17 : 37. 17. Family-group name problem: The nominal genus Antalis Adams (H.) & Adams (A.), [1854], is not the type genus of a family-group taxon and accordingly no question arises in the present case of placing any name on the Official List of Family- Group Names in Zoology. 18. At the time of the submission of the application dealt with in the present Opinion, the expression prescribed for the (Eye OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS second portion of the binomen which constitutes the scientific name of a species was the expression “ trivial name” and the Official List reserved for recording such names was styled the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology, the word ‘* trivial ’’ appearing also in the title of the Official Index reserved for recording rejected and invalid names of this category. Under a decision taken by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, the expression “ specific name ” was substituted for the expression “ trivial name” and corres- ponding changes were made in the titles of the Official List and Official Index of such names (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 21). The changes in terminology so adopted have been incorporated in the Ruling given in the present Opinion. 19. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Com- mission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 20. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Sixty-One (361) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. DonE in London, this Twenty-Second day of February, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Five. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING eee eee — Printed in England by Mretcarre & CoorEerR Lritep, 10-24 Scrutton St., London EC 2 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 12. Pp. 173—182 OPINION 362 Rejection for nomenclatorial purposes of Geoffroy (E.L.), 1767, Traité Sommaire des Coquilles, tant fluviatiles que terrestres, qui se trouvent aux Environs de Paris LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1955 Price Five Shillings (All rights reserved) Issued 4th November, 1955 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 362 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President: Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts., England). President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953). Vice-President: Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953). Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948). B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology.) Professor H. BOSCcHMA (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (Ast January 1947). Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948). Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary). Dr. Joseph PEARSON (Tasmanian Museum, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia) (27th July 1948). Dr. Henning LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948). Professor Teiso ESAKI (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950). Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950). Mr. Norman Denbigh RILEY (British Museum (Natural History) London) (9th June 1950). Professor Tadeusz JACZEWSKI (Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950). Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (Sth July 1950). Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt- Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (5th July 1950). Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice- President). Professor J. R. DYMOND (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 1953): : Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President). Professor Harold E. Vokes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953). Professor Béla HANKO (Mezdgazdasdgi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953). Dr. Norman R. STOLL (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953). Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953). Dr. L. B. Hottuuis (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netier- lands) (12th August 1953). OPINION 362 REJECTION FOR NOMENCLATORIAL PURPOSES OF GEOFFROY (E.L.), 1767, ‘“TRAITE SOMMAIRE DES COQUILLES, TANT FLUVIATILES QUE TERRESTRES, QUI SE TROUVENT AUX ENVIRONS DE PARIS” RULING :—(1) In the work entitled Traité Sommaire des Coquilles, tant fluviatiles que terrestres, qui se trouvent aux Environs de Paris published in 1767, Geoffroy (E.L.) did not apply the principles of binominal nomenclature, as required by Proviso (b) to Article 25 of the Régles, as amended by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948, and accordingly no name acquired the status of availability under the Law of Priority in virtue of having been so published. (2) The title of the foregoing work is hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Works in Zoological Nomenclature as Title No. 30. I—THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE In June 1951 Dr. Bengt Hubendick (Zoologiska Institutionen Uppsala, Sweden) submitted to the Commission an application for the use of its Plenary Powers for the purpose, mainly, of designating for the genus Ancylus Miiller (O.F.), 1774 (Class Gastropoda) a type species in harmony with the accustomed usage!. In this application Dr. Hubendick drew attention to 1 For the decision by the Commission on Dr. Hubendick’s application regarding the name Ancylus Miller (O.F.), 1774, see Opinion 363. WOV 28 1955 176 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS the fact that the name Ancylus had been published by Geoffroy (E.L.) in 1767 in a work entitled Traité Sommaire des Coquilles, tant fluviatiles que terrestres, qui se trouvent aux Environs de Paris which, however, he considered was not available nomenclatorially, because in it Geoffroy had not applied the principles of binominal nomenclature, as required by Proviso (b) to Article 25 of the Régles, as amended by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948. Inthe concluding paragraph of his applica- tion Dr. Hubendick, when summarising his recommendations, included a request that the Commission should give a Ruling that for the foregoing reason Geoffroy’s Traité Sommaire was not a nomenclatorially available work. The following are extracts of the portions of Dr. Hubendick’s application regarding the name Ancylus Miller in which he discussed Geoffroy’s Traité Sommaire (paragraphs 2 and 3) and submitted to the Commission the recommendation indicated above (paragraph 8(1)) :— Extracts from Dr. Bengt Hubendick’s application regarding the generic name ‘* Ancylus ’’ Miller (O.F.), 1774, of the portions relating to the status of the work by Geoffroy (E.L.) entitled ‘‘ Traité Sommaire des Coquilles qui se trouvent aux Environs de Paris *’ published in 1767 (A) Paragraphs 2 and 3 of Dr. Hubendick’s application : 2. The generic name Ancylus was first published in 1767 by Geoffroy on pages 13 and 124 of his Traité sommaire des Coquilles . . . qui se trouvent aux Environs de Paris. Geoffroy placed what he regarded as One species only in this genus but he did not cite it under a binominal name. The description which he gave is so vague that the species which he had in mind might have been either the species now commonly treated as having already been named Patella lacustris Linnaeus, 1758 (Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1 : 783) or the later named species Ancylus fluviatilis Miiller (O.F.), 1774 (Verm. terrestr. fluviat. Hist. 2 : 201). Geoffroy stated, however, that the species in question was the only one known in the neighbourhood of Paris and this suggests that this species was the common Ancylus fluviatilis Miiller. This inference is supported by the fact that Geoffroy cited (1) Lister (1678, Hist. Anim. Angl. : 151, pl. 2, fig. 32), (2) Gualtieri (1742, Index Test. Conch. : pl. 2, fig. AA), and (3) d’Argenville (1780, Conch. 2 : 1, pls. 8, 27), for the figures given by all of these authors appear to represent the foregoing species. On the other hand, Geoffroy cited also the description of OPINION 362 TT: Patella lacustris published by Linnaeus in 1746 (Faun. svec. (ed. 1) : 369) and again in 1758 (Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1 : 783). There has, however, been discussion in the past as to the identity of the species to which Linnaeus applied this name. Jeffreys (1862, Brit. Conch. 1 : 123), for example, and Woodward (B.B.) (1903, J. Conch. 19 : 361) pointed out that the description given by Linnaeus applied as well to the species Ancylus fluviatilis Miller as to that to which the name Patella lacustris Linnaeus, 1758, is commonly applied ; the figures cited by Linnaeus appear to depict Ancylus fluviatilis Muller, and that species alone is represented in the Linnean collection. It was for reasons of this order that nearly one hundred years ago Forbes & Hanley (1852, Hist. Brit. Moll. 4 : 188) and Hanley (1855, [psa Linnaei Conchylia : 426) applied the trivial name /acustris Linnaeus to the species named fluviatilis by Miller. In recent times other authors including Kennard & Woodward (1920, J. linn. Soc. Lond. (Zool.) 34 : 210) have taken the opposite view, holding either that the species which Miiller identified as Ancylus lacustris (Linnaeus) was in fact the species to which Linnaeus in 1758 had given the name Patella lacustris or that, notwith- standing the dissimilarity of that species from Ancylus fluviatilis, Linnaeus had confused the two species together and therefore that his nominal species Patella lacustris was a composite species. It may, therefore, be the case that Geoffroy had in mind only one species, namely Ancylus fluviatilis Miller, when in 1767, he used the generic name Ancylus. As we shall see, however, the name Ancylus, as used by Geoffroy, is an invalid name. The sense in which he applied it has, therefore, no nomenclatorial significance, being of historical interest only. As to the trivial name /acustris Linnaeus, there is no doubt that Muller (1774) applied it to the first of the two species which may have been cemprised in it by Linnaeus, for to the second of those species he then gave the name Ancylus fluviatilis. It is in accordance with the interpretation of Miiller that the name Jacustris Linnaeus is now generally used and it is in this sense that the nominal species Patella lacustris Linnaeus is today accepted as the type species of Acroloxus Beck, 1837. 3. There have in the past been differences of opinion among specialists on the question whether in his Traité sommaire of 1767 Geoffroy applied the principles of ‘‘ nomenclature binaire”’ (as prescribed, up to 1948, by Proviso (5) to Article 25 of the Régles) and therefore as to whether new names published by Geoffroy in the fore- going work acquired thereby any rights under the Law of Priority. Fortunately, all scope for further argument regarding the meaning to be attached to the above Proviso to Article 25 was put an end to in Paris in 1948 when the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, on the recommendation of the International Commission, (1) gave a ruling that the expression “‘ nomenclature binaire’’ as hitherto used in the Régles, had a meaning identical with that attaching to the expression “‘ nomenclature binominale ’’, and (2) decided to substitute 178 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS the latter entirely unambiguous expression for the expression “ nomen- clature binaire ’’, wherever that expression had formerly appeared in the Régles (1905, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 63—66). During the same session the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature decided that, in accordance with the foregoing decision, another work by Etienne Louis Geoffroy [1727—1810], his Histoire abrégée des Insectes qui se trouvent aux Environs de Paris, failed to comply with the requirements of Proviso (6) to Article 25, by reason of the fact that in that work Geoffroy had not “ appliqué les principes de la nomen- clature binominale ”’ (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 366—369). The system of nomenclature in the Traité sommaire is identical with that used both earlier (in 1762) and later (an 1799—1800) in the two editions of the Histoire abrégée. It follows, therefore, that under the decisions cited above new names in the Traité sommaire possess no rights under the Law of Priority in virtue of having been so published. In order, however, to put a stop to the risk of further discussion on this subject, it would be convenient if the International Commission were now to give a formal ruling to the foregoing effect, so that the Traité sommaire may be added to the list of works rejected for non-compliance with Proviso (b) to Article 25. (B) Paragraph 8(1) of Dr. Hubendick’s application : . The Commission should :— (1) give a ruling that in the work entitled Traité sommaire des Coquilles . . . qui se trouvent aux Environs de Paris, published in 1767 (as in the Historie abrégée des Insectes qui se trouvent aux Environs de Paris, published in 1762 and republished in 1799—1800) Geoffroy (E.L.) did not apply’ the principles of binominal nomenclature, as required by Proviso (6) to Article 25 of the Régles, as amended by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948, and therefore that no name acquired availability under the Law of Priority in virtue of being so published ; Il.—THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : At the time of the receipt of Dr. Hubendick’s application it was considered that it OPINION 362 179 would be convenient during the initial stages to treat his proposals relating to the status to be accorded to Geoffroy’s Traité Sommaire and those relating to the generic name Ancylus Miiller (O.F.), 1774, as constituting a single application. This twofold application was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 240. 3. Publication of the present application: Dr. Hubendick’s application was sent to the printer on 13th May 1951 for pub- lication in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature but owing to various circumstances it was not actually published until 23rd May 1952 (Hubendick, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 227—230). Of the portions of the foregoing application which was concerned with the status of Geoffroy’s Traité Sommaire the passage reproduced in Section (A) of paragraph 1 of the present Opinion appeared on pages 227—228, and that reproduced in Section (B), appearing at the foot of page 229 and the top of page 230. 4. No objection received: By reason of the proposed use of the Plenary Powers for the purpose of designating a type species for the genus Ancylus Miller, 1774, Public Notice was given of Dr. Hubendick’s application in the prescribed manner. No objection was, however, elicited as regards the portion of that application which was concerned with Geoftroy’s Traité Sommaire. 5. Preparation of a Report for consideration by the Commission on the procedure proposed to be adopted in the present case : On 15th March 1954 Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, prepared for the consideration of the Commission the following brief Report on the origin and nature of the present application and the procedure proposed to be adopted in dealing with it :— Origin of application : The present application arose incidentally in an application on the name Ancylus (see V.P.(54)31). In view of its general character, it has been thought better to treat the subject separately and to render a separate Opinion on it. The issue involved is accordingly submitted in a separate Voting Paper. Nature of application: The present application relates to a work (the Traité Sommaire) published in 1767 by an author (E. L. Geoffroy) who never adopted the binominal nomenclature of Linnaeus. One 180 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS work by this author (Hist. abrég. Ins. Eny. Paris) has already been rejected as being non-binominal (Bull. 4 : 368), a decision recently embodied in Opinion 228 (now in the press). Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Works in Zoological Nomen- clature. In view of the decision by the Copenhagen Congress to establish the foregoing Official Index (1953, Cop. Dec. zool. Nomencl. : 23), a proposal to add the title of Geoffroy’s Traité Sommaire to this Index has been added to Dr. Hubendick’s proposal in the recommenda- tion now submitted. II1I—THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 6. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(54)30: On 17th March 1954, a Voting Paper (V.P.(54)30) was issued in which Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “ the proposal relating to Geoffroy, 1767, Traité Sommaire as set out at the foot of the present Voting Paper’’. The proposal set out at the foot of the foregoing Voting Paper was in terms identical with the Ruling given in the present Opinion. 7. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 17th June, 1954. 8. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)30: At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)30 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following nineteen (19) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Riley ; Holthuis ; Vokes ; Hering ; Bonnet ; Boschma ; OPINION 362 181 Lemche ; Dymond; do Amaral; Sylvester-Bradley ; Esaki; Mertens; Hemming; Jaczewski; Bradley (J.C.) ; Hank6o ; Pearson ; Stoll ; Cabrera ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) Voting Papers not returned : None. 9. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 18th June 1954 Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(54)30, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 8 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. 10. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 22nd February 1955 Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)30. 11. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Commission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 182 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 12. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Sixty-Two (362) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. DoneE in London, this Twenty-Second day of February, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Five. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING Printed in England by Mrercatre & Cooprer LimITED, 10-24 Scrutton St., London EC 2 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, c.M.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 13. Pp. 183—202 OPINION 363 Designation, under the Plenary Powers, of a type species in harmony with accustomed usage for the nominal genus Ancylus Miiller (O.F.), 1774 (Class Gastropoda) LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1955 Price Ten Shillings (All rights reserved) Issued 4th November, 1955 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 363 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts, England) President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President: Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. BoscHMA (Rijksmuseum van WNatuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (1st January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (Zva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, Eng gland) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) Dr. Joseph PEARSON (Tasmanian “Museum, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia) (27th July 1948) Dr. Henning LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948) Professor Teiso Esaki (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (A7th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mr. Norman Denbigh Rimey (British Museum (Natural History) London) (9th June 1950) Professor Tadeusz JACZEWSKI CUInstitute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950) Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (Sth July 1950) Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (5th July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice- President) ee J. R. DyMOND (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 1953 Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. VoKes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezdégazdasdgi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. STOLL (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) Dr. L. B. HoLtHuts (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Nether- lands) (12th August 1953) OPINION 363 DESIGNATION, UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS, OF A TYPE SPECIES IN HARMONY WITH ACCUSTOMED USAGE FOR THE NOMINAL GENUS ‘ ANCYLUS ”’ MULLER (O.F.), 1774 (CLASS GASTROPODA) RULING :—(1) Under the Plenary Powers (a) all selections of type species for the nominal genus Ancylus Miller (O.F.), 1774 (Class Gastropoda) made prior to the present Ruling are hereby set aside, and (b) the nominal species Ancylus fluviatilis Miller (O.F.), 1774, is hereby designated to be the type species of the foregoing genus. (2) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 884 and 885 respectively :— (a) Ancylus Miller (O.F.), 1774 (gender : masculine) (type species, by designation under the Plenary Powers under (1)(b) above: Ancylus fluviatilis Miiller (O.F.), 1774) ; (b) Acroloxus Beck, 1837 (gender: masculine) (type species, by selection by Herrmannsen (1846) : Patella lacustris Linnaeus, 1758, as interpreted by Miller (O.F.), 1774: 199—200) ; (3) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 502 and 503 respectively :— WGV 28 1955 186 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (a) fluviatilis Miller (O.F.), 1774, as published in the combination Ancylus fluviatilis (specific name, by designation under the Plenary Powers under (1)(b) above, of type species of Ancylus Miller (O.F.), 1774) ; (b) /acustris Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the com- bination Patella lacustris, as interpreted in the manner specified in (2)(b) above (specific name of type species of Acroloxus Beck, 1837). (4) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 303 and 304 respectively :-— (a) Ancylus Geoffroy (E.L.), 1767 (a name published in a work rejected for nomenclatorial purposes?) ; (b) Pseudancylus Walker, 1921 (a junior objective synonym of Ancylus Miller (O.F.), 1774, as determined under the Plenary Powers under (1)(b) above). I—THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 6th November 1946 Dr. Bengt Hubendick (Zoologiska Institutionen, Uppsala, Sweden) submitted a preliminary applica- tion relating to the preservation of the generic name Ancylus in the sense historically attaching to that name in palaeontological literature. For the reasons explained in paragraph 3 of the present Opinion, it was not possible to deal with this application at the time of its receipt and later it was necessary to revise it in certain respects. In the form in which it was finally submitted this application was as follows :— * For the decision by, which the work in which the name was published was hes by the Commission see Opinion 362 (pp. 173 to 182 of the present volume). OPINION 363 187 Proposed use of the Plenary Powers to designate a type species for the genus ‘‘ Ancylus ’’ Miiller, 1774 (Class Gastropoda) in harmony with established nomenclatorial practice By BENGT HUBENDICK (Riksmuseum, Stockholm, Sweden) The object of the present application is to seek the assistance of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, through the use of its Plenary Powers, in securing that the type species of the genus Ancylus Miiller (O.F.), 1774 (Class Gastropoda), shall be the species commonly accepted as such and to avoid the confusion which would result from the strict application of the normal rules in this case. That confusion would be extremely serious, for under the normal rules it would be necessary to abandon the term ‘‘ Ancylus-See ’’ which is universally used to denote a well-known former limnic stage of the Baltic and is so deeply entrenched in the literature of European geology that its abandonment would be open to the strongest possible objection and must, indeed, be regarded as entirely impracticable. 2. The generic name Ancylus was first published in 1767 by Geoffroy on pages 13 and 124 of his Traité sommaire des Coquilles . . . qui se trouvent aux Environs de Paris. Geoffroy placed what he regarded as one species only in this genus but he did not cite it under a binominal name. The description which he gave is so vague that the species which he had in mind might have been either the species now commonly treated as having already been named Patella lacustris Linnaeus, 1758 (Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1 : 783) or the later named species Ancylus fluviatilis Miller (O.F.), 1774 (Verm. terrestr. fluviat. Hist. 2 : 201). Geoffroy stated, however, that the species in question was the only one known in the neighbourhood of Paris and this suggests that that species was the common Ancylus fluviatilis Miller. This inference is supported by the fact that Geoffroy cited (1) Lister (1678, Hist. Anim. Angl. : 151, pl. 2, fig. 32), (2) Gualtieri (1742, Index Test. Conch. : pl. 2, fig. AA), and (3) d’Argenville (1780, Conch. 2:1, pls. 8, 27), for the figures given by all of these authors appear to represent the foregoing species. On the other hand, Geoffroy cited also the description of Patella lacustris published by Linnaeus in 1746 (Faun. svec. (ed. 1) : 369) and again in 1758 (Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1 : 783). There has, however, been discussion in the past as to the identity of the species to which Linnaeus applied this name. Jeffreys (1862, Brit. Conch. 1 : 123), for example, and Woodward (B.B.) (1903, J. Conch. 10 : 361) pointed out that the description given by Linnaeus applied as well to the species Ancylus fluviatilis Miiller as to that to which the name Patella lacustris Linnaeus, 1758, is commonly applied ; the figures cited by Linnaeus appear to depict Ancylus fluviatilis Miller, and that species alone is represented in the Linnean collection. It was for reasons of this order that nearly one hundred years ago Forbes & Hanley (1852, Hist. Brit. Moll. 4 : 188) and Hanley (1855, Jpsa Linnaei Conchylia : 426) applied the trivial 188 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS name Jacustris Linnaeus to the species named fluviatilis by Miiller. In recent times other authors, including Kennard & Woodward (1920, J. linn. Soc. Lond. (Zool.) 34 : 210) have taken the opposite view, holding either that the species which Miller identified as Ancylus lacustris (Linnaeus) was in fact the species to which Linnaeus in 1758 had given the name Patella lacustris or that, notwithstanding the dissimilarity of that species from Ancylus fluviatilis, Linnaeus had con- fused the two species together and therefore that his nominal species Patella lacustris was a composite species. It may, therefore, be the case that Geoffroy had in mind only one species, namely Ancylus fluviatilis Miller, when in 1767, he used the generic name Ancylus. As we shall see, however, the name Ancylus, as used by Geoffroy, is an _ invalid name. The sense in which he applied it has, therefore, no nomenclatorial significance, being of historical interest only. As to the trivial name Jacustris Linnaeus, there is no doubt that Miller (1774) applied it to the first of the two species which may have been comprised in it by Linnaeus, for to the second of those species he then gave the name Ancylus fluviatilis. It is in accordance with the interpretation of Miiller that the name /acustris Linnaeus is now generally used and it is in this sense that the nominal species Patella lacustris Linnaeus is today accepted as the type species of Acroloxus Beck, 1837 (see paragraph 7 below). 3. There have in the past been differences of opinion among specialists on the question whether in his Traité sommaire of 1767 Geoffroy applied the principles of “‘nomenclature binaire”’’ (as prescribed, up to 1948, by Proviso (b) to Article 25 of the Régles) and therefore as to whether new names published by Geoffroy in the fore- going work acquired thereby any rights under the Law of Priority. Fortunately, all scope for further argument regarding the meaning to be attached to the above Proviso to Article 25 was put an end to in Paris in. 1948 when the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, on the recommendation of the International Commission, (1) gave a ruling that the expression “‘ nomenclature binaire’’, as hitherto used in the Régles, had a meaning identical with that attaching to the expression “‘ nomenclature binominale ’’, and (2) decided to substitute the latter entirely unambiguous expression for the expression ““ nomen- clature binaire’’, wherever that expression had formerly appeared in the Régles (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 63—66). During the same session the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature decided that, in accordance with the foregoing decision, another work by Etienne Louis Geoffroy [1727—1810], his Histoire abrégée des Insectes qui se trouvent aux Environs de Paris, failed to comply with the requirements of Proviso (6) to Article 25, by reason of the fact that in that work Geoffroy had not “‘ appliqué les principes de la nomen- clature binominale ’”’ (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 366—369). The system of nomenclature in the Traité sommaire is identical with that used both earlier (in 1762) and later (in 1799—1800) in the two editions of the Histoire abrégée. It follows, therefore, that under the decisions OPINION 363 189 cited above new names in the Traité sommaire possess no rights under the Law of Priority in virtue of having been so published. In order, however, to put a stop to the risk of further discussion on this subject, it would be convenient if the International Commission were now to give a formal ruling to the foregoing effect, so that the Traité sommaire may be added to the list of works rejected for non-compliance with Provison (6) to Article 25. 4. Having now established that the name Ancylus Geoffroy, 1767, is not an available name, we have to determine what was the next sub- sequent occasion on which the name Ancylus was published as a generic name. This was in 1774, when it was so used by O. F. Muller (Ancylus Miller, 1774, Verm. terrestr. fluviat. Hist. 2: 199). Miller, who employed the Linnean binominal system of nomenclature, cited two nominal species as belonging to this genus, namely: (1) Ancylus lacustris (Linnaeus, 1758) (=Patella lacustris Linnaeus, 1758), and (2) the new nominal species Ancylus fluviatilis Muller (: 201). One or other of these two nominal species must therefore be the type species of Ancylus Miiller. 5. It is now known that the first type selection for this genus was made in 1823 by Children (Quart. J. Sci. Lit. Arts 15 : 231), who so selected the nominal species Ancylus lacustris (Linnaeus). This selec- tion was completely overlooked at the time and this species later became one of the originally included species of the nominal genus Acroloxus Beck, 1837 (Index Moll. Mus. Christ. Freder. : 124), to which it is still commonly referred and of which it was selected as the type species by Herrmannsen in 1846 (Indic. Gen. Malacoz. Primordia1 : 16). 6. The next selection of a type species for the genus Ancylus Miiller was by Gray in 1847 (Proc. zool. Soc. Lond. 15 : 181), when the nominal species Ancylus fluviatilis Miller, 1774, was so selected. Ever since that date, the name Ancylus has been generally used for the genus which includes this species. Moreover, it is upon the basis of this type selection that the name Ancylus has been employed in the term ““Ancylus-See’’ by Baltic geologists to denote the stage of the Baltic Sea when this genus occurred in that area. Among the important recent authors by whom the name Ancylus has been used in the fore- going sense may be noted Thiele (1931, Handbuch der syst. Weichtier- kunde 1 (Pt. 2) : 482 ; ibid. 2 (Pt. 4) : 1151), who maintained that this usage was correct. 7. Some modern authors have however used the name Ancylus for the species selected as the type species by Children. This has led to great confusion, for it has not only involved the transfer of the generic name Ancylus from the genus containing Ancylus fluviatilis Miller, for which it is so well known as a name, to the genus hitherto always known as Acroloxus Beck, but, in addition, has deprived of its meaning 190 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS the term ‘“‘Ancylus-See’’, since Patella lacustris Linnaeus, which, on this transfer, becomes the type species of Ancylus, did not occur in the limnic stage of the Baltic to which the term “‘Ancylus-See”’ is always applied. It is for the purpose of putting an end to this state of con- fusion that the International Commission is now asked to use its Plenary Powers to designate Ancylus fluviatilis Miiller, 1774, as the type species of the genus Ancylus Miiller, 1774. 8. For the reasons set forth above, the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature is asked to stabilise the nomenclature of the two genera here under discussion in the following manner, that is, that the Commission should :— (1) give a ruling that in the work entitled Traité sommaire des Coquilles . . . qui se trouvent aux Environs de Paris, published in 1767 (as in the Histoire abrégée des Insectes qui se trouvent aux Environs de Paris, published in 1762 and republished in 1799—1800) Geoffroy (E.L.) did not apply the principles of binominal nomenclature, as required by Proviso (6) to Article 25 of the Régles, as amended by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948, and therefore that no name acquired availability under the Law of Priority in virtue of being so published ; (2) use its Plenary Powers (a) to set aside all type selections for the genus Ancylus Miller (O.F.), 1774, made prior to the decision now proposed to be taken, and (5) to designate Ancylus fluviatilis Miiller (O.F.), 1774, to be the type species of the foregoing genus ; (3) place the under-mentioned generic names on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology :— (a) Ancylus Miller (O.F.), 1774 (gender of generic name: masculine) (type species, by designation, as proposed under (2)(6) above, under the Plenary Powers : Ancylus fluviatilis Miller (O.F.), 1774) ; (b) Acroloxus Beck, 1837 (gender of generic name : masculine) (type species, by selection by Herrmannsen (1846) : Patella lacustris Linnaeus, 1758, as interpreted by Miller (O.F.), 1774 : 199—200) ; (4) place the under-mentioned trivial names on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology :— (a) fluviatilis Miiller (O.F.), 1774, as published in the binominal -combination Ancylus fluviatilis (trivial name of species proposed, under (2)(b) above, to be designated, under the Plenary Powers, as the type species of Ancylus Miller (O.F.), 1774) ; OPINION 363 191 (b) lacustris Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the binominal com- bination Patella lacustris, the species so named to be interpreted as specified in (3)(b) above (trivial name of type species of Acroloxus Beck, 1837) ; (5) place on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology the generic name Ancylus Geoffroy, 1767 (name published in a work rejected as not complying with the require- ments of Proviso (6) to Article 25 of the Régles). II.—THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt of Dr. Hubendick’s preliminary application in 1946 the question of the future interpretation of the generic name Ancylus was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 240. At that time it was contemplated that the foregoing case should be dealt with jointly with that of the generic name Ancylastrum Bourguignat, 1853, but later it was decided that, although the Ancylastrum problem was bound up in certain respects with that of the name Ancylus, the latter represented an entirely distinct problem. It was therefore considered that the most convenient course would be (1) for a separate application to be prepared for each of these cases, and (2) for these applications to be published simultaneously and, later, considered by the Commission successively. At this point the case of the name Ancylastrum was allotted a separate Registered Number—Z.N.(S.) 546. 3. Revision of the present application in 1951 : Correspondence in regard to various aspects of the present application was exchanged between the Secretary and the applicant in 1947 but it was not possible to bring this case before the Commission at its Session held in Paris in 1948, for one of the main problems involved—the status to be accorded to Geoffroy’s Traité sommaire of 17672— raised an issue of principle regarding the interpretation * For the later history of this case see paragraph 10 of the present Opinion. 192 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS ¢ of the expression “nomenclature binaire”’ which at that time figured in Proviso (6) to Article 25 and which was then awaiting solution by the International Congress of Zoology. The settlement of this general question by the Paris Congress? cleared the ground for the further consideration of the present case. In the period from the close of the Paris Congress until the summer of 1950 the entire resources of the Office of the Commission were directed to the preparation and publication of the Official Record of the Proceedings of the Commission at its Paris Session, and it was not until the close of that period that it was possible to resume work on the preparation for publication in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature of applications relating to individual nomenclatorial problems submitted to the Commission for decision. Work on the present case was resumed in the early part of 1951. Like all other cases which had been submitted prior to the Paris Congress and which were still outstanding, the present case required revision in certain respects in order to bring it into line with the General Directives relating to the placing of names on Official Lists and other matters which had been issued to the Commission by that Congress. The necessary revision was completed in the present case by 11th June 1951. 4. Preliminary Consultations in 1951: During the concluding stages of the revision of the present application in the summer of 1951 Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, invited comments on the action proposed from two specialists who were known to be interested in this case. The specialists so consulted were (1) Mr. A. E. Ellis (Epsom College, Epsom, England) who had already raised with the Commission the question of the stabilisation of the names Ancylus and Acroloxus ; (2) Mr. Hugh Watson (Cambridge, England), with whom Dr. Hubendick had been in correspondence prior to the submission of the present application. The comments received from these specialists are given in the immediately following paragraphs. 5. Support for the present application received from Mr. A. E. — Ellis (Epsom College, Epsom, England): In a letter dated 5th OSS DS BWI Waal, Noah ee hae OPINION 363 193 June 1951 Mr. A. E. Ellis (Epsom College, Epsom, England) indicated as follows his support for the proposals submitted by Dr. Hubendick :— In my application Z.N.(S.) 470 (1951, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 2 : 119— 125) for the addition to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology of the names of certain non-marine genera of the Phylum Mollusca, I included a request that there should be added to the List (1) the name Ancylus Miiller (O.F.), 1774 (type species, by selection by Gray (1847) : Ancylus fluviatilis Miller (O.F.), 1774) and (2) the name Acroloxus Beck, 1837 (type species, by selection by Herrmannsen (1846) : Patella lacustris Linnaeus, 1758)*. Since the publication of the foregoing application my attention has been drawn to the fact that, prior to the selection by Gray in 1847 of Ancylus fluviatilis Miiller, 1774, as the type species of Ancylus Miiller, 1774, Children in 1823 (Quart. J. Sci. 15 : 231) had selected Patella lacustris Linnaeus, 1758 (the second of the two nominal species cited by Miiller in 1774 under the generic name Ancylus) to be the type species of the genus Ancylus Miller. 2. Children’s action in this matter, which I regret I overlooked, makes it necessary to re-examine this case, since, under a strict application of the Régles, it would be necessary to transfer the generic name Ancylus Miiller from the genus for which it is so well-known to the genus equally well-known under the name Acroloxus Beck, 1837. In addition, it would be necessary to find a new term in place of the term “‘Ancylus Lake ”’ to denote the stage in the history of the Baltic Sea at present known by that term by reason of the occurrence of Ancylus, as typified by A. fluviatilis Miller, in that area during the portion of the Pleistocene concerned. 3. As will immediately be obvious, such changes could not fail to give rise to confusion, affecting, as they would, the nomenclature both of living and fossil forms, and also general geological literature. I under- stand that on these grounds Dr. Bengt Hubendick of the University of Uppsala has requested the International Commission to prevent this confusion from arising by using its Plenary Powers to set aside Children’s (1823) selection of Patella lacustris Linnaeus, 1758, as the type species of Ancylus Miiller, 1774, and itself to designate Ancylus fluviatilis Miller, 1774, to be the type species of this genus. This is 4 In view of Mr. Ellis’s letter of 5th June 1951 the proposals in regard to the names Ancylus and Acroloxus which had been included, with other proposals, in his application Z.N.(S.) 470 were treated as having been superseded by his support for the application submitted by Dr. Hubendick. For the decision taken by the Commission on the remaining portions of the application Z.N.(S.) 470 see Opinion 335 (1955, Ops. Decls. int. Comm. zool. Nomencl. 10 : 45—76). 194 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS precisely the action which, in my opinion, is required if serious and unnecessary confusion and name-changing is to be avoided in this case. I accordingly desire to support Dr. Hubendick’s recommendation that the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature should use its Plenary Powers in the manner proposed. 6. Comment received from Mr. Hugh Watson (Cambridge, England) : On 15th June 1951 Mr. Hugh Watson (Cambridge, England) addressed to the Commission the following letter setting out his views as to the advantages and disadvantages involved in the grant of Dr. Hubendick’s application :— I have been asked to express my views on an application submitted to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in 1947 asking the Commission “‘ to use its Plenary Powers to designate Ancylus fluviatilis Miiller, 1774, to be the type species of the above genus, in place of Patella lacustris Linnaeus, 1758, selected as such by Children in 1823 ’’. Although I have not seen the application itself, | am informed that it “is based upon the confusion which would result from the strict application of the ordinary Rules in the present case, having regard especially to the fact that the term ‘Ancylus-See’ is deeply entrenched in European geological literature as the name of a limnic stage of the Baltic, that term having been given because of the occurrence in that area of the foregoing species ; the strict application of the ordinary Rules would mean the acceptance as the type species of Ancylus of a species which did not occur in the foregoing area, with the result that the long-standing term ‘Ancylus-See’ would lose its meaning and would have to be abandoned for some entirely new expression, a course which [the applicant] considers would be entirely impracticable ’’. The sentence just quoted seems to me admirably to summarise the strongest reason in favour of this application being granted. To attempt to change the long-standing term ‘‘Ancylus-See ’’ (or Lake) might cause much inconvenience and possible confusion to geologists for a very long period ; while to retain it if the genus now to be called Ancylus is not known to occur there might seem to be sadly misleading. In favour of this application being granted I might also point out that E. L. Geoffroy in his work of 1767, in which he proposed the name Ancylus, is not considered to have employed binominal nomenclature, and the name must therefore be attributed to O. F. Miiller, 1774, who included in the genus the two species, A. Jacustris (Linnaeus) and A. fluviatilis Miiller ; and that those subsequent authors who first placed these species in separate genera, such as J. E. Gray, 1840 (in Turton’s Manual, pp. 66, 230), H. & A. Adams, 1855, and their OPINION 363 195 followers removed A. lacustris to a separate genus with another name and retained A. fluviatilis in Ancylus itself, of which genus Gray in 1847 selected “‘ Pat. fluviatilis’’ as the type species. Moreover, even since the discovery in 1921 of Children’s prior type selection, eminent malacologists like Thiele (1931, 1935), Ehrmann (1933), Hubendick (1947), and Mandahl-Barth (1949) have continued this usage, which it is the object of the present application to make permanent. And if the genus containing A. /Jacustris is to be called Ancylus, then the correct name of that to which A. fluviatilis belongs will be in doubt, some authors considering that it should be Ancylastrum Bourguignat, 1853, and others Pseudancylus Walker, 1921. On the other hand, the following arguments might be advanced in opposition to the granting of this application. The name Ancylus was first proposed by Geoffroy in 1767 for a single species which he identified as Patella lacustris Linnaeus ; and, although there is a slight doubt as to whether the species to which Linnaeus and Geoffroy applied this name was not a composite one that included also Miiller’s ” A. fluviatilis, there can be no such doubt in regard to the identity of the Ancylus lacustris of Miiller, which he placed first and stated was Geoffroy’s ‘Ancylus’, the name which Miiller adopted for the genus. It might therefore be argued that A. Jacustris must be taken as the type species of Ancylus Miiller, in the same way that it is held that when in 1781 Miller adopted the name Bulinus Adanson, 1757, for another genus, the species to which Adanson had applied this name (and which Miiller called B. senegalensis) must be regarded as the type species of Miiller’s genus Bulinus (see Pilsbry & Bequaert, 1927, p. 134). Accord- ingly, when Children definitely selected A. Jacustris as the type species of Ancylus in 1823, he was acting very properly, and Gray was clearly making a mistake in selecting A. fluviatilis as the type species 24 years later. That this was a mistake, however, was realised more than thirty years ago, and since then most authors have rightly regarded A. lacustris as the type species of Ancylus, and if they placed A. fluviatilis in a separate genus, they have given it another generic name. For example, this course was followed by Kennard & Woodward in 1920, and in their ““ Synonymy ” (1926) and in their many other writings on British Pleistocene, Holocene, and Recent non-marine Mollusca ; by Bryant Walker, the American authority on the Ancylidae, in various writings from 1921 until his death ; by H. B. Baker, who wrote in 1925 : *“Ancylus Miiller (1774), type Patella lacustris Linné (chosen by Children, 1823—4) is the only legitimate Ancylus s.s.”’; by A. E. Ellis in his standard book on British snails (1926) ; by Pilsbry & Bequaert in their great work on the freshwater Mollusca of the Congo (1927); by L. Germain in his standard work on French land and. freshwater Mollusca (1931) ; by C. R. Boettger in his paper on freshwater limpets (1932) and subsequent works on German Gastropods ; by H. Schlesch in his writings on the non-marine Mollusca of Denmark (1934) and Latvia (1942) ; by M. Connolly in his Monographic Survey of South African non-marine Mollusca (1939) ; and by L. Forcart in his small 196 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS book on Swiss snails and mussels (1947). Seeing therefore that the majority of able writers on this subject in different countries appear to have employed the name Ancylus for the genus including A. lacustris, in accordance with the Rules, it might be argued that it would be extremely confusing to attempt now to transfer this name to the genus containing A. fluviatilis in opposition to the ordinary Rules. Thus, it might be thought that the International Commission should not use its powers to suspend the Rules, when to do so now would lead to a change that might cause greater confusion than the alteration of the term “‘Ancylus-See ”’ to “* Pseudancylus-See ”’ or ““Ancylastrum-See ”’, which is as great a change as the geologists might need to make in their terminology. And they might not think that even this change was at all necessary, for during the nineteenth century the majority of authors followed Miiller himself in including both A. lacustris and A. fluviatilis in the genus Ancylus, and even as late as 1927 and 1930 eminent malacologists like D. Gyer and G. Mermod continued to do so in their well-known works on German and Swiss snails, and so did A. E. Boycott in 1936, when he dealt with the habitats of the British fresh- water Mollusca. Therefore, the term ““Ancylus-See”’, being by no means new, might be held simply to mean that the lake contained fresh-water limpets, that is to say, members of the genus Ancylus in its older and broader sense, without implying to which of the smaller genera into which Ancylus is now divided they belonged. Lastly, if, contrary to the ordinary Rules, the name Ancylus were now to be applied to the restricted genus which includes A. fluviatilis instead of to that containing A. Jacustris, it would still be necessary to decide whether A. fluviatilis is also to be regarded as the type species of Ancylastrum Bourguignat, 1853, notwithstanding that Bourguignat himself designated his A. cumingianus as the type species as on this disputed question depends the problem not only of which of the two generic names, Pseudancylus Walker, 1921, and Ancylastrum, should be used for A. fluviatilis if Ancylus is used for A. lacustris, but also of whether Ancylastrum or Tasmancylus Iredale, 1926, is to be used for A. cumingianus Bourguignat, which belongs to a third genus. It is to be hoped that the International Commission will not fail also to decide this matter at the same time, as reference to the same body of literature is necessary for its study, and it concerns practically the same question, namely, of which genus or genera should A. fluviatilis be regarded as the type species. It is, in my view, clear that the advantages of suspending the strict application of the Rules in the present case would not be so unquestion- able as in cases where the technical validity of generic names in general use is found to be doubtful but their change would cause great confusion OPINION 363 197 and their retention none at all—as in Bithynia for B. tentaculata (Linnaeus), etc., and Helicella for H. itala (Linnaeus), etc. My view is therefore that the Commission would do well to consider carefully the weighty arguments against as well as in favour of granting this application before coming to a conclusion about it. It is greatly to be hoped, however, that it will then come to a definite decision, one way or the other, without further delay, that will enable us to know whether we should call the genus containing A. Jacustris (Linnaeus) Ancylus Miller or Acroloxus Beck, that containing A. fluviatilis Ancylus Miller, Ancylastrum Bourguignat® or Pseudancylus Walker, and that containing A. cumingianus Bourguignat Ancylastrum Bourguignat or Tasmancylus Iredale. 7. Publication of the present application: The application submitted by Dr. Hubendick was sent to the printer on 13th May 1952, and was published on 23rd July of the same year in Part 8 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Hubendick, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 227—230). The comments received from Mr. Ellis and Mr. Watson respectively were included in Part 9 of the same volume and were published on the same day as Dr. Hubendick’s application (Ellis, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 288 ; Watson, 1952, ibid. 6 : 286—288). 8. Issue of Public Notices: Under the revised procedure pres- cribed by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 51—56), Public Notice of the possible use by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature of its Plenary Powers in the present case was given on 23rd May 1952 (a) in Part 8 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Dr. Hubendick’s application was published) and (5) to the other prescribed serial publications. In addition, Public Notice was given also to a number of general zoological serial publications and to certain palaeontological serials in Europe and America. 9. No objection received: The issue of the Public Notices specified in the preceding paragraph elicited no objection to the action proposed to be taken in the present case. ® For the decision taken by the Commission in regard to the generic name Ancylastrum Bourguignat, 1853 see the immediately following Opinion (Opinion 364). : 198 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 10. Decision to treat as a separate case the portion of Dr. Hubendick’s application relating to the status to be accorded to the work by Geoffroy (E.L.) entitled the ‘*‘ Traité Sommaire ”’ published in 1767 : When in March 1954 Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, came to consider the form of the Voting Paper to be submitted to the Commission in the present case, he took the view that, as the interest attaching to the question of the status to be accorded to the work by Geoffroy (E.L.), Traité Sommaire des Coquilles, tant fluviatiles que terrestres, qui se trouvent aux Environs de Paris published in 1767 was considerably wider than that involved in the question whether the name Ancylus should be attributed to Geoffroy, 1767, or to Miiller (O.F.), 1774, the correct course would be to embody in separate Opinions the decisions to be taken by the Commission in regard to these matters. In accor- dance with this decision, Mr. Hemming prepared two Voting Papers, the first (V.P.(54)30), dealing with the Dr. Hubendick’s proposal relating to Geoffroy’s Traité Sommaire’ (which had appeared as Point (1) in paragraph 8 of the present application), the second (V.P.(54)31), concerned with the generic name Ancylus Miiller and matters incidental thereto (which had appeared as Points (2) to (5) of the paragraph referred to above). IIlL—THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 11. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(54)31 : On 17th March 1954, a Voting Paper (V.P.(54)31) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “the proposal relating to the name Ancylus Miller, 1774, as set out in Points (2) to (5) in paragraph 8 on page 230 in volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature’ [i.e. in the Points numbered as above in paragraph 8 of the application reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion]. ® For the decision by the Commissicn on the status to be accorded to Geoffroy’s Traité Sommaire of 1767 see Opinion 362 (pp. 173 to 182 of the present volume). OPINION 363 199 12. The Prescribed Voting Period : As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 17th June 1954. 13. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)31 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)31 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following seventeen (17) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Riley ; Holthuis ; Hering ; Bonnet ; Boschma ; Lemche ; Dymond; do Amaral; Sylvester-Bradley; Esaki; Mertens; Jaczewski; Bradley (J.C.); Hanko; Pearson ; Hemming ; Cabrera ; (b) Negative Votes, two (2) : Vokes ; Stoll ; (c) Voting Papers not returned : None. 14. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 18th June 1954 Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(54)31, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 13 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the fore- going Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. 15. Addition of ‘‘ Pseudancylus ’’ Walker, 1921, to the « Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology ’? : On 22nd February 1955, Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, placed the VA 200 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS following Minute relating to the generic name Pseudancylus Walker, 1921, on the Commission’s File Z.N.(S.) 240 :— Addition of the generic name ‘‘ Pseudancylus ’? Walker, 1921, to the ‘* Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology ”’ MINUTE by FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E., Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature The decision taken by the Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)31 to use its Plenary Powers to designate the nominal species Ancylus fluviatilis Miller (O.F.), 1774, to be the type species of the genus Ancylus Miller (O.F.), 1774, has, amongst other effects, that of making the name Pseudancylus Walker, 1921 (Nautilus 35 : 58) a junior objective synonym of Ancylus Miiller, 1774, since its type species also is by original designation Ancylus fluviatilis Miller. 2. Under the General Directives issued to the Commission by the International Congress of Zoology (a) that the Rulings given in Opinions are to cover the whole of the ground involved, and (b) that objectively invalid names dealt with in Opinions be placed on the appropriate Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Names, the name Pseudancylus Walker, 1921, requires now to be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology. 3. As Secretary to the International Commission, I accordingly hereby direct that the generic name Pseudancylus Walker, 1921, be entered on the foregoing Official Index in the Ruling to be prepared for the Opinion embodying the decision taken by the Commission in its vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)31. 16. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 23rd February 1955 Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Com- mission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)31, subject to the adjustment specified in the Secretary’s Minute dated 22nd February 1955 (paragraph 15 above). 17. Original References: The following are the original references for the names placed on the Official Lists and Official — Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— Acroloxus Beck, 1837, Index Moll. Mus. Ch. Fred. : 124 Ancylus Geoffroy, 1767, Traité Sommaire Cog. Env. Paris : 13, 124 OPINION 263 201 Ancylus Miiller (O.F.), 1774, Verm. terrestr. fluviat. Hist. 2 : 199 fluviatilis, Ancylus, Miller (O.F.), 1774, Verm. terrestr. fluviat. Hist. 2: 201 lacustris, Patella, Linnaeus, 1758, Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1 : 783 Pseudancylus Walker, 1921, Nautilus 35 : 58 18. The following is the reference for the selection of a type species for the genus Acroloxus Beck, 1837, specified in the Ruling given in the present Opinion :—Herrmannsen, 1846, Index Gen. malacozool. Primordia 1 : 16. 19. Family-group-name aspect : The application dealt with in the present Opinion was published in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature prior to the establishment of the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953. It has not been possible since then to deal with this aspect of the present case. This question is, however, now being examined on a separate File to which the Registered Number Z.N.(G.) 125 has been allotted. 20. At the time of the submission of the application dealt with in the present Opinion, the expression prescribed for the second portion of the binomen which constitutes the scientific name of a species was the expression “trivial name” and the Official List reserved for recording such names was styled the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology, the word “ trivial” appearing also in the title of the Official Index reserved for recording rejected and invalid names of this category. Under a decision taken by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, the expression “ specific name ”’ was substituted for the expression “ trivial name” and corres- ponding changes were made in the titles of the Official List and Official Index of such names (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 21). The changes in terminology so adopted have been incorporated in the Ruling given in the present Opinion. 21. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is 202 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Commission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 22. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Sixty-Three (363) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twenty-Third day of February, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Five. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING Printed in England by Mrrcatre & Cooper LimiTeD, 10-24 Scrutton St., London EC 2 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, c.M.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 14. Pp. 203—214 OPINION 364 Addition of the name Ancylastrum Bourguignat, February 1853 (Class Gastropoda) to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Ancylus (Ancylastrum) cumingianus Bourguignat, May 1853, as the type species of the genus so named LONDON : > Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1955 Price Six Shillings (All rights reserved) Issued 4th November, 1955 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 364 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts, England) President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President: Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. BOscHMA (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (Ast January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) See PEARSON (Tasmanian Museum, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia) (27th y 1948 Dr. Henning LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948) Professor Teiso Esaki (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mr. Norman Denbigh RILEY (British Museum (Natural History) London) (9th June 1950) Professor Tadeusz JACZEWSKI (Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950) Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (Sth July 1950) Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (5th July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice- President) Professor J. R. DyMOND (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 1953) Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. Vokes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezdgazdasdgi Muzeum Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. STOLL (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) 4 Dr. L. B. HoLtuuts (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Nether- lands) (12th August 1953) OPINION 364 ADDITION OF THE NAME ‘** ANCYLASTRUM ”? BOUR- GUIGNAT, FEBRUARY 1853 (CLASS GASTROPODA) TO THE ‘* OFFICIAL LIST OF GENERIC NAMES IN ZOOLOGY ” WITH ‘*‘ ANCYLUS (ANCYLASTRUM) CUMINGIANUS ”? BOURGUIGNAT, MAY 1853, AS THE TYPE SPECIES OF THE GENUS SO NAMED RULING :—(1) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name No. 886 :—Ancylastrum Boutr- guignat, February 1853 (gender: neuter) (type species, by designation by Bourguignat (May 1853) : Ancylus (Ancylastrum) cumingianus Bourguignat, May 1853). (2) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name No. 504 :—cumingianus Bourguignat, May 1853, as published in the combination: Ancylus (Ancylastrum) cumingianus (specific name of type species of Ancylastrum Bourguignat, February 1853). I—THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 6th November 1946 Dr. Bengt Hubendick (Zoologiska Institutionen, Uppsala, Sweden) submitted to the Commission a pre- liminary application covering jointly the case of the name Ancylus Miller (O.F.), 1774, and the name Ancylastrum Bourguignat, 1853 (Class Gastropoda). Later, it was decided that it would better serve the convenience of the International Commission if a separate application were to be prepared in regard to each of these names. These applications, after revision in order to secure compliance with certain General Directives issued to the Commission by the International Congress of Zoology regarding NOV 28 1955 206 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS the form and content of applications relating to individual names, were submitted on 11th June 1951. The later history of the case relating to the name Ancylus Muller, 1774, and the decision of the Commission on that case have been given in the Commission’s Opinion 363 (pp. 183—202) of the present volume). The present Opinion is concerned only with the application relating to the name Ancylastrum Bourguignat. The application in regard to this name submitted by Dr. Hubendick was as follows :— Proposed addition of the name ‘‘Ancylastrum ’’ Bourguignat, 1853 (Class Gastropoda) to the ‘* Official List of Generic Names in Zoology ”’ By BENGT HUBENDICK (Riksmuseum, Stockholm, Sweden) The purpose of the present application is to ask the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature to place the well-known generic name Ancylastrum Bourguignat, 1853 (type species, by subse- quent selection : Ancylus (Ancylastrum) cumingianus Bourguignat, 1853) on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology. 2. The name Ancylastrum was introduced into the literature by Bourguignat as the name of a subgenus of the genus Ancylus (for which name Bourguignat did not cite an author). On the first publica- tion of this name which occurred in the first part of a paper published in instalments and which was issued on 15th February 1853 (J. Conchyliol. 4 : 63) Bourguignat briefly defined this subgenus but did not refer any species to it by name. In the second part of his paper, published on Ist May 1853, Bourguignat cited the species which he regarded as belonging to this subgenus and expressly stated that its type species was Ancylus (Ancylastrum) cumingianus, a new species then named and briefly characterised for the first time (: 170). The full description of this new species was reserved for a paper then in preparation for publication in the Proceedings of the Zoological Society of London, and was published early in the following year ([1854], Proc. zool. Soc. Lond. 21:91). In that paper Bourguignat repeated the statement that the above species was the type species of Ancylastrum Bourguignat. 3. The validity of Bourguignat’s action in selecting Ancylus (Ancyl- astrum) cumingianus Bourguignat to be the type species of Ancylastrum Bourguignat has in the past been challenged on two quite different grounds, as follows :— (1) Some authors have rejected the above species as the type species on the ground that it was not eligible for selection as such, OPINION 364 207 since the specific name Ancylus (Ancylastrum) cumingianus Bourguignat had not been published when on 15th February 1853 the subgeneric name Ancylastrum Bourguignat was first published. (2) Other authors have advanced the view that the name Ancylastrum was published by Bourguignat as the name of the typical subgenus of the genus Ancylus and therefore that, notwith- standing the designation by Bourguignat of Ancylus (Ancyl- astrum) cumingianus Bourguignat as the type species of Ancylastrum Bourguignat, the type species of that subgenus must be Ancylus fluviatilis Miller, 1774, that species having been selected by Gray (1847) as the type species of the genus Ancylus, as restricted by Gray, it being impossible under the Régles for the typical subgenus of a genus to have, as its type species, any species, other than the type species of the genus itself. ; 4. We may conveniently examine first the contention that the species Ancylus (Ancylastrum) cumingianus Bourguignat, May 1853, is ineligible for selection as the type species of the subgenus Ancylastrum Bourguignat, February 1853. As we have seen (paragraph 2 above) the subgeneric name Ancylastrum was first published by Bourguignat in February 1853 without any nominal species cited by name as belong- ing thereto. Accordingly, up till July 1948, the species which should be treated as the type species of this subgenus fell to be decided in accord- ance with the provisions of the Commission’s Opinion 46 (1912, Smithson. Publ. 2060 : 104—107), those being the only provisions in the Régles and the Opinions, taken together, that dealt with this subject. The extensive discussions which have taken place in regard to the type species of Ancylastrum Bourguignat are, no doubt, due, in part, to the fact, as the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature itself recognised in Paris in July 1948 (see 1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 159), the obscurities and self-contradictions in Opinion 46 were such that in many cases it had proved impossible to deduce from that Opinion what species should, under the Régles, be regarded as the type species of any given genus originally established without any nominal species cited as belonging thereto. It was to remedy this defect that the International Commission in 1948 cancelled the foregoing Opinion and recommended to the Congress that words should be inserted in the Régles to make it clear that where, prior to Ist January 1931, a generic name was published for a genus established (a) with an indication, definition or description, (6) with no nominal species distinctly referred to it, the first nominal species to be subsequently so referred to it by the same or another author is, or are, to be deemed to have been originally included species, that, where one such species only is so cited that species automatically becomes the type species of the genus concerned and that, where two or more such species are 208 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS cited but none is designated or indicated as the type species of the genus concerned, those species become, for the purposes of Article 30 the sole originally included species, from which alone therefore the type species of the genus may be selected by a subsequent author (see 1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 160, 346). This recommendation was approved by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology (see 1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl.5 : 131) ; the provision so recommended and approved is therefore that which governs the determination of the type species of the subgenus Ancylastrum Bourguignat. Applying that provision to this case, we find that Bourguignat himself in May 1853 was the first author to refer any nominal species to the subgenus Ancylasirum Bourguignat, February 1853, and that on that occasion he designated one of the nominal species so referred, namely Ancylus (Ancylastrum) cumingianus Bourguignat, May 1853 (a species then named and briefly diagnosed for the first time) to be the type species of Ancylastrum Bourguignat, February 1853. Under the decision taken by the International Congress of Zoology in Paris in 1948 that species is therefore unquestionably the validly designated type species of Ancylastrum Bourguignat, 1853. 5. The second of the two arguments advanced against the acceptance of the foregoing species as the type species of Ancylastrum Bourguignat is disposed of, equally with the first argument, by the decision taken by the Paris Congress discussed above, for that decision is unequivocal and unqualified in its terms. It is therefore not necessary to examine the second argument in detail. It must be noted, however, that that argument would have been equally ill-founded, even if Bourguignat had cited Ancylus (Ancylastrum) cumingianus at the time when he first published the name Ancylastrum and had not designated that species as the type species, some later author having so selected it, for in that case also that species would have been the validly determined type species of Ancylastrum. For it is the Rules in Article 30 which alone govern the determination of the type species of a genus. It is true that the Régles provide (Article 9) that the nominotypical subgenus of a genus (i.e. the subgenus containing the type species of the genus) automatically takes, as its name, the name of the genus itself, but that provision in no way impinges upon, or qualifies the effect of, the provisions of Article 30. If for the moment we assume that Bour- guignat gave the name Ancylastrum to the nominotypical subgenus of the genus Ancylus, the effect of his action would not have been to nullify the type designation made by Bourguignat for his subgenus Ancylastrum ; it would have been entirely different, namely to make the subgeneric name Ancylastrum Bourguignat either an objective or a subjective synonym of the name Ancylus, the valid name of the nominotypical subgenus of the genus Ancylus, (i) an objective synonym if the type species of Ancylastrum had been the same nominal species as that of Ancylus, (ii) a subjective synonym if the two type species were species which specialists subjectively considered to be congeneric with one another. As a matter of fact, however, Bourguignat did not OPINION 364 209 publish the subgeneric name Ancylastrum for the nominotypical genus of the genus Ancylus, for, as I have shown in the separate application which I have submitted to the International Commission in regard to the generic name Ancylus (application Z.N.(S.) 240), the type species of that genus, under the Régles, is not Ancylus fluviatilis Miiller, 1774 (the species treated as the type species of that genus by all those who have challenged the position of Ancylus (Ancylastrum) cumingianus Bourguignat as the type species of Ancylastrum Bourguignat) but the entirely different species Patella lacustris Linnaeus, 1758 (now commonly referred to the genus Acroloxus Beck, 1837, of which also it is the type species). From every point of view, therefore, the argument against the acceptance of Ancylus (Ancylastrum) cumingianus Bourguignat as the type species of Ancylastrum on the ground that that name was published for the nominotypical subgenus of Ancylus, is entirely misconceived and without foundation. 6. Having now clearly established that Ancylus (Ancylastrum) cumingianus Bourguignat, May 1853, is the validly determined type species of Ancylastrum Bourguignat, February 1853, we have finally to note that the name Ancylastrum Bourguignat is itself an available name in the sense that it is not a homonym of any earlier generic or subgeneric name consisting of the same word and that there is no genus or subgenus, possessing an earlier and available name that has, as its type species, the same nominal species or some other nominal species that is subjectively identified by specialists with that species or is considered congeneric with that species. The name Ancylastrum Bourguignat, 1853, is therefore qualified in every respect for admission to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology. 7. In order, therefore, to promote stability in the nomenclature of this group by putting an end to fruitless discussion regarding the type species of the genus Ancylastrum Bourguignat, I now ask the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature :— (1) to place the generic name Ancylastrum Bourguignat, February 1853 (gender of generic name: neuter) (type species, by designation by Bourguignat (May 1853) : Ancylus (Ancylastrum) cumingianus Bourguignat, May 1853) on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology 3. (2) to place the trivial name cumingianus Bourguignat, 1853, as published in the combination Ancylus (Ancylastrum) cumingianus (trivial name of the type species of Ancylastrum Bourguignat, 1853) on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology. 210 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Il—_THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : At the time of the receipt in 1946 of Dr. Hubendick’s preliminary communication, the cases relating to the generic names Ancylus Miller and Ancylastrum Bourguignat so raised were allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 240. When later (as explained in the preceding paragraph) it was decided to treat the problems involved in the foregoing names as constituting separate applications, the Regis- tered Number Z.N.(S.) 240 was retained for the case relating to the name Ancylus Miller and a new File bearing the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 546 was allotted to the case of the name Ancylastrum Bourguignat. 3. Preliminary consultations in 1951: During the concluding stages of the revision of the application relating to the name Ancylus Miller, Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, invited comments on that application from two specialists who were known to be interested in that case. Of the specialists so consulted Mr. Hugh Watson (Cambridge, England) commented on the question : of the name Ancylastrum Bourguignat in the communication which on 15th June 1951 he furnished to the Commission. Mr. Watson’s communication has been published in extenso in the Opinion (Opinion 363): in which the Commission has given its decision in regard to the name Ancylus Miller. The passage in Mr. Watson’s communication which was concerned with the name Ancylastrum Bourguignat, 1853, was as follows :— If, contrary to the ordinary Rules, the name Ancylus were now to be applied to the restricted genus which includes A. fluviatilis instead of to that containing A. lacustris, it would still be necessary to decide whether A. fluviatilis is also to be regarded as the type species of Ancylastrum Bourguignat, 1853, notwithstanding that Bourguignat himself designated his A. cumingianus as the type species as on this disputed question depends the problem not only of which of the two generic names, Pseudancylus Walker, 1921, and Ancylastrum, should be used for A. fluviatilis if Ancylus is used for A. lacustris, but also of whether Ancylastrum or Tasmancylus Iredale, 1926, is to be used for A. cumingianus Bourguignat, which belongs to a third genus. It is 1 See pp. 194—197 of the present volume. OPINION 364 211 to be hoped that the International Commission will not fail also to decide this matter at the same time, as reference to the same body of literature is necessary for its study, and it concerns practically the same question, namely, of which genus or genera should A. fluviatilis be regarded as the type species. It is, in my view, clear that the advantages of suspending the strict application of the Rules in the present case would not be so unquestion- able as in cases where the technical validity of generic names in general use is found to be doubtful but their change would cause great confusion and their retention none at all—as in Bithynia for B. tentaculata (Linnaeus), etc., and Helicella for H. itala (Linnaeus), etc. My view is therefore that the Commission would do well to consider carefully the weighty arguments against as well as in favour of granting this application before coming to a conclusion about it. It is greatly to be hoped, however, that it will then come to a definite decision, one way or the other, without further delay, that will enable us to know whether we should call the genus containing A. Jacustris (Linnaeus) Ancylus Miller or Acro/oxus Beck, that containing A. fluviatilis Ancylus Miller, Ancylastrum Bourguignat or Pseudancylus Walker, and that containing A. cumingianus Bourguignat Ancylastrum Bourguignat or Tasmancylus Iredale. 4. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 13th May 1952 and was published in Part 8 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature on 23rd July of the same year (Hubendick, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 230—233). 5. No objection received : The publication of Dr. Hubendick’s application in regard to the present case elicited no objection or other comment on the action proposed. Ifl.—THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 6. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(54)32 : On 17th March 1954, a Voting Paper (V.P.(54)32) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against “ the PD OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS proposal relating to Ancylastrum Bourguignat, 1853, as set out in paragraph 7 on page 233 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature”? [i.e. in paragraph 7 of the application reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion]. 7. The Prescribed Voting Period for Voting Paper V.P.(54)32: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 17th June 1954. 8. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)32: At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)32 was as follows :— | (a) Affirmarive Votes had been given by the following eighteen (18) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Riley: Holthuis ; Hering; Bonnet ; Boschma; Lemche ; Dymond; do Amaral; Sylvester-Bradley; Esaki ; Mertens ; Jaczewski; Bradley (J. C.) ; Hanké; Pearson ; Stoll ; Hemming ; Cabrera ; (b) Negative Votes, one (1) : Vokes ; (c) Voting Papers not returned : None. 9. Declaration of Result of Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)32 : On 18th June 1954 Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(54)32, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 8 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. OPINION 364 213 10. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 23rd February 1955 Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)32. 11. Original references: The following are the original references for the names placed on Official Lists by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— Ancylastrum Bourguignat, February 1853, J. Conchyliol. 4 : 63 cumingianus, Ancylus (Ancylastrum), Bourguignat, May 1853, J. Conchyliol. 4 : 170 12. Family-group-name aspect: The application dealt with in the present Opinion was published in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature prior to the establishment of the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953. It has not been possible since then to deal with this aspect of the present case. This question is, however, now being examined on a separate File to which the Registered Number Z.N.(G.) 125 has been allotted. 13. At the time of the submission of the application dealt with in the present Opinion, the expression prescribed for the second. portion of the binomen which constitutes the scientific name of a species was the expression “ trivial name” and the Official List reserved for recording such names was styled the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology, the word “ trivial” appearing also in the title of the Official Index reserved for recording rejected and invalid names of this category. Under a decision taken by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, the expression “ specific name” was substituted for the expression “ trivial name ” and corresponding changes were made in the titles of the Official List and Official Index of such names (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 21). The changes in terminology so adopted have been incorporated in the Ruling given in the present Opinion. 214 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 14. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Commission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 15. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Sixty-Four (364) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twenty-Third day of February, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Five. ' Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING Printed in England by MrtcarFe & CoopER LimiTED, 10-24 Scrutton St., London EC 2 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, cM.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 15. Pp. 215—230 OPINION 365 Suppression, under the Plenary Powers, of the specific name cinereous Le Conte, 1852, as published in the combination Crotalus cinereous, for the purpose of rendering the specific name atrox Baird & Girard, 1853, as published in the combination Crotalus atrox, the oldest available name for the Western Diamond Rattle- snake (Class Reptilia, Order Squamata) LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1955 Price Eight Shillings (All rights reserved) Issued 16th November, 1955 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 365 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts., England) President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President: Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. BoscHmMa (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (1st January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) ae Ce PEARSON (Zasmanian Museum, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia) (27th uly Dr. Henning LEMcHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948) Professor Teiso Esaki (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mr. Norman Denbigh Riey (British Museum (Natural History) London) (9th June 1950) Professor Tadeusz JACZEWSKI Unstitute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950) Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (Sth July 1950) Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (5th July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice- President) ae J. R. DyMonD (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. Voxes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezéogazdasdgi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. SToLt (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) Dr. L. B. Hoituuts (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Nether- lands) (12th August 1953) OPINION 365 SUPPRESSION, UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS, OF THE SPECIFIC NAME ‘** CINEREOUS ”’ LE CONTE, 1852, AS PUBLISHED IN THE COMBINATION ‘ CRO- TALUS CINEREOUS ”, FOR THE PURPOSE OF RENDERING THE SPECIFIC NAME ‘* ATROX ” BAIRD & GIRARD, 1853, AS PUBLISHED IN THE COMBINATION ‘‘ CROTALUS ATROX ”’, THE OLDEST AVAILABLE NAME FOR THE WESTERN DIAMOND RATTLESNAKE (CLASS REPTILIA, ORDER SQUAMATA) RULING :—(1) Under the Plenary Powers the specific name cinereous Le Conte, 1852, as published in the com- bination Crotalus cinereous, is hereby suppressed for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy. (2) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name No. 505 :—atrox Baird & Girard, 1853, as published in the combination Crotalus atrox. (3) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology with the Name No. 129 :—cinereous Le Conte, 1852, as published in the combination Cro- talus cinereous, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers under (1) above. DEC 1 3 1960 218 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS I.—THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 9th April 1951 Dr. Laurence M. Klauber (San Diego, California, U.S.A.) submitted to the Commission the following application for the suppression under the Plenary Powers of the specific name cinereous Le Conte, 1852, as published in the com- bination Crotalus cinereous, for the purpose of preserving the specific name atrox Baird & Girard, 1853, as published in the combination Crotalus atrox, as the name for the Western Diamond Rattlesnake :-— Proposed use of the Plenary Powers to preserve for the western diamond rattlesnake the trivial name ‘‘atrox ’’ Baird & Girard, 1853 (as published in the combination ‘‘ Crotalus atrox ’’) by suppressing the trivial name ‘‘ cinereous ’’ Le Conte in Hallowell, 1852 (as published in combination ‘‘Crotalus cinereous’’) (Class Reptilia, Order Squamata) By LAURENCE M. KLAUBER (San Diego, California, U.S.A.) The purpose of the present application is to ask the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature to preserve the well-known trivial name atrox Baird & Girard, 1853, as published in the binominal combination Crotalus atrox for the western diamond rattlesnake by the use of its Plenary Powers to suppress the earlier trivial name cinereous Le Conte in Hallowell, 1852, as published in the combination Crotalus cinereous (Class Reptilia, Order Squamata). 2. In 1852, Hallowell (: 177) described the rattlesnake Crotalus lecontei. This nominal species has since seldom been recognised as valid, its name being usually considered a synonym of Crotalus confluentus Say, 1823, or, more recently, of Crotalus viridis Rafinesque, 1818. This disposition of /econtei Hallowell is undoubtedly correct, as was demonstrated by Stejneger in do Amaral, 1929 (: 87). The validity of /econtei has no bearing on the question herein raised. 3. In the course of his description of /econtei, Hallowell included the following paragraph :— “* Remarks. My friend, Dr. Le Conte informs me that he found near the Colorado, about seven hundred miles from the last mentioned locality, a species of crotalus which was very abundant in that region ; a OPINION 365 219 over four feet in length, and which appears to be the same as the one above described. He took the following notes of it upon the spot : “Crotalus-cinereous ; black with a series of subrhomboidal spots margined with dark brown, and exterior to this a line of white scales ; sides with a few darker cinereous spots ; beneath pale ochraceous ; neck and upper part of head white ; tail white with four black rings,* becoming irregular beneath; length 44 ft.; greatest circumference 4 inches ; 185 transverse scales beneath the body, 28 caudal ; fourteen scales in the oblique rows from spine to side in middle and on neck ; nine posteriorly and on tail. Colorado, March, 1851. The dorsal spots became indistinct behind. Sandy deserts’.’’[This extract from Le Conte occurs on page 177.] 4. In 1854, Hallowell repeated his description of /econtei and again repeated under “‘ Remarks” the quotation from Le Conte’s com- munication. In this reprint the words Crotalus cinereous were italicised and the hyphen was omitted, and there were several other minor changes, including the change of the word “ black ’’, after the name, to “‘ back’’. 5. As I have discussed elsewhere (Klauber, 1936: 194), although Hallowell thought that Le Conte’s cinereous was the same as the rattlesnake that he (Hallowell) was describing as C. lecontei, actually it was a quite different snake. For the description and the type locality, the Colorado [Desert], leave no question but that the descrip- tion covers the western diamond rattlesnake Crotalus atrox Baird and Girard, 1853 (: 5). 6. It seems to me that, although Hallowell had no such intention, his inclusion of Le Conte’s manuscript name and description con- stitutes a valid description under Opinion 4 of the Commission, as further discussed in vol. 1, part 13, pp. 103—114, of the Opinions and Declarations, 1944 ; and that the name Crotalus cinereous Le Conte in Hallowell, 1852, anticipates Crotalus atrox Baird and Girard, 1853. Gloyd (1940 : 205) has taken a contrary view, primarily because of the inclusion of the dash and the lack of italics in the first publication of Le Conte’s manuscript description. 7. Although I sought to establish Crotalus cinereous as the proper name of the western diamond rattlesnake in 1936, at a time when no official means were available for the conservation of trivial names, I am quite willing to withdraw from that position, now that a procedure for such conservation has been duly established. Therefore I suggest * In a young specimen brought by Dr. Woodhouse these four black rings are very distinct. 220 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS that this question be finally settled by stabilising the long-established and currently utilised name atrox Baird & Girard for this species. It is important that this be done, since the name atrox is employed not only by systematists, but likewise also extensively by the medical profession, for the western diamond rattlesnake in the United States. The concrete proposals now submitted are that the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature should :— (1) use its Plenary Powers to suppress the trivial name cinereous Le Conte in Hallowell, 1852, as published in the binominal combination Crotalus cinereous, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy ; (2) place the trivial name atrox Baird & Girard, 1853, as published in the binominal combination Crotalus atrox, on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology ; (3) place the trivial name cinereous Le Conte in Hallowell, 1852, as published in the binominal combination Crotalus cinereous, as proposed, in (1) above, to be suppressed under the Plenary Powers, on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Trivial Names in Zoology. References Baird, Spencer F. and Girard, Charles, 1853. Catalogue of North American Reptiles in the Museum of the Smithsonian Institution. Part 1.—Serpents, pp. xvi + 172. Do Amaral, Afranio, 1929. On Crotalus confluentus Say, 1823, and its Allied Forms. Bull. Antivenin Inst. Amer., 2(4) : 86—97. Gloyd, Howard K., 1940. The Rattlesnakes, Genera Sistrurus and Crotalus. Chicago Acad. Sci., Spec. Publ. 4 : pp. vi + 270. Hallowell, Edward, 1852. Descriptions of New Species of Reptiles Inhabiting North America. Proc. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad., 4(5) : 177—182. ——, 1854. Reptiles : in “‘ Report of an Expedition down the Zuni and Colorado Rivers’’ by Captain L. Sitgreaves. Washington, pp. 106— By. Klauber, Laurence M., 1936. A Key to the Rattlesnakes with Sum- mary of Characteristics. Trans. San Diego Soc. nat. Hist., 8(20) : 185—276. OPINION 365 221 Il—THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt of Dr. Klauber’s application, the question of the use of the Plenary Powers for the purpose of preserving the specific name atrox Baird & Girard, 1853, as published in the combination Crotalus atrox, to be the name for the Western Diamond Rattle- snake was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 523. 3. Support received prior to the publication of the present application : In the period between the receipt of the present application and its publication in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature support for the action under the Plenary Powers proposed was received from the following specialists and groups of specialists :—(1) Dr. C. B. Perkins (Zoological Society of San Diego, Balboa Park, San Diego, California, U.S.A); (2) Dr. Edward H. Taylor (University of Kansas, Department of Zoology, Lawrence, Kansas, U.S.A.); (3) Professor Hobart M. Smith (University of Illinois, Department of Zoology, Urbana, Illinois, U.S.A.) ; (4) Dr. Karl P. Schmidt, Dr. D. Dwight Davis and Dr. Clifford H. Pope (Chicago Natural History Museum, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.); (5) Dr. Charles M. Bogert (The American Museum of Natural History, New York); (6) Dr. Howard K. Gloyd (The Chicago Academy of Sciences, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.). The communications received from these specialists are reproduced in the immediately following paragraphs. 4. Support received from Dr. C. B. Perkins (Zoological Society of San Diego, Balboa Park, San Diego, California, U.S.A.) : On 9th April 1952 Dr. C. B. Perkins (Zoological Society of San Diego, California, U.S.A.) addressed the following letter to the Commission in support of the present application (Perkins, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 8 : 156) :— I think L. M. Klauber is correct in his contention that Crotalus cinereous antedates Crotalus atrox and also that Crotalus multimacu- latus is the correct name for the snake now known as Crotalus poly- Stictus. 222 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS However, Crotalus atrox and Crotalus polystictus have been used for many years. Changing the names would cause confusion. There- fore, I believe the Commission should place Crotalus atrox ,and Crotalus polystictus on the Official List and place Crotalus cinereous and Crotalus multimaculatus on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Names. 5. Support received from Dr. Edward H. Taylor (University of Kansas, Department of Zoology, Lawrence, Kansas, U.S.A.) : On 16th April 1952 Dr. Edward H. Taylor (University of Kansas, Department of Zoology, Lawrence, Kansas, U.S.A.) intimated as follows his support for the present application (Taylor, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 9 : 156) :— I heartily concur in Dr. Klauber’s proposals. These are the names that Dr. Hobart M. Smith and Taylor used in their work “‘An Anno- tated Checklist and Key to the Snakes of Mexico ”’. I heartily trust that the Commission will accept the proposals. 6. Support received from Professor Hobart M. Smith (University of Illinois, Department of Zoology, Urbana, Illinois, U.S.A.): On 28th April 1952 Professor Hobart M. Smith (University of Illinois, Department of Zoology, Urbana, Illinois, U.S.A.) addressed the following letter to the Commission in support of the present application (Smith, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 256) :— It does not appear to me that Crotalus cinereous Le Conte, 1852, is an available name, but that upon careful consideration other conclusion is possible has been well demonstrated. In such controversial matters a complete analysis of the various interpretations involved is not needed nearly as much as a simple establishment by the Commission of the proper name. In this case there can be no question that conservation of atrox would best serve nomenclatorial stability. There is less reason for uncertainty regarding availability of multi- maculata, which clearly, in the interest of stability should be suppressed at the same time that polystictus is placed on the Official List. Both the recommendations suggested by Dr. Klauber have much merit in eliminating possible causes for confusion, and commendable also is his prompt adoption of the long-needed procedure for conserving long-recognized names which by strict application of the rules would be OPINION 365 223 changed. This is certainly one of the most important advances of nomenclatorial procedure in a good many years. We can now anti- cipate a real decrease in the alarming rate of name changes. 7. Support received from Dr. Karl P. Schmidt, Dr. D. Dwight Davis and Dr. Clifford H. Pope (Chicago Natural History Museum, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.) : On 29th April 1952 Dr. Karl P. Schmidt, Dr. D. Dwight Davis and Dr. Clifford H. Pope (Chicago Natural History Museum, Illinois, U.S.A.) intimated as follows their support for the present application (Schmidt, Davis & Pope, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 256) :— We wish to support the application of Dr. L. M. Klauber regarding the name Crotalus atrox versus Crotalus cinereous and Crotalus polystictus as against Crotalus multimaculatus. 8. Support received from Dr. Charles M. Bogert (The American Museum of Natural History, New York) : On 6th May 1952 Dr. Charles M. Bogert (The American Museum of Natural History, New York) addressed the following letter to the Commission in support of the present application (Bogert, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 360) :— I am writing to advise you that I am heartily in accord with Dr. L. M. Klauber’s suggestion that the names Crotalus atrox Baird & Girard, 1853, and Crotalus polystictus (Cope, 1865) be placed on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology, and that the names Crotalus cinereous Le Conte in Hallowell, 1852, and Crotalus multimaculatus Jan, 1853, be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Trivial Names. It is eminently preferable to continue using the names Crotalus atrox and Crotalus polystictus, both of which have been long and widely used in preference to those that, in accordance with Dr. Klauber’s recommendations, should be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Names. 9. Support received from Dr. Howard K. Gloyd (The Chicago Academy of Sciences, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.) : On 29th May 1952 Dr. Howard K. Gloyd (The Chicago Academy of Sciences, 224 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.) notified the Commission as follows of his support for the present application (Gloyd, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 9 : 155) :— I am writing to express my opinion on the following two cases of nomenclature of rattlesnakes submitted to the Commission by Dr. L. M. Klauber :-— (1) Crotalus cinereous Le Conte in Hallowell, 1852, versus Crotalus atrox Baird & Girard, 1853; and (2) Crotalus multimaculatus Jan, 1863, versus Crotalus polystictus (Cope, 1865). In regard to the first, I still hold the opinion expressed in my paper of 1940 on the rattlesnakes (Chicago Acad. Sci., Special Publ. 4 : 205, footnote). I do not think the first publication of the “name” cinereous was intended as a specific name, but rather as a descriptive adjective. In addition to this, the dropping of atrox Baird & Girard after nearly a hundred years of unquestioned application should be avoided, if possible. I have not personally studied the question of multimaculatus versus polystictus, but I have read Dr. Klauber’s discussion of the case with care and am quite content to accept his recommendations. 10. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 13th May 1952 and was published in Part 8 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature on 23rd July of the same year (Klauber, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 234—236). 11. Issue of Public Notices : In accordance with the revised procedure prescribed by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 51—56), Public Notice of the possible use by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature of its Plenary Powers in the present case was given on 23rd July 1952 (a) in Part 8 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Dr. Klauber’s application was published) and (5) to the other pre- scribed serial publications. In addition, Public Notice was given also to certain general zoological serial publications. OPINION 365 225 _ 12. Comments received in response to the issue of the prescribed Public Notices : The publication of the Public Notices specified in paragraph 11 above elicited three further comments supporting the present application. These were received from the following specialists :—(1) Mr. Roger Conant (Philadelphia Zoological Garden, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.) ; (2) Dr. Richard A. Edgren (Division of Biological Research, Searle & Co., Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.); (3) Dr. Jay M. Savage (Stanford University, Natural History Museum, Stanford, California, U.S.A.). The communications so received are reproduced in the immedi- ately following paragraphs. No objection to the action proposed was received from any source. 13. Support received from Mr. Roger Conant (Philadelphia Zoological Garden, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.) : On 18th November 1952, Mr. Roger Conant (Philadelphia Zoological Garden, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.) addressed to the Commission a letter dealing, inter alia, with the present application, for which he intimated his support as follows :— I am in favor of the conservation of the name Crotalus atrox as against Crotalus cinereous and Crotalus polystictus as against Crotalus multimaculatus, as suggested by Dr. L. M. Klauber. 14. Support received from Dr. Richard A. Edgren (Division of Biological Research, Searle & Co., Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.) : On 24th November 1952 Dr. Richard A. Edgren (Division of Bio- logical Research, Searle & Co., Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.) addressed a letter to the Commission in support of the present and other applications. The following extract is that which deals with the present case :— I am in favor of the validation of Crotalus atrox Baird and Girard, 1852. 15. Support received from Dr. Jay M. Savage (Stanford Uni- versity, Natural History Museum, Stanford, California, U.S.A.) : On 28th November, 1952, Dr. Jay M. Savage (Stanford University, Natural History Museum, Stanford, California, U.S.A.) addressed 226 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS to the Commission a letter commenting upon a number of current cases and, as regards the present application, intimating his support as follows :— There is no question that the best interest of all concerned lies in the continued usage of Crotalus atrox. 16. Bearing on the present application of the decision regarding the status of names published in synonymies taken by the Four- teenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953 : On 10th March 1954 Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, placed the following Minute on the Commission’s File Z.N.(S.) 523 :— On the bearing on Dr. L. M. Klauber’s application regarding the specific name for the Western Diamond Rattlesnake of the decision as to the status of names published in synonymies taken by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953 MINUTE by FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E., Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature In discussing the specific name cinereous Le Conte, 1852, as published in the combination Crotalus cinereous—the suppression of which is the object of the present application—Dr. L. M. Klauber considered (in paragraph 6) the question whether this name must be regarded as an available name, notwithstanding the fact that at the time when it was published it was a manuscript name and that the author by whom it was published (Hallowell) sank it as a synonym. Dr. Klauber concluded—perfectly correctly at the time when he wrote the present application—that the decision taken by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948, when incorporating into the Régles the Ruling given in Opinion 4 did, in fact, confer the status of avail- ability upon the specific name cinereous Le Conte, as published in the combination Crotalus cinereous, by Hallowell in 1852. 2. Since the submission of Dr. Klauber’s application the question of principle embodied in Opinion 4 has been further considered by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, which reversed the greater part of the decision by the Paris Congress, thus depriving many names published in synonymies of the status of availability. This decision however applied only to names published OPINION 365 227 in synonymies “* without independent descriptions ’’ (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 63—64, Decision 115). In the present case the manuscript name cinereous Le Conte was published and rejected by Hallowell, but, as he supplied for the taxon so named the brief “indication ’’ written by Le Conte (and quoted by Dr. Klauber in paragraph 3 of his application), the name cinereous Le Conte in Hallowell retains under the Copenhagen decision the status of avail- ability which it previously possessed under the decision of the Paris Congress. 3. The application in the present case is thus in no way affected by the decision of the Copenhagen Congress and may therefore go forward to the Commission for immediate vote. IIl.—THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 17. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(54)33 : On 17th March 1954, a Voting Paper (V.P.(54)33) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “the proposal relating to the name atrox Baird & Girard, 1853, as published in the combination Crotalus atrox, as set out in paragraph 7 on page 235 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature ” [i.e. in paragraph 7 of the application reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion]. 18. The Prescribed Voting Period for Voting Paper V.P.(54)33 : As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three- Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 17th June 1954. 228 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 19. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)33 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)33 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following nineteen (19) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Riley ; Holthuis ; Vokes ; Hering ; Bonnet ; Boschma ; Lemche; Dymond; do Amaral; Sylvester-Bradley ; Esaki; Mertens; Bradley (J.C.); Hanko; Pearson ; Stoll; Hemming; Jaczewski; Cabrera ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) Voting Papers not returned : None. 20. Declaration of Result of Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)33 : On 18th June 1954, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(54)33, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 19 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. OPINION 365 229 21. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 25th Febuary 1955, Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)33. 22. Original References : The following are the original refer- ences for the names placed on Official Lists and Official Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— atrox, Crotalus, Baird & Girard, 1853, Cat. N. Amer. Rept. Mus. Smithson. Inst. 1 (Serpents) : 5 cinereous, Crotalus, Le Conte, 1852, in Hallowell, 1852, Proc. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad. 5(5) : 177 23. Family-group-name aspect: As the present Opinion is concerned only with certain specific names, no problem in relation to family-group names arises for consideration. 24. At the time of the submission of the application dealt with in the present Opinion, the expression prescribed for the second portion of the binomen which constitutes the scientific name of a species was the expression “trivial name” and the Official List reserved for recording such names was styled the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology, the word “ trivial ”’ appearing also in the title of the Official Index reserved for record- ing rejected and invalid names of this category. Under a decision taken by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, the expression “specific name’ was sub- stituted for the expression “trivial name” and corresponding changes were made in the titles of the Official List and Official Index of such names (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 21). The changes in terminology so adopted have been incor- porated in the Ruling given in the present Opinion. 25. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is accordingly 230 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS hereby rendered in the name of the said International Commission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 26. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Sixty-Five (365) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twenty-Fifth day of February, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Five. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING nn Ee Printed in England by MercaLFe & Cooper LimiTED, 10-24 Scrutton St., London E C 2 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, c.M.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission / 24 VOLUME 11. Part 16. Pp. 231—244 OPINION 366 Suppression, under the Plenary Powers, of the specific name multimaculata Jan, 1863, as published in the combination Crotalus lugubris var. multimaculata, for the purpose of rendering the specific name polysticta Cope, 1865, as published in the combination Caudisona polysticta, the oldest available name for the Mexican Lance-Headed Rattlesnake (Class Reptilia, Order Squamata) LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1955 Price Seven Shillings (All rights reserved) Issued 16th November, 1955 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 366 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts., England) President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President : Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. BoscuMa (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (Ast January 1947) } Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) Dr. Joseph PEARSON (Tasmanian Museum, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia) (27th July 1948) Dr. Henning LemcueE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948) Professor Teiso Esaki (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (A7th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mr. Norman Denbigh Ritey (British Museum (Natural History) London) (9th June 1950) Professor Tadeusz JAczEwsk1 (institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950) Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a.M., Germany) (Sth July 1950) Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (5th July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio. do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice- President) Professor J. R. DyMOND (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 1953) Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (42th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. Vokes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) _ Professor Béla HANKO (Mezogazdasagi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. STOLL (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) Dr. L. B. Hoxtuuts (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (12th August 1953) OPINION 366 SUPPRESSION, UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS, OF THE SPECIFIC NAME ‘*‘ MULTIMACULATA ” JAN, 1863, AS PUBLISHED IN THE COMBINATION ‘* CROTALUS LUGUBRIS VAR. MULTIMACULATA ”,, FOR THE PURPOSE OF RENDERING THE SPECIFIC NAME ‘* POLYSTICTA ”’ COPE, 1865, AS PUBLISHED IN THE COMBINATION ‘*“CAUDISONA POLYSTICTA”’, THE OLDEST AVAILABLE NAME FOR THE MEXICAN LANCE- HEADED RATTLESNAKE (CLASS REPTILIA, ORDER SQUAMATA) RULING :—(1) Under the Plenary Powers the name multimaculata Jan, 1863, as published in the combination Crotalus lugubris var. multimaculata, is hereby suppressed for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy. (2) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 506 and 507 respectively :— (a) polysticta Cope, 1865, as published in the combina- tion Caudisona polysticta ; (b) triseriatus Wagler, 1830, as published in the com- bination Uropsophus triseriatus. (3) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology with the Name No. 130 :— multimaculata Jan, 1863, as published in the combination Crotalus lugubris var. multimaculata and as suppressed under the Plenary Powers under (1) above. DEC 13 195: 234 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS I. THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 9th April 1951, Dr. Laurence M. Klauber (San Diego, California, U.S.A.) submitted to the Commission the following application for the suppression under the Plenary Powers of the name multimaculata Jan, 1863, as published in the combination Crotalus lugubris var. multimaculata, for the purpose of pre- serving the name polysticta Cope, 1865, as published in the combination Caudisona polysticta, as the name for the Mexican Lance-Headed Rattlesnake :— Proposed use of the Plenary Powers to preserve the trivial name ‘* polysticta ’ Cope, 1865 (as published in the combination ‘* Caudisona polysticta’’) for the Mexican Lance-Headed Rattlesnake, by suppressing the trivial name ‘‘ multi- maculata’ Jan, 1863 (as published in the com- bination ‘‘ Crotalus lugubris var. multimaculata ’’) (Class Reptilia, Order Squamata) By LAURENCE M. KLAUBER (San Diego, California, U.S.A.) The purpose of the present application is to ask the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature to use its Plenary Powers to suppress the trivial name multimaculata Jan, 1863, as published in the combination Crotalus lugubris var. multimaculata (Class Reptilia, Order Squamata), thereby preserving the trivial name polysticta Cope, 1865, as published in the combination Caudisona polysticta, the name now and for many years universally employed (in the combination Crotalus polystictus) for the Mexican lance-headed rattlesnake. The details of this case are set out in the following paragraphs. 2. In 1865, Cope (: 191) described the Mexican lance-headed rattlesnake as Caudisona polysticta, and this name has been almost universally applied (in the combination Crotalus polystictus) to this snake ever since. Indeed, there has since been only a single synonym allocated to this species, this being Crotalus jimenezii Duges, 1877 (: 23). Yet without doubt, under a strict interpretation of the Rules, the proper name for this snake is Crotalus multimaculatus Jan, 1863. 3. In 1859, Jan (pp. 153, 156: or, in separate form, pp. 28, 30, 31) described Crotalus lugubris based on four syntypes, two of which were in the Milan collection, one in the Westphal-Castelnau collection, and one in the Natural History Museum in Paris. Jan’s nominal species Crotalus lugubris was a composite. The two Milan specimens belonged OPINION 366 235 to the species now known as Crotalus triseriatus Wagler, 1830 (: 176), and the Paris specimen probably did likewise. But the Westphal- Castelnau specimen belonged to the same species as Cope’s Crotalus polystictus, as can be readily determined from a figure of this specimen that appeared later (1874, Jan and Sordelli 46 : pl. III, fig. 3). 4. In 1940 in an endeavour to protect Cope’s name polystictus from becoming a junior synonym of the older name /Jugubris of Jan, I selected one of the Milan specimens as the lectotype of Jugubris, thus placing the latter in the synonymy of triseriatus Wagler, 1830 (Klauber : 17). In 1939 I corresponded with Dr. Guiseppe Scortecci of the Museo Civico de Storia Naturale of Milan, from whom I ascertained that Jan’s two specimens were still available (they were subsequently destroyed in the war), and I then secured photographs of the better preserved of the two, this being the specimen numbered “‘ Milan 1414”’. From these pictures it was possible to determine that this specimen was conspecific with Crotalus triseriatus Wagler, as the latter nominal species has been interpreted during the past 100 years or more. Thus, by making the specimen ‘“‘ Milan 1414” the lectotype of Crotalus lugubris Jan, 1859, this name was eliminated as a possible antecedent of polystictus Cope, 1865. 5. In 1863, Jan (: 124) published the trivial name multimaculata for a variety [subspecies] of Crotalus lugubris. I have previously stated (1940 : 17) that this was a nomen nudum, but I now believe this to have been an error ; for Jan, although supplying no description of multi- maculata in his 1863 publication, lists the Westphal specimen as the type specimen of multimaculata and this is certainly an “‘ indication ”’ under Art. 25a (see also 1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4: 149). The ** indication ”’ is, of course, to the description of the Westphal specimen that appeared in 1859 (p. 157, or p. 32 of the separate), which description, giving dimensions and some scale counts, was as complete as many of the old snake descriptions that are deemed valid today. Thus, in summary, we have a name applied to a specimen previously described, all of which appeared in print prior to the advent of the trivial name polysticta, Cope, 1865. 6. Hence I believe that, under a strict application of the Rules, the correct name for the Mexican lance-headed rattlesnake is Crotalus multimaculatus (Jan, 1863), of which the name Crotalus polystictus (Cope, 1865) becomes a junior subjective synonym. The displacement in this way of the trivial name polystictus would be highly undesirable, as that name has been used consistently and almost universally for this snake for many years, while the name multimaculatus Jan is virtually unknown in the literature. Therefore I believe that this is a case where the Commission should use its Plenary Powers for the purpose of preventing the confusion which would follow the strict application of the Rules, now that it has been given extended powers for the protection of trivial names in common use. 236 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 7. The concrete proposals which are therefore now submitted are that the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature should :— (1) use its Plenary Powers to suppress, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy, the trivial name multimaculata Jan, 1863, as published in the combination Crotalus lugubris var. multimaculata ; (2) place the under-mentioned trivial names on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology :— (a) polysticta Cope, 1865, as published in the binominal combination Caudisona polysticta ; (b) triseriatus Wagler, 1830, as published in the binominal combination Uropsophus triseriatus ; (3) place the trivial name multimaculata Jan, 1863, as published in the combination Crotalus lugubris var. multimaculata, as pro- posed, under (1) above, to be suppressed under the Plenary Powers, on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Trivial Names in Zoology. References Cope, Edward D., 1865. Third Contribution to the Herpetology of Tropical America. Proc. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad. 17 : 185—198. Dugés, Alfredo, 1877. Apuntes para la Monografia de los Crotalos de México. La Naturaleza 4 : 1\—29. Jan, Georg, 1859. Plan d’une Iconographie descriptive des Ophidiens. Revue et Magasin de Zoologie (2) 10 [part 4] : 148—157. ——. Prodrome d’une Inconographie descriptive des Ophidiens. Paris, pp. 1—32 [a modified separate of the above ; see H. M. Smith (1943, Trans. Kansas Acad. Sci. 46 : 241—242)]. ——., 1863. Elenco Sistematico degli Ofidi. Milano, pp. 1—143. Jan, Georg, and Sordelli, Ferdinand, 1860—81. Jconographie générale des Ophidiens. Milan and Paris, text pp. 1—100, and atlas of 3 volumes. Klauber, Laurence M., 1940. Notes from a Herpetological Diary, II. Copeia 1940 (1) : 15—18. Wagler, Johann G., 1830. Natiirliches System der Amphibien Miinchen, Stuttgart und Tiibingen, pp. 1—354. OPINION 366 | 237 Il. THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt of Dr. Klauber’s application, the question of the use of the Plenary Powers for the purpose of preserving the specific name polysticta Cope, 1865, as published in the combination Caudisona poly- sticta, to be the name for the Mexican Lance-Headed Rattlesnake, was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 524. 3. Support received prior to the publication of the present application : In the period between the receipt of the present application and its publication in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature support for the action under the Plenary Powers proposed was received from the following specialists and groups of specialists :—(1) Dr. C. B. Perkins (Zoological Society of San Diego, Balboa Park, San Diego, California, U.S.A.) ; (2) Dr. Edward H. Taylor (University of Kansas, Department of Zoology, Lawrence, Kansas, U.S.A.) ; (3) Professor Hobart M. Smith (Uni- versity of Illinois, Department of Zoology, Urbana, Illinois, U.S.A.) ; (4) Dr. Karl P. Schmidt, Dr. D. Dwight Davis, and Dr. Clifford H. Pope (Chicago Natural History Museum, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.) ; (5) Dr. Charles M. Bogert (The American Museum of Natural History, New York); (6) Dr. Howard K. Gloyd (The Chicago Academy of Sciences, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.). The communications received from these specialists are reproduced in the immediately following paragraphs. 4. Support received from Dr. C. B. Perkins (Zoological Society of San Diego, Balboa Park, San Diego, California, U.S.A.) : On 9th April 1952, Dr. C. B. Perkins (Zoological Society of San Diego, San Diego, California, U.S.A.) addressed the following letter to the Commission in support of the present application (Perkins, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 9 : 156) :— I think L. M. Klauber is correct in his contention that Crotalus cinereous antedates Crotalus atrox and also that Crotalus multimaculatus is the correct name for the snake now known as Crotalus polystictus. However, Crotalus atrox and Crotalus polystictus have been used for many years. Changing the names would cause confusion. There- fore, I believe the Commission should place Crotalus atrox and Crotalus polystictus on the Official List and place Crotalus cinereous 238 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS and Crotalus multimaculatus on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Names. 5. Support received from Dr. Edward H. Taylor (University of Kansas, Department of Zoology, Lawrence, Kansas, U.S.A.) : On 16th April 1952, Dr. Edward H. Taylor (University of Kansas, Department of Zoology, Lawrence, Kansas, U.S.A.) intimated as follows his support for the present application (Taylor, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 9 : 156) :— I have recently received from Dr. L. M. Klauber two propositions :— (1) The Case Z.N.(S.) 523 of Crotalus cinereous Le Conte in Hallowell, 1852, versus Crotalus atrox Baird and Girard, 1853, and (2) The Case Z.N.(S.) 524 of Crotalus multimaculatus Jan, 1863, versus Crotalus polystictus (Cope), 1865. I heartily concur in Dr. Klauber’s proposals. These are the names that Dr. Hobart M. Smith and Taylor used in their work ““An Anno- tated Checklist and Key to the Snakes of Mexico ”’. I heartily trust that the Commission will accept the proposals. 6. Support received from Professor Hobart M. Smith (University of Illinois, Department of Zoology, Urbana, Illinois, U.S.A.) : On 28th April 1952, Professor Hobart M. Smith (University of Illinois, Department of Zoology, Urbana, Illinois, U.S.A.) addressed the following letter to the Commission in support of the present application (Smith, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 256) :— It does not appear to me that Crotalus cinereous Le Conte, 1852, is an available name, but that upon careful consideration other con- clusion is possible has been well demonstrated. In such controversial matters a complete analysis of the various interpretations involved is not needed nearly as much as a simple establishment by the Com- mission of the proper name. In this case there can be no question that conservation of atrox would best serve nomenclatural stability. There is less reason for uncertainty regarding availability of multi- maculata, which clearly in the interest of stability should be suppressed at the same time that polystictus is placed on the Official List. Both the recommendations suggested by Dr. Klauber have much merit in eliminating possible causes for confusion, and commendable OPINION 366 239 also is his prompt adoption of the long-needed procedure for con- serving long-recognized names which by strict application of the rules would be changed. This is certainly one of the most important advances of nomenclatorial procedure in a good many years. We can now anticipate a real decrease in the alarming rate of name changes. 7. Support received from Dr. Karl P. Schmidt, Dr. D. Dwight Davis, and Dr. Clifford H. Pope (Chicago Natural History Museum, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.) : On 29th April 1952, Dr. Karl P. Schmidt, Dr. D. Dwight Davis, and Dr. Clifford H. Pope (Chicago Natural History Museum, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.) intimated as follows their support for the present application (Schmidt, Davis & Pope, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 256) :— We wish to support the application of Dr. L. M. Klauber regarding the name Crotalus atrox versus Crotalus cinereous and Crotalus polystictus as against Crotalus multimaculatus. 8. Support received from Dr. Charles M. Bogert (The American Museum of Natural History, New York): On 6th May 1952, Dr. Charles M. Bogert (The American Museum of Natural History, New York) addressed the following letter to the Commission in support of the present application (Bogert, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 360) :— I am writing to advise you that I am heartily in accord with Dr. L. M. Klauber’s suggestion that the names Crotalus atrox Baird & Girard, 1853, and Crotalus polystictus (Cope, 1865) be placed on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology, and that the names Crotalus cinereous Le Conte in Hallowell, 1852, and Crotalus multi- maculatus Jan, 1853, be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Trivial Names. It is eminently preferable to continue using the names Crotalus atrox and Crotalus polystictus, both of which have been long and widely used in preference to those that, in accordance with Dr. Klauber’s recommendations, should be placed on the Official Index of rejected and invalid names. 9. Support received from Dr. Howard K. Gloyd (The Chicago Academy of Sciences, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.) : On 29th May 1952, Dr. Howard K. Gloyd (The Chicago Academy of Sciences, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.) notified the Commission as follows of his support for the present application (Gloyd, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 9 : 155) :— 240 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS I am writing to express my opinion on the following two cases of nomenclature of rattlesnakes submitted to the Commission by Dr. L. M. Klauber :— (1) Crotalus cinereous Le Conte in Hallowell, 1852, versus Crotalus atrox Baird & Girard, 1853; and (2) Crotalus multimaculatus Jan, 1863, versus Crotalus polystictus (Cope, 1865). I have not personally studied the question of multimaculatus versus polystictus, but I have read Dr. Klauber’s discussion of the case with care and am quite content to accept his recommendations. 10. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 13th May 1952 and was published in Part 8 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature on 23rd July of that year (Klauber, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 236—238). 11. Issue of Public Notices : In accordance with the revised procedure prescribed by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 51—56), Public Notice of the possible use by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature of its Plenary Powers in the present case was given on 23rd July 1952 (a) in Part 8 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Dr. Klauber’s application was published) and (b) to the other pre- scribed serial publications. In addition, Public Notice was given also to certain general zoological serial publications. 12. Comments received in response to the issue of the prescribed Public Notices : The publication of the Public Notices specified in paragraph 11 above elicited the following further comments on the present application. These were received from the following specialists :—(1) Mr. Roger Conant (Philadelphia Zoological Garden, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.) ; (2) Dr. Richard A. Edgren (Division of Biological Research, Searle & Co., Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.) ; (3) Dr. Jay M. Savage (Stanford University, Natural History Museum, Stanford, California, U.S.A.). The communications so received are reproduced in the immediately following paragraphs. No objection to the action proposed was received from any source. OPINION 366 241 13. Support received from Mr. Roger Conant (Philadelphia Zoological Garden, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.) : On 18th November, 1952 Mr. Roger Conant (Philadelphia Zoological Garden, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.) addressed to the Commission a letter dealing, inter alia, with the present applica- tion, for which he intimated his support as follows :— I am in favor of the conservation of the name Crotalus atrox as against Crotalus cinereous and Crotalus polystictus as against Crotalus multimaculatus, as suggested by Dr. L. M. Klauber, of San Diego, California. 14. Support received from Dr. Richard A. Edgren (Division of Biological Research, Searle & Co., Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.) : On 24th November 1952, Dr. Richard A. Edgren (Division of Biological Research, Searle & Co., Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.) addressed a letter to the Commission in support of the present and other applications. The following extract is that which deals with the present case :— I am in favor of the validation of Crotalus polysticta (Cope, 1865). 15. Support received from Dr. Jay M. Savage (Stanford Uni- versity, Natural History Museum, Stanford, California, U.S.A.) : On 28th November 1952, Dr. Jay M. Savage (Stanford University, Natural History Museum, Stanford, California, U.S.A.) addressed to the Commission a letter commenting upon a number of current cases and, as regards the present application, intimating his support as follows :— Here again I concur with all of Dr. Klauber’s requests regarding the name Crotalus polystictus. I. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 16. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(54)34: On 17th March 1954, a Voting Paper (V.P.(54)34) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “the proposal relating to the name polysticta Cope, 1865, as 242 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS published in the combination Caudisona polysticta, as set out in paragraph 7 on page 238 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoo- logical Nomenclature” [i.e. in paragraph 7 of the application reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion]. 17. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 17th June 1954. 18. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)34 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)34 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following eighteen (18) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Riley ; Holthuis ; Vokes ; Hering ; Bonnet ; Boschma ; Lemche ; Dymond; do Amaral; Sylvester-Bradley ; Esaki; Mertens; Bradley (J.C.); Hank6; Pearson ; Jaczewski ; Stoll ; Hemming ; (b) Negative Votes, one (i): Cabrera ; (c) Voting Papers not returned : None. 19, Declaration of Result of Vote: On 18th June 1954, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(54)34, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in para- graph 18 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Com- mission in the matter aforesaid. “OPINION 366 | © 243 - 20. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 25th February 1955, Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)34. 21. Original References: The following are the original references for the names placed on Official Lists and Official Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— multimaculata, Crotalus lugubris var., Jan, 1863, Elenco sist. Ofidi : 124 polysticta, Caudisona, Cope, 1865, Proc. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad. 7s 191 triseriatus, Uropsophus, Wagler, 1830, Naturl. Syst. Amphib. : 176 22. Family-Group Names aspect: As the present Opinion is concerned only with certain specific names, no problem in relation to family-group names arises in the present case, as it would have done if this Opinion had been concerned also with generic names. 23. At the time of the submission of the application dealt with in the present Opinion, the expression prescribed for the second portion of the binomen which constitutes the scientific name of a species was the expression “trivial name’ and the Official List reserved for recording such names was styled the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology, the word “trivial ”’ appearing also in the title of the Official Index reserved for record- ing rejected and invalid names of this category. Under a decision taken by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, the expression “ specific name ” was substituted for the expression “trivial name’ and corre- sponding changes were made in the titles of the Official List and Official Index of such names (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 21). The changes in terminology so adopted have been incorporated in the Ruling given in the present Opinion. 24. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Commission 244 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 25. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Sixty-Six (366) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twenty-Fifth day of February, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Five. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING Printed in England by MrtcaLFE & Cooper LimiTED, 10-24 Scrutton St., London EC 2_ OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by | FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 17. Pp. 245—254 OPINION 367 Addition to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology of the generic names Joernquistia Reed, 1896 (Class Trilobita) and Tornquistia Paeckelmann, 1930 (Class Brachiopoda) LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1955 Price Five Shillings (All rights reserved) Issued 16th November, 1955 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 367 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts, England) President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President : Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. BoscHMA (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (ist January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) DE oe LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th uly Professor Teiso Esaki (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mr. Norman Denbigh RILEy (British Museum (Natural History), London) (9th June 1950) Professor Tadeusz JACZEwSKI (Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950) Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a.M., Germany) (Sth July 1950) Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt- Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (5th July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice President) Professor J. R. DyMonD (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 1953) Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. VoxEs (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) 2 Professor Béla HANKO (Mezégazdasdgi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. STOLL (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) Dr. L. B. HoLtuuts (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (12th August 1953) Dr. K. H. L. Key (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Canberra, A.C.T., Australia) (15th October 1954) Dr. Alden H. MILLER (Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California, U.S.A.) (29th October 1954) Doc. Dr. Ferdinand PRANTL (Ndrodni Museum v Praze, Prague, Czechoslovakia) (30th October 1954) Professor Dr. Wilhelm KUHNELT (Zoologisches Institut der Universitat, Vienna, Austria) (6th November 1954) Deen F. S. BODENHEIMER (The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel) (41th November Professor Ernst MAYR (Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College, Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A.) (4th December 1954) Professor Enrico TorTONESE (Istituto e Museo di Zoologia della Universita di Torino, Torino, Italy) (16th December 1954) OPINION 367 ADDITION TO THE “OFFICIAL LIST OF GENERIC NAMES IN ZOOLOGY ” OF THE GENERIC NAMES “TOERNQUISTIA ” REED, 1896 (CLASS TRILOBITA) AND “ TORNQUISTIA” PAECKELMANN, 1930 (CLASS BRACHIOPODA) - RULING :—(1) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 887 and 888 respectively :— (a) Toernquistia (published as Térnquistia) Reed, 1896 (gender : feminine) (type species, by monotypy : Cyphaspis (Toernquistia) nicholsoni Reed, 1896) (Class Trilobita) (b) Tornquistia Paeckelmann, 1930 (gender: feminine) (type species, by original designation : Leptaena (Chonetes) polita M°Coy, 1852) (Class Brachio- poda). (2) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 508 and 509 respectively :— (a) nicholsoni Reed, 1896, as published in the combina- tion Cyphaspis (T érnquistia) nicholsoni (specific name of type species of Toernquistia (correction of Térnquistia Reed, 1896) ; (b) polita M°Coy, 1852, as published in the combination Leptaena (Chonetes) polita (specific name of type species of Tornquistia Paeckelmann, 1930). (3) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with the Name No. 305 :—Paeckel- mannia Licharew (B.K.), 1934 (a junior objective synonym of Tornquistia Paeckelmann, 1930). 248 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS I.—THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 7th January 1955, Mr. Francis Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, sub- mitted to the Commission the following application relating to the generic names Toernquistia (published as Térnquistia) Reed, 1896 (Class Trilobita) and Tornquistia Paeckelmann, 1930 (Class Brachiopoda) for the purpose of securing the settlement of such of the questions relating to these names raised in an application regarding the relative status to be accorded to names differing from one another in spelling only by the presence, or absence, of diacritic marks over one or more of the letters in the word of which the names in question are composed, submitted by Dr. Helen Muir-Wood (British Museum (Natural History), London) as remained outstanding after the decision taken by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, on the question of principle involved :— Proposed addition to the ‘‘ Official List of Generic Names in Zoology ”’ of the generic names ‘‘ Toernquistia ’’ Reed, 1896 (Class Trilo- bita) and ‘‘ Tornquistia ’’ Paeckelmann, 1930 (Class Brachiopoda) By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E., Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature The purpose of the present application is to seek a decision from the Commission in regard to the names Térnquistia Reed (F.R.C.), 1896 (Class Trilobita) and Tornquistia Paeckelmann, 1930 (Class Brachiopoda) which formed the subject of an application by Dr. Helen Muir-Wood (British Museum (Natural History), London) (1951, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 92—94), on which it was impossible for the Com- mission to reach a decision at that time owing to uncertainties regarding the issue of principle involved. That question has now been settled by a decision taken by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, and in consequence it is possible for the Commission to reach a decision on the more limited aspect of the question submitted by Dr. Muir-Wood. 2. The facts of this case are as follows :—(1) In the Class Trilobita there exists a nominal genus Térnquistia Reed, 1896 (Quart. J. geol. Soc. Lond. 52 : 433) and in the Class Brachiopoda a nominal genus’ Tornquistia Paeckelmann, 1930 (Abh. preuss. geol. Landesanst. (n.s.) 122 : 218, 277). (2) Reed’s trilobite genus was dedicated to the Swedish palaeontologist S. L. Térnquist ; Paeckelmann’s brachiopod OPINION 367 249 genus to the German palaeontologist A. J. H. Tornquist. (3) The type species of Térnquistia Reed, which was established as a subgenus of Cyphaspis, is Cyphaspis (Térnquistia) nicholsoni Reed, 1896 (ibid. 52 : 433) by monotypy, and the type species of Tornquistia Paeckelmann is Leptaena (Chonetes) polita MCCoy, 1852 (Ann. Mag. nat. Hist.(2) 10 : 421) also by original designation. (4) The question submitted by Dr. Muir-Wood was whether the presence, in the case of the name of Reed’s genus (76rnquistia), and the absence, in the case of that of Paeckelmann’s genus (Tornquistia) of a diacritic mark (an umlaut) over the letter “‘ o ”’ was sufficient to prevent these names from becoming homonyms of one another for the purposes of Article 34. 3. Two decisions affecting the present case were taken by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953. The first of these was concerned with the treatment to be accorded to zoological names which, when first published, contained one or more letters bearing a diacritic mark or diacritic marks. The second, which was governed by the first, was concerned with the question expressly submitted by Dr. Muir-Wocd. 4. On the question of the orthography of zoological names which, when first published, contained a letter bearing a diacritic mark, the Congress in the course of a thorough revision of Article 20, inserted in the Régles a provision that in future diacritic marks were not to be used in the orthography of zoological names and that, where such a mark was employed when a name was first published, it was in future to be indicated by a combination of letters to be prescribed in a Schedule to be annexed to the revised text of the Rég/es, the preparation of this Schedule being entrusted to the International Commission (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 57—-58, Decision 101). The accepted method of indicating an umlaut by letters in place of the use of a diacritic mark is by the insertion of the letter “‘e”’ after the vowel which previously had borne the diacritic mark. Accordingly, under the foregoing decision the correct—and the only correct—way of writing the generic name published as T6rnquistia is Toernquistia. 5, When the Congress came to consider Article 34 (the Article relating to generic homonymy) it referred back to the decision relating to the orthography of names containing letters bearing diacritic marks referred to in paragraph 4 above and decided to insert in the Régles a provision that, where a generic name (or within a single genus a specific name) was at the time of its first publication identical with some other generic name (or, as the case may be, some other specific name), except for the presence, in the one case, and the absence, in the other, of a diacritic mark (neither) the two generic names (nor the two specific names) are to be treated as homonyms of one another, since the combination of letters which is to be substituted for the letter bearing a diacritic mark in one of the two names concerned will create a difference in spelling sufficient to exclude the names concerned from the scope of the Law of Homonymy (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. DEC 13 1955 250 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Nomencl. : 79—80, Decision 155). Under the foregoing decision the generic names Toernquistia (published as Térnquistia) Reed, 1896, and Tornquistia Paeckelmann, 1930, are not be treated as homonyms of one another. 6. The ground has thus been cleared for the Commission to bring to a close the case submitted by Dr. Muir-Wood by placing the names involved on the appropriate Official Lists and Official Indexes. For the information required for preparing the proposals now submitted I am indebted, so far as the Brachiopod name Tornquistia Paeckelmann is concerned, to Dr. Muir-Wood and, so far as the Trilobite name Toernquistia Reed is concerned, to Dr. C. J. Stubblefield (Geological Survey and Museum, London). 7. The recommendations now submitted are that the International Commission should :— (1) place the under-mentioned generic names on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology :— (a) Toernquistia (published as Térnquistia) Reed, 1896 (gender : feminine) (type species, by monotypy: Cyphaspis (Toernquistia) nicholsoni Reed, 1896) (Class Trilobita) ; (b) Tornquistia Paeckelmann, 1930 (gender: feminine) (type species, by original designation : Leptaena (Chonetes) polita McCoy, 1852) ; (2) place the under-mentioned specific names on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology :— (a) nicholsoni Reed, 1896, as published in the combination Cyphaspis (Toernquistia) nicholsoni (specific name of type species of Toernquistia Reed, 1896) ; (b) polita MCCoy, 1852, as published in the combination Leptaena (Chonetes) polita (specific name of type species of Tornquistia Paeckelmann, 1930) ; (3) place the under-mentioned generic name on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology :—Paeckel- mannia Licharew (B.K.), 1934 (in Zittel, Grundztige der Paldonto- logie (Russian Ed.), Leningrad-Moscow 1 (Invertebr.) : 509, footnote) (a name published as a substitute for Tornquistia Paeckelmann, 1930, now ruled to be an available name). 2. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt of Mr. Hemming’s application, the question of the action needed to eA OPINION 367 Dey dispose of the matters still outstanding on Dr. Helen Muit-Wood’s Application Z.N.(S.) 538 (a File which had been closed after the question of principle relating to differences in the spelling of names owing to the presence, or absence, of diacritic marks, raised therein had been settled by the Copenhagen Congress in 1953) was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 820. 3. Report on the present application submitted to the Com- mission : On 22nd January 1955, Mr. Hemming prepared for the consideration of the Commission the following brief Report on the present case, to which his application was attached as an Annexe :— I submit herewith for the consideration of the Commission a short note in regard to the above names which contains proposals for the consequential action in regard thereto following the decision on the question of principle involved taken by the Copenhagen (1953) Con- gress. This case, as the Commission will note, was published in the Bulletin as long ago as 1951 and it is desirable that it should now be disposed of with as little further delay as possible. 2. The action now proposed is supported by Dr. Helen Muir-Wood (British Museum (Natural History), London) (the original applicant in this case) and by Dr. C. J. Stubblefield, F.R.S., the authority on trilobites. 1I—THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 4. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(55)1 : On 26th January 1955, a Voting Paper (V.P.)(O.M.)(55)1) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “the proposal in relation to the generic names Toernquistia Reed, 1896, and Tornquistia Paeckelmann, 1930, specified in paragraph 7 of the Annexe [1.c. in the paragraph so numbered in the application reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion] to the paper by the Secretary numbered. Z.N.(S.) 820 submitted simultaneously with the present Voting Paper ”’ [i.e. the paper reproduced in paragraph 3 of the present Opinion]. Zo OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 5. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the One-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 26th February 1955. 6. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(55)1 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(55)1 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following nineteen (19) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Sylvester-Bradley ; Lemche ; Boschma ; Riley ; Hering ; Vokes ; Mayr; Kuthnelt ; Bodenheimer ; Key ; Esaki ; Stoll; do Amaral; Hemming; Dymond; Tortonese ; Bradley (J.C.) ; Cabrera ; Bonnet ; (b) Negative Votes : one (1): Miller ; (c) On Leave of Absence : two (2): Holthuis ; Mertens ; (d) Voting Papers not returned : three (3): Hank6! ; Jaczewski? ; Prantl.? 1 A late affirmative vote was returned by Commissioner Hanko on 11th March 1955. 2 A late affirmative vote was returned by Commissioner Jaczewski on 12th April 1955. 3 A late affirmative vote was returned by Commissioner Prantl on 6th April 1955. OPINION 367 253 7. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 27th February 1955, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(55)1, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 6 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. 8. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘* Opinion ”’ : On 28th February 1955, Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Com- mission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(55)1. 9. Original References : The following are the original references for the names placed on Official Lists and Official Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— nicholsoni, Cyphaspis (Tornquistia), Reed, 1896, Quart. J. geol. Soc. Lond. 52 : 433 Paeckelmannia Licharew (B.K.), 1934, in Zittel, Grundziige Paldont. (Russian Ed.), Leningrad-Moscow 1 (Invertebr.) : 509 polita, Leptaena (Chonetes), M©Coy, 1852, Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. (2) 10 : 421 Toernquistia (published as Toérnquistia) Reed, 1896, Quart. J. geol. Soc. Lond. 52 : 433 Tornquistia Paeckelmann, 1930, Abh. preuss. geol. Landesanst. Berl. (n.s.) 122 : 218, 277 10. Family-Group Name aspect: The application dealt with in the present Opinion was published in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature prior to the establishment of the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953. It has not been possible since then to deal with this aspect of the present case. This question is however now being examined on a separate File to which the Registered Number Z.N.(G.) 125 has been allotted. 254 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 11. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Com- mission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 12. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Sixty-Seven (367) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. DONE in London, this Twenty-Eighth day of February, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Five. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING Printed in England by Mrercatre & Coorrer LimiTED, 10-24 Scrutton St., London E C 2 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 18. Pp. 255—264 OPINION 368 Addition to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology of the generic names Jakowleffia Puton, 1875 (Class Insecta, Order Hemiptera) and Yakovlevia Fredericks, 1925 (Class Brachiopoda) LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1955 Price Five Shillings (All rights reserved) _———— ee en Issued 16th November, 1955 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 368 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts, England) President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President : Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. BoscHMA (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (ist January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) BE ee LEeMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th uly Professor Teiso Esaki (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mr. Norman Denbigh RILey (British Museum (Natural History), London) (9th June 1950) Professor Tadeusz JACZEWSKI (Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950) Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a.M., Germany) (Sth July 1950) Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt- Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (Sth July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice President) Professor J. R. DyMonD (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 1953) - Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. Voxes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANK6 (Mezdgazdasdgi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. STOLL (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) Dr. L. B. Hottuuts (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (12th August 1953) Dr. K. H. L. Key (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Canberra, A.C.T., Australia) (15th October 1954) Dr. Alden H. MILLER (Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California, U.S.A.) (29th October 1954) Doc. Dr. Ferdinand PRANTL (Ndrodni Museum v Praze, Prague, Czechoslovakia) (30th October 1954) 7 Professor Dr. Wilhelm KUHNELT (Zoologisches Institut der Universitat, Vienna, Austria) (6th November 1954) eon F. S. BODENHEIMER (The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel) (11th November Professor Ernst MAYR (Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College, Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A.) (4th December 1954) ‘ 3 Professor Enrico ToRTONESE (Istituto e Museo di Zoologie della Universita di Torino, Torino, Italy) (16th December 1954) OPINION 368 ADDITION TO THE ‘OFFICIAL LIST OF GENERIC NAMES IN ZOOLOGY ”? OF THE GENERIC NAMES ** JAKOWLEFFIA”” PUTON, 1875 (CLASS INSECTA, ORDER HEMIPTERA) AND ** YAKOVLEVIA”’ FREDERICKS, 1925 (CLASS BRACHIOPODA) RULING :—(1) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 889 and 890 respectively :— (a) Jakowleffia Puton, 1875 (gender: feminine) (type species, by monotypy: Anomaloptera setulosa Jakovlev, 1874) (Class Insecta, Order Hemiptera) ; (b) Yakovlevia Fredericks, 1925 (gender: feminine) (type species, by monotypy: Yakovlevia kalu- zinensis Fredericks, 1925) (Class Brachiopoda?). (2) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 510 and 511 respectively :— (a) setulosa Jakovlev, 1874, as published in the com- bination Anomaloptera setulosa (specific name of type species of Jakowleffia Puton, 1875) ; (b) kaluzinensis Fredericks, 1925, as published in the combination Yakovlevia kaluzinensis (specific name of type species of Yakovlevia Fredericks, 1925). 1 In returning his Voting Paper on this case Professor H. Boschma indicated that he preferred that this group should be treated as a Phylum rather than asa lass. 258 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (3) The under-mentioned generic name is _ hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with the Name No. 306 :— Yakovlevia Vologdin, 1931 (a junior homonym of Yakovlevia Fredericks, 1925). I—THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 8th January 1955, Mr. Francis Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, sub- mitted to the Commission an application relating to the generic names Jakowleffia Puton, 1875 (Class Insecta, Order Hemiptera) and Yakovlevia Fredericks, 1925 (Class Brachiopoda). The purpose of this application was to secure a settlement of such of the questions relating to these names raised in an application regarding the relative status of names based upon words belonging to languages using alphabets other than the Latin alphabet when those names differ from one another in spelling only by reason of differences in the methods of transliteration adopted, submitted by Dr. Helen Muir-Wood (British Museum (Natural History), London), as remained outstanding after the decision taken by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, on the question of principle involved :— Proposed addition to the ‘‘ Official List of Generic Names in Zoology ”” of the generic names ‘‘ Jakowleffia ’’ Puton, 1875 (Class Insecta, Order Hemiptera) and ‘‘ Yakovlevia ’’ Fredericks, 1925 (Class Brachiopoda) By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E., Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature The purpose of the present application is to ask the International Commission to take a decision on the application regarding the name Yakovlevia Fredericks, 1925 (Class Brachiopoda) submitted by Dr. Helen Muir-Wood (British Museum (Natural History), London) in 1951 on which it was not possible for the Commission to give a Ruling on the expiry of the six-month period following publication (Muir- Wood, 1951, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 90—92) owing to doubts which ——s--~ - OPINION 368 259 then existed in regard to the question of principle involved in this case. The major problem was settled by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, and in this way the ground was cleared for the settlement of the more restricted portion of the problem submitted by Dr. Muir-Wood. 2. The facts of this case are as follows :—(1) The nominal genus Jakowleffia Puton, 1875 (Pet. Nouv. ent. 1 (No. 128) : 512) was established for a genus of the Order Hemiptera (Class Insecta) with Anomaloptera setulosa Jakovlev, 1874 (Bull. Soc. imp. Nat. Moscou 1874 (No. 2) : 261, pl. 10, fig. 5) as type species by monotypy.. (2) In 1925 another nominal genus based upon the same Russian surname was established—this time in the Class Brachiopoda. The method adopted on this occasion for the transliteration of this surname was different, the name appearing as Yakovlevia Fredericks, 1925 (Rec. geol. Comm. Russian Far East 40:7). The type species of the genus so named is Yakovlevia kaluzinensis Fredericks, 1925 (ibid. 40 : 7) by monotypy. (3) In 1931 the same spelling was used for a new genus in the ARCHAEOCYATHINAE. This was the name Yakovlevia Vologdin, 1931 (Archaeocyathinae Siber : 36). This name is invalid as a junior homonym of Yakovlevia Fredericks, 1925. (4) The question of principle raised in Dr. Muir-Wood’s application was whether, having regard to the differences in spelling between the names Jakowleffia Puton and Yakovlevia Fredericks, those names might both be accepted or whether these names should be treated as homonyms of one another, as they were both based upon the same word and the differences in spelling were the result solely of the adoption of different methods of transliterating the word concerned from the Cyrillic, to the Latin, alphabet. 3. Two decisions taken by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, when read together, provide a definite answer to the question of principle involved in this case. These decisions were the following :—(1) The Congress, when reviewing Article 19 (the Article relating to the emendation of names) decided to insert in the revised text of the Régles a provision prescribing, inter alia, that errors of transliteration are not to be accepted as constituting a valid reason for emending a zoological name (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 43, Decision 71(1)(a)(i)). Under this decision neither the spelling Jakowleffia used by Puton in 1875 nor the spelling Yakov- levia used by Fredericks in 1925 is subject to emendation. (2) When considering Article 34 (the Article relating to generic homonymy), the Congress decided to amend this Article so as to provide that ‘a generic name is not to be treated as a homonym of another such name if it differs from it in spelling by even one letter ’’ (1953, Copen- hagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 78, Decision 152). The combined effect of these two decisions is to provide that the names Jakowleffia Puton and Yakovlevia Fredericks are not to be treated as being homonyms of one another. 260 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 4. The ground has thus been cleared for the Commission to bring to a close the case submitted by Dr. Muir-Wood by placing the names involved on the appropriate Official Lists and Official Indexes. For the information needed to formulate the necessary proposals on this subject I am indebted, in the case of the generic name Yakovlevia Fredericks to Dr. Muir-Wood and, in the case of the generic name Jakowleffia Puton, to Dr. W. E. China (British Museum (Natural History), London). To both of these specialists the grateful thanks of the Commission are due for the assistance so given on the questions involved. 5. Dr. Muir-Wood informs me that the generic name Yakovlevia Fredericks and also the specific name kaluzinensis Fredericks as published in combination with the generic name Yakovlevia are both available names, and that each is believed to be the oldest available name for the taxon concerned. Dr. Muir-Wood adds that there is some doubt regarding the affinities of the genus Yakovlevia, which has not been referred to in the literature since 1925. She agrees however that this is a taxonomic matter which does not affect the question of placing the foregoing names on the Official Lists. 6. As regards the generic name Jakowleffia Puton, Dr. China states that this generic name and also the specific name setulosa Jakovlev, as published in the combination Anomaloptera setulosa are both available names and that each is believed to be the oldest available name for the taxon concerned. Dr. China adds that the species Jakowleffia setulosa (Jakovlev, 1874) occurs in South Russia and Turkestan and is still the only species placed in the genus Jakowleffia. 7. The recommendations now submitted are that the International Commission should :— (1) place the under-mentioned generic names on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology :— (a) Jakowleffia Puton, 1875 (gender : feminine) (type species, by monotypy : Anomaloptera setulosa Jakovlev, 1874) (Class Insecta, Order Hemiptera) ; (b) Yakovlevia Fredericks, 1925 (gender: feminine) (type species, by monotypy : Yakovlevia kaluzinensis Freder- icks, 1925) (Class Brachiopoda) ; (2) place the under-mentioned specific names on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology :— (a) setulosa Jakovlev, 1874, as published in the combination Anomaloptera setulosa (specific name of type species of Jakowleffia Puton, 1875) ; OPINION 368 261 (b) kaluzinensis Fredericks, 1925, as published in the combina- tion Yakovlevia kaluzinensis (specific name of type species of Yakovlevia Fredericks, 1925) ; (3) place the undermentioned generic name on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology :—Yakovy- levia Vologdin, 1931 (a junior homonym of Yakovlevia Fredericks, 1925). 2. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt of Mr. Hemming’s application, the question of the action needed to dispose of the matters still outstanding on Dr. Helen Muir- Wood’s Application Z.N.(S.) 530, a File which had been closed after the question of principle relating to the transliteration of words into the Latin alphabet raised therein had been settled by the Copenhagen Congress in 1953, was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 821. 3. Report on the present application submitted to the Com- mission : On 22nd January 1955, Mr. Hemming prepared for the consideration of the Commission the following brief Report on the present case, to which his application was attached as an Annexe :— I submit herewith for the consideration of the Commission a short note in regard to the above names which contains proposals for the consequential action in regard thereto following the decision on the question of principle involved taken by the Copenhagen (1953) Congress. This case, as the Commission will note, was published in the Bulletin as long ago as 1951 and it is desirable that it should now be disposed of with as little further delay as possible. 2. The action now proposed is supported by Dr. Helen Muir-Wood (British Museum (Natural History), London) (the original applicant in this case). Il—THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 4. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(55)3 : On 26th January 1955, a Voting Paper (V.P.(O.M.)(55)3) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or 262 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS against, “‘ the proposal relating to the generic names Jakowleffia Puton, 1875, and Yakovlevia Fredericks, 1925, recommended in paragraph 7 of the Annexe [i.e. in the paragraph so numbered on the application reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion] to the memorandum by the Secretary, numbered Z.N.(S.) 821, submitted simultaneously with the present Voting Paper ”’ [i.e. the memorandum reproduced in paragraph 3 of the present Opinion]. 5. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the One-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 26th February 1955. 6. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(55)3 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(55)3 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following twenty (20) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Sylvester-Bradley ; Lemche ; Boschma ; Riley ; Hering ; Vokes; Mayr; Kiihnelt ; Bodenheimer; Key; Esaki; Stoll; do Amaral; Hemming ; Dymond; Tortonese ; Bradley (J.C.) ; Miller ; Cabrera ; Bonnet ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) On Leave of Absence, two (2) : Holthuis ; Mertens ; (d) Voting Papers not returned, three (3) : Hank6? ; Jaczewski® ; Prantl‘. 2 a ie affirmative vote was returned by Commissioner Hanké on 11th March ‘. © a late affirmative vote was returned by Commissioner Jaczewski on 12th April 555 5 4 A late affirmative vote was returned by Commissioner Prantl on 6th April 1955. OPINION 368 263 7. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 27th February 1955, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(55)3, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 6 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. 8. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 28th February 1955, Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(55)3. 9. Original References : The following are the original refer- ences for the names placed on Official Lists and Official Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— Jakowleffia Puton, 1875, Pet. Nouv. ent. 1 (No. 128) : 512 Kaluzinensis, Yakovlevia, Fredericks, 1925, Rec. geol. Comm. Russian Far East 40 :7 setulosa, Anomaloptera, Jakovlev, 1874, Bull. Soc. imp. Nat. Moscou 1874 (No. 2) : 261, pl. 10, fig. 5 Yakovlevia Fredericks, 1925, Rec. geol. Comm. Russian Far East 40:7 ; Yakovlevia Vologdin, 1931, Archaeocyathinae Siber. : 36 10. Family-Group Name aspect: Dr. Helen Muir-Wood (British Museum (Natural History), London), by whom the case of the name Yakovlevia Fredericks, 1925, was first brought to the notice of the Commission, has reported that no family-group name based upon the foregoing generic name has been published and that the genus Yakovlevia Fredericks is currently referred to the family PRODUCTIDAE. Similarly, Dr. W. E. China (British Museum (Natural History), London) has reported that the generic name Jakowleffia Puton, 1875, the other name placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology by the Ruling given in the present Opinion, has not been taken as the base for any family- group name, and that the genus Jakowleffia Puton is currently 264 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS placed in the family LYGAEIDAE Schilling, 1829, Subfamily OXYCARANINAE Stal, 1872. Accordingly, in the present case no question arises of placing any name on the Official List of Family- Group Names in Zoology. 11. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Commission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 12. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Sixty-Eight (368) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twenty-Eighth day of February, Nine- teen Hundred and Fifty-Five. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING Printed in England by Mretcatre & Cooper LimiTED, 10-24 Scrutton St., London EC2 ~ OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by CO FRANCIS HEMMING, c._.c., CBE. / Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 19. Pp. 265—300 OPINION 369 Suppression under the Plenary Powers of the generic names Tylos Meigen, 1800 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) and Tylos Heyden, 1826 (Class Arachnida) and validation thereby of the generic names Tylos Audouin, [1826] (Class Crustacea, Order Isopoda) and Micropeza Meigen, 1803 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1955 Price Eighteen Shillings (All rights reserved) eee eee _________ Issued 2nd December, 1955 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 369 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts., England) President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President: Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) t Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. BoscHMA (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (Ast January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) Dr. Joseph PEARSON (Tasmanian Museum, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia) (27th July 1948) Dr. Henning LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948) Professor Teiso ESAKI (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mr. Norman Denbigh RiLey (British Museum (Natural History), London) (9th June 1950) Professor Tadeusz JACZEWSKI (institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950) Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (5th July 1950) Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt- Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (5th July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice- President) ; Professor J. R. DYMOND (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 1953) Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. VoKEes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezégazdasdgi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. STOLL (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) Dr. L. B. HoLtuuts (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Nether- lands) (12th August 1953) OPINION 369 SUPPRESSION UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS OF THE GENERIC NAMES “TYLOS” MEIGEN, 1800 (CLASS INSECTA, ORDER DIPTERA) AND “ TYLOS ” HEYDEN, 1826 (CLASS ARACHNIDA) AND VALIDA- TION THEREBY OF THE GENERIC NAMES “© TYLOS ” AUDOUIN, [1826] (CLASS CRUSTACEA, ORDER ISOPODA) AND ‘“‘ MICROPEZA ”? MEIGEN, 1803 (CLASS INSECTA, ORDER DIPTERA) RULING :—(1) Under the Plenary Powers the under- mentioned generic names are hereby suppressed for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy :— (a) Tylos Meigen, 1800 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) ; (b) Tylos Heyden, 1826 (Class Arachnida). (2) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 891 and 892 respectively :— (a) Tylos (Latreille MS.) Audouin, [1826] (gender : masculine) (type species, by monotypy: Tylos latreillei Audouin, [1826]) (Class Crustacea, Order Isopoda) ; (b) Micropeza Meigen, 1803 (gender : feminine) (type species, by monotypy: Musca _ corrigiolata Linnaeus, 1767) (Class Insecta, Order Diptera). (3) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 512 and 513 respectively :— (a) latreillei Audouin, [1826], as published in the com- bination Tylos latreillei (specific name of type species of Tylos Audouin, [1826)]) ; (b) corrigiolata Linnaeus, 1767, as published in the combination Musca corrigiolata (specific name of type species of Micropeza Meigen, 1803). JAN 5 1956 268 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (4) The generic names specified in (1) above and as there suppressed under the Plenary Powers are hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 307 and 308 respectively. I.—THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 6th November 1950 Professor Martin L. Aczél Unstitute of Entomology, National University of Tucumdn, Argentina) submitted the following application for the acceptance of the generic name Tylos Meigen, 1800, in preference to the name Micropeza Meigen, 1803 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) :— Proposed addition of the generic name ‘‘ Tylos’’ Meigen, 1800 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) to the ‘‘ Official List of Generic Names in Zoology ’”’ and of ‘* Micropeza ”’ Meigen, 1803, to the ‘‘ Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology ”’ By MARTIN L. ACZEL Unstitute of Entomology, National University of Tucuman, Tucuman, Argentina) (Extract from a letter dated 6th November 1950, with enclosure) Wanting to assist in stabilizing the nomenclature of Dipterology, I submit the following request for a Meigen (1800) name in the family TYLIDAE to be placed on the Official List. This is a simple case of synonymy of a Meigen (1800) name with the genus Tylos Meigen, 1800 (Nouvelle Classification des Mouches a deux Ailes : 31) which is recognizable from the original description and Micropeza Meigen, 1803 (Mag. f. Insektenk. (Illiger) 2 : 276) which is quite obviously a synonym. In accordance with the Opinion 152 as supplemented by the conclusions of the Fourteenth Meeting of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in Paris (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 552—558), application is hereby made for the Commission to place the name Ty/os Meigen, 1800 (type species by subsequent selection by Coquillet, 1910 (Proc. U.S. nat. Mus. OPINION 369 269 37 (No. 1719) : 618): Musca corrigiolata Linnaeus) on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology and that the name Micropeza Meigen, 1803 (type species by original designation : Musca corrigiolata Linnaeus) be sunk as a synonym of Tylos. Before 1908 the name Tylos was used scarcely, if at all. Between 1908 and 1932 it was used occasionally. Hendel treated several species under the names Jy/os, using the family name TYLIDAE in 1931 (Bull. Soc. ent. Egypte, 2:61) and in 1932 (Konowia 11 : 120—121). In 1930 L. Czerny (in Lindner, Die Fliegen pal. Region 42a. Tylidae), treated this family using the name TYLIDAE and placed ten species in the genus Tylos. The last leading worker on this family, Willi Hennig, in his world revision of TYLIDAE, 1934—1936 (1934, Stett. ent. Zig. 95 : 65—108, 294—330 ; 1935, ibid. 96 : 27—67 ; Konowia 14 : 68—92, 192—216, 289—310 ; 1936, Konowia 15 : 129—144, 201—239) as well as in his other papers published between 1934 and 1941 used the family name TYLIDAE and the generic name Tylos, feeling morally obliged to follow the International Rules of Zoological Nomenclature, the Opinions concerning the Meigen 1800 names, and the principle of priority. It should be noted also that Professor M. James in 1946 (“ The dipt. family Tylidae in Colorado”, Ent. News 57 : 128—131) used also the legitimate names TYLIDAE and Tylos. My own publications in which I have used these names are as follows : 1950, ““ Notes on Tylidae I. The Palaearctical Tylidae of the Hungar. Mus.”’, Acta zool. Lilloana (1949) 8 : 161—196. 1950, *“‘ Notes on Tylidae II. Argentine species of the subfamily Tylinae in the Ent. Coll. of the Miguel Lillo Foundation ”’, loc. cit. 8 : 219—280. 1950, Catalogo de la familia de las Tylidae, loc. cit. 8 : 309—389. The following paper is in the hands of the printer due for publication in the near future : “‘ Morfologia externa y division sistematica de las Tanypezidiformes, con sinopsis de las especies argentinos de Tylidae y Neriidae. 120 manuscript pages for publication in the next volum of the Acta zool. Lilloana’’. In the past ten years W. Hennig, Professor James and I, have used the same names on our identifications on these flies, examining collections from the major museums throughout the United States and Europe, from all the zoogeographical regions. 270 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS The family and the genus is of no importance from an economic standpoint, having saprophagous larvae, and the workers in applied entomology would not be affected by the official adoption of the name Tylos and TYLIDAE. According to successive volumes of the Zoological Record, just a single reference to Micropeza and MICROPEZIDAE has appeared in the literature since 1936. This was a short note on British MICROPEZIDAE by Mr. J. E. Collin (1945, Ent. Rec. 57 : 115—119). Conclusions : The continued acceptance of the generic name Tylos Meigen, 1800, and the family name TYLIDAE, in preference to Micropeza Meigen, 1803, and MICROPEZIDAE, should not cause any degree of disturbance and would certainly create more uniformity and stability than confusion. The writer accordingly requests the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature to place :— (1) the generic name Tylos Meigen, 1800, Nouv. Class. Mouches : 31 (type species by subsequent selection by Coquillet (1910) : Musca corrigiolata Linnaeus, 1767) on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology ; (2) the generic name Micropeza Meigen, 1803 (an objective synonym of Tylos Meigen, 1800) on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology ; (3) the trivial name corrigiolata Linnaeus, 1767, Syst. Nat. (ed. 12) 1(2) : 955, as published in the binominal combination Musca corrigiolata, on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology. Il—THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt of Professor Aczél’s application, the question of the acceptance or rejection of the generic name Tylos Meigen, 1800, was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 501. 3. Comments received prior to the publication of Professor Aczél’s application : Some years prior to the receipt of Professor Aczél’s application in the present case Dr. John Smart (then of the OPINION 369 21h British Museum (Natural History), London and now of the Department of Zoology, Cambridge University, Cambridge) had communicated to Mr. Hemming the draft of a projected paper on the Meigen problem in which he had analysed in detail those cases, including the present, where family names were at stake and had recommended in each case that of the two rival generic names concerned that published by Meigen in 1800 should be rejected. Accordingly, on the receipt of Professor Aczél’s letter Mr. Hemming notified Dr. Smart of the proposal submitted, in order to give him an opportunity of furnishing a statement of his views for the consideration of the Commission. At the same time Mr. Hemming informed Dr. Alan Stone (United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine, Washington, D.C., U.S.A.), who was known to be a staunch supporter of the Meigen (1800) names, of the application received from Professor Aczél, and invited him to submit a statement of his views on this case. 4. Counter-proposal submitted by Dr. John Smart (Cambridge University, Department of Zoology, Cambridge) : On 12th January 1951, Dr. John Smart (Cambridge University, Department of Zoology, Cambridge) submitted the following counter-proposal in which he asked that the Commission should not only reject Professor Aczél’s proposal that the name 7ylos Meigen, 1800, should be placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology but also that it should use its Plenary Powers for the purpose of suppressing that generic name in order to validate the name Micropeza Meigen, 1803, the name which, prior to the resurrection of the Meigen (1800) names, had been widely used for the genus concerned and was still so used by many authors :— Proposed use of the Plenary Powers to validate the name ** Micropeza ’’ Meigen, 1803, and to suppress the name ** Tylos ’’ Meigen, 1800 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) By JOHN SMART, M.A., D.Sc. (University of Cambridge, Department of Zoology, Cambridge) The object of the present application is to seek the use by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature of its Plenary Powers for the purpose of validating the generic name Micropeza Meigen, 1803, by suppressing the name Tylos Meigen, 1800 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera). DDD OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS The following are the relevant particulars relating to the foregoing names :— (1) Tylos Meigen, 1800, Nouv. Class. Mouches : 31. No named species were cited by Meigen as belonging to this genus. Hendel was the first author to cite a species by name as belonging to this genus (Hendel, 1908, Verh. zool.-bot. Ges. Wien 58 (2/3) : 60). The sole species so cited by Hendel was Musca corrigiolata Fabricius, i.e. Musca corrigiolata Linnaeus, 1767 (Syst. Nat. (ed. 12) 1(2) : 995). That species is therefore the type species of Tylos Meigen, by monotypy. (The same species was later selected as the type species of this genus by Coquillet (1910) who regarded Micropeza as only a change of name.) (2) Micropeza Meigen, 1803, Mag. f. Insektenk. (Illiger) 2 : 276. Meigen cited only Musca corrigiolata Linnaeus, 1767, which is therefore the type species by monotypy. The name Ty/os was completely ignored by Dipterists until Hendel (1908) suggested that it might be synonymous with Micropeza. (He indicated his doubt by inserting a ““?”’ before Micropeza, which was placed in the text in the position of a synonym.) Subsequent authors who favoured the use of the Meigen (1800) names accepted the synonymy without question. That Musca corrigiolata Fabricius is the same species as Musca corrigiolata Linnaeus is agreed among specialists, and the species concerned is well-recognized. The genus Micropeza Meigen, 1803, is the type genus of a distinctive family of the Order Diptera—the MICROPEZIDAE—the Stilt-Legged Flies. This genus and family have always been known by these names, except by those specialists who, following Hendel, have used the generic name Tylos Meigen, 1800, and the family name TYLIDAE. It is clearly very desirable that an end should be put as soon as possible to the current divergence of practice in this matter by an authoritative ruling as to which of these names should be used. Having regard to the preponderant use in literature of the name Micropeza during the last century and a half, I am of the opinion that the best course would be to establish that name in preference to the name Tylos. I accordingly suggest that the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature should :-— (1) use its Plenary Powers (a) to suppress the name Tylos Meigen, 1800, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy, and (6) to validate the name Micropeza Meigen, 1803 ; OPINION 369 273 (2) place the generic name Micropeza Meigen, 1803 (type species by monotypy : Musca corrigiolata Linnaeus, 1767) (gender of generic name : feminine) on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology ; (3) place the generic name Jylos Meigen, 1800 (gender of generic name: masculine) as proposed under (1) (a) above, to be suppressed under the Plenary Powers, on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology ; (4) place the trivial name corrigiolata Linnaeus, 1767, as published © in the binominal combination Musca corrigiolata, on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology. 5. Support for Professor Aczél’s proposal received from Dr. Alan Stone (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C.) : On 30th January 1951 Dr. Alan Stone (United States Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine, Washington, D.C., U.S.A.) addressed the following letter to the Commission in support of the application submitted by Professor Aczél :— The case for Tylos versus Micropeza is essentially the same as for Dorilas versus Pipunculus, although the use of Tylos has possibly been even more extensive than that of Dorilas. Aczél, Hennig, Czerny and Hendel, have all used the generic name Ty/os, and the family name TYLIDAE in important revisionary works. Cresson is the most important worker in the family who has stuck to Micropeza and MICROPEZIDAE. James, Seguy, and de Meijere have also used TYLIDAE, as did Kloet & Hincks in their Check List of British Insecta. Most of the important papers of the last fifteen years have used the name Tylos. It seems unnecessary to repeat the general arguments that I gave in my letter concerning Dorilas' that are equally applicable here. 6. Publication of the present application: Professor Aczél’s application and Dr. Smart’s counter-proposal were sent to the printer in January 1951 and Dr. Stone’s note of support for Professor Aczél’s proposal was similarly despatched immediately upon its receipt at the beginning of February 1951. All three documents were published on 4th May 1951 in Part 5 of volume 2 1 For the application and associated documents here referred to see 1950, Bull. Zool. Nomencl. 2 : 140—149. No decision has yet been taken by the Commission in regard to the name Dorilas. 274 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Aczél, 1951, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 2 : 156—157; Smart, 1951, ibid. 2 : 158—159 ; Stone, 19515 rbid. 2%: 160): 7. Issue of Public Notices: Under the revised arrangements prescribed by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 51—56) Public Notice of the possible use by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature of its Plenary Powers in the present case was given on 4th May 1951 (a) in Part 5 of volume 2 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Dr. Smart’s counter- proposal was published) and (b) to the other prescribed serial publications. In addition, Public Notice was given: to certain general zoological serial publications and to a number of entomological serials in Europe and America. 8. Nature of the comments received in response to the Public Notice issued : The comments received in response to the Public Notice issued fall into four groups :—{a) comments from entomologists supporting Professor Aczél’s application to recog- nise Tylos Meigen, 1800 ; (b) communications from entomologists supporting Dr. Smart’s counter-proposal that the name Tylos Meigen, 1800, should be suppressed in favour of Micropeza Meigen, 1803; (c) communications from specialists in the Order Isopoda (Class Crustacea) objecting to Professor Aczél’s proposal and supporting Dr. Smart’s counter-proposal on the ground that the acceptance of the name Tylos Meigen, 1800, in the Order Diptera (Class Insecta) would involve the rejection in the Order Isopoda of the long-established generic name Tylos (Latreille MS.) Audouin, [1826]; (d) comments from general zoologists supporting the suppression of the name Tylos Meigen, 1800, in favour of Tylos Audouin, [1826]?. The following are the comments so received, grouped under the foregoing headings :— (a) Dipterist supporting the acceptance of the name “ Tylos” Meigen, 1800 (Professor Aczél’s proposal), one (A): W. Hennig (Deutsches Entomologisches Institut, Berlin) ; (b) Dipterists supporting the suppression of the name “Tylos” Meigen, 1800, and supporting the validation of ““Micropeza” Meigen, 1803 (Dr. Smart's counter-proposal), two (2): * For a note on the authorship and date here attributed tc this name see paragraph 19 of the present Opinion. EE OPINION 369 ATS C. P. Alexander (University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Mass., U.S.A.) ; F. R. Shaw (University of Massachusetts, Department of Entomology, Amherst, Mass., U.S.A.) ; (c) Specialists in the Class Crustacea supporting the suppression of the name “Tylos” Meigen, 1800 (Class Insecta) and the validation of the name “* Tylos’’ Audouin, {1826]* (Class Crustacea, Order Isopoda), four (4) : A. Vandel (Laboratoire de Zoologie, Université de Toulouse, France) ; L. B. Holthuis (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke . Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) ; Werner Herold (Humboldt-Universitdt zu Berlin) ; Isobel Gordon (British Museum (Natural History), London); (d) General zoologists supporting the suppression of “ Tylos” Meigen, 1800, and the validation of “ Tylos’’ Audouin, [1826]?, one (1): Charles H. Blake (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Biology, Cambridge, Mass., U.S.A.). The communications referred to above are reproduced in the foregoing order in the immediately following paragraphs. 9. Support for Professor Aczél’s proposal received from Dr. W. Hennig (Deutsches Entomologisches Institut, Berlin): On 22nd May 1951 Dr. W. Hennig (Deutsches Entomologisches Institut, Berlin) addressed the following letter to the Commission in support of the proposals 1ecently published in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature for the acceptance of certain generic names published by Meigen in 1800, including the name Tylos Meigen, 1800 (Hennig, 1951, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 2 : 348) :— Asked by Professor E. M. Hering for a comment on the various proposals concerning the names of Dipterous genera (Bull. zool. Nomencl., Vol. 2, Part 5) I wish to bring forward the following con- siderations :— It is deeply to be regretted that the names of Meigen, 1800, were unearthed by Hendel (1908) and at that time every effort to suppress those names should have been supported. 3 See footnote 2. 276 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Since, however, the suppression of the names of Meigen, 1800, in toto was rejected by Opinion 28, they were used in several funda- mental publications such as Lindner’s “‘ Fliegen der palaarktischen Region ”’ and other important revisionary works as pointed out by Aczél, Hardy, and Stone. Every attempt to restore the names of Meigen, 1800, is, therefore, now 30 to 40 years too late and contributes to augmentation rather than diminution of confusion. This is especially true in the case of the names Ty/os, Dorilas, and also Philia and Tendipes, though for these latter two perhaps not quite to the same extent. For this reason I fully agree with Aczél, Hardy, and Stone in the proposal to use the names Tylos, Dorilas, Philia and Tendipes instead of Micropeza, Pipunculus, Dilophus, and Chironomus respectively. It is quite another situation with Titania versus Chlorops. Titania has never been used in recent publications. Its introduction in the place of the well-known and very important name Chlorops would lead, therefore, to considerable disadvantage and confusion, especially in the literature of economic entomology. I think that there will be general agreement in this case with the proposal of Dr. Sabrosky. 10. Supplementary statement furnished by Dr. Hennig: At the time when Dr. Hennig furnished the statement reproduced in paragraph 9 above, it was erroneously believed that the issue involved in the present case was limited to the question of which of two competing names (7ylos Meigen, 1800, and Micropeza Meigen, 1803) should be used for a given genus in the Order Diptera in the Class Insecta. When later (as explained in para- graph 8 above) it became apparent that, in addition to the foregoing problem, the present case raised the issue also whether the name Tylos Meigen in the Order Diptera should be permitted to invalidate the name Jylos Audouin, [1826], in the Order Isopoda (Class Crustacea), Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, judged it desirable to ascertain whether in the light of this development Dr. Hennig still held the views on the original issue involved expressed in his letter of 22nd May 1951 (paragraph 9 above). On this question Dr. Hennig replied as follows :— Letter dated 6th March 1952 from Dr. W. Hennig to the Secretary to the Commission In spite of the importance attached by Dr. Herold to the name Tylos Latreille in Isopods I am of the opinion that Tylos Meigen OPINION 369 PAT (and consequently the family name TYLIDAE) in Diptera should be retained unless a general list of nomina conservanda (in which Tylos Latreille possibly could be included) be validated by the nomenclatural authorities. 11. Support for Dr. Smart’s counter-proposal received from Professor C. P. Alexander (University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Mass., U.S.A.) : On 8th October 1951 Professor C. P. Alexander (University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Mass., U.S.A.) addressed the following letter to the Commission in support of the suppression under the Plenary Powers of the name Tylos Meigen, 1800 (in favour of the name Micropeza Meigen, 1803) together with certain other generic names published by Meigen in his Nouvelle Classification (Alexander, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 172) :-— I have noted the suggestions in various publications regarding the proposed suspension of the rules in various cases. The notice to which I refer specifically is in The Entomologist, July 1951, pp. 164—165. As a dipterist, I would like to vote upon the five names that you mention ; that is, Titania, Dorilas, Tendipes, Philia, and Tylos. In all cases I vote most strongly in favor of the 1803 names, which in all but one case are also by Meigen. I feel that these longer-used names —Chlorops, Pipunculus, Chironomus, Dilophus and Micropeza— should be retained. It has been argued that a great injustice has been done to Meigen by ignoring the 1800 names. I can never see the justice of such an argument, since, as is well known, Meigen was the first to ignore his 1800 names and replace them with the better known ones in 1803. If the final ruling of the Commission is to recognise the 1803 names in preference to the 1800 ones, I believe that it would establish a precedent whereby all of the (to me) obnoxious 1800 names proposed by Meigen could be discarded. There can be little question that for the past 40 years the recognition of these 1800 names has caused vast confusion. All during my entomological life we have been faced with this situation, and it is greatly to be regretted that firm steps were not taken in the matter some 40 years ago. 12. Support for Dr. Smart’s counter-proposal received from Dr. F. R. Shaw (University of Massachusetts, Department of Entomology, Amherst, Mass., U.S.A.) : On 10th October, 1951 Dr. F. R. Shaw (University of Massachusetts, Department of Entomology, Amherst, Mass., U.S.A.) addressed the following 278 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS letter to the Commission in support of the suppression under the Plenary Powers of the generic name Tylos Meigen, 1800, and the other generic names published by Meigen on which applications and counter-applications had been published in Part 5 of volume 2 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Shaw, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 179) :— I note in a recent issue of The Entomologist a statement asking specialists in Diptera to express their views on the following :— Titania Meigen, 1800, vs. Chlorops Meigen, 1803 Dorilas Meigen, 1800, vs. Pipunculus Latreille [1802—03] Tendipes Meigen, 1800, vs. Chironomus Meigen, 1803 Philia Meigen, 1800, vs. Dilophus Meigen, 1803 Tylos Meigen, 1800 vs. Micropeza Meigen, 1803. With no exceptions I would vote against the use of the Meigen 1800 names. The names in themselves are meaningless and the fact that a later worker set up some type species, concerning which in many cases he knew nothing, would not seem to me to warrant the retention of the 1800 names. 13. Objection to Professor Aczél’s proposal raised from the point of view of Isopod nomenclature by Professor A. Vandel (Laboratoire de Zoologie, Université de Toulouse, France): On 6th June 1951 Professor A. Vandel (Laboratoire de Zoologie, Université de Toulouse) addressed a short letter to the Commission expressing the view that the adoption of the generic name Tylos Meigen, 1800, would cause grave inconvenience by invalidating the same generic name as used in the Order Isopoda ; on 20th July 1951 Professor Vandel wrote a further letter explaining that the name Tylos in the Isopoda had been in constant use for one hundred and twenty-five years and that the rejection of that name would therefore be open to strong objection (Vandel, 1951, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 2 : 347). The following are extracts from the letters referred to above :— (a) Extract from a letter from Professor Vandel dated 6th June 1951 L’adoption de Tylos Meigen, 1800, proposée par Aczél (: 156) (mais rejeté par Smart: 158) aurait le grave inconvénient d’etablir une ——E—e—EEe————— o OPINION 369 279 homonymie avec un genre bien connu d’Isopodes Oniscoides, Tylos Latreille, 1825 (in Audouin et Savigny). (b) Extract from a letter from Professor Vandel dated 20th July 1951 En parlant de “‘ genre bien connu,”’ je voulais simplement exprimer que depuis 1825 le terme de Ty/os est adopté sans exception par tous les carcinologistes. Il serait trop long d’en donner la liste complete, mais une énumération importante a été donnée par : Stebbing (T.R.R.) —1910, ‘* Reports on the Marine Biology of the Sudanese Red Sea ”’ (J. linn. Soc. Lond. (Zool.) 31. Voir pp. 226—227). Il serait bien facheux qu’un nom employé de facgon constante depuis 125 ans fit rejeté. 14. Submission by Professor Vandel of a proposal that the generic name ‘‘ Tylos ”’ in the Class Crustacea should be validated by the suppression under the Plenary Powers of the older name ** Tylos ’? Meigen, 1800 (Class Insecta): In order that the Commission, when considering this case, might have before it an account of the history and usage of the name Ty/os Latreille, 1825, Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, addressed a letter (on 7th August 1951) asking Professor Vandel to prepare such a statement for the information of the Commission. Professor Vandel kindly undertook to do so and on 22nd November 1951 he furnished the following report (Vandel, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 174—176) :— Proposition en faveur du maintien du nom de ‘‘ Tylos ”’ (Latreille MS.) Audouin, 1825+ (Crustacea ; Isopoda terrestria) Par A. VANDEL (Faculté des Sciences de Toulouse, France) Position du Probleme Une discussion s’est élevée entre les entomologistes adonnés a Vétude des Diptéres au sujet du choix qui s’impose entre les deux synonymes : Tylos Meigen, 1800, et Micropeza Meigen, 1803. Les carcinologistes n’ont pas a prendre parti dans ce débat. Mais, L. B. Holthuis (1951) et moi-méme (Vandel, 1951) avons fait remarquer que l’adoption du terme de Tylos pour désigner un Diptére entrainerait “ For the reason for the attribution of the date ‘‘ 1826’ to this name in the present Opinion see paragraph 19. 280 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS l’abandon du nom de Tylos Audouin, conséquence des plus regrettables, car le nom de Tylos est universellement adopté pour désigner un grand genre d’Isopodes terrestres. Les carcinologistes ont de solides raisons de demander le maintien du terme de Tylos, ainsi qu'il ressort des remarques suivantes. Historique du terme ‘‘ Tylos ’? Audouin Le terme de Ty/os, en tant que dénomination appliquée a un Crustacé, apparait dans la livraison relative aux Crustacés, parue dans la “Description de l’Egypte’’, et rédigée par Jean-Victor Audouin. Reproduisons la phrase dans laquelle figure l’acte de naissance du nom de Tylos (lére édit., p. 96; 2éme édit., pp. 285—286): ““M. Savigny avait sans doute l’intention d’établir un nouveau genre avec cette espéce qui se distingue essentiellement des cloportes, des porcellions et des armadilles, par des caractéres fort tranchés. M. Latreille qui posséde un individu identique, avait appréci¢é a leur juste valeur les divers traits de son organisation, et il s’était décidé depuis longtemps a en faire un genre distinct sous le nom de J7ylos, que nous adoptons, en reconnaissant que M. Savigny a, de son coté, développé avec la plus grande exactitude tous ses caractéres, dans les nombreuses figures qu’on a sous les yeux’. C’est donc a Latreille, que nous devons le nom de Tylos, encore qu'il n’apparaisse qu’en 1829, dans les publications du grand entomologiste frangais (Latreille, 1829, p. 141). Il convient done de désigner ce genre de la fagon suivante : Tylos (Latreille MS.) Audouin 1825. Date de parution de l’ouvrage de Jean-Victor Audouin La date ce cet ouvrage est difficile a fixer en toute certitude. Les planches gravées par les soins de J. C. Savigny portent la mention ** dessiné et gravé en 1805—1812”’. Mais, Vexplication des planches, due a J.-V. Audouin est bien postérieure. La seule date officielle qui apparaisse dans l’ouvrage est la lettre du Ministre de l’Intérieur confiant la rédaction de l’explication des planches de J. C. Savigny a J. V. Audouin ; cette lettre est datée du 19 mars 1825. Il convient, a mon sens, de s’en tenir a la date de 1825 qui est la seule 4 n’étre point conjecturale.® C. D. Sherborn (1897, p. 287) a soutenu que la livraison des Crustacés (ainsi que les autres livraisons qui constituent la Quatrieme partie du Tome premier) date de 1826. C’est la méme date qui figure dans le ** Catalogue of the Library of the British Museum—Natural History ”’. Il convient cependant de remarquer que l’adoption de l’année 1826 comme date de parution de louvrage de J.-V. Audouin ne repose sur aucune donnée vérifiable, et quwil est tout a fait exagéré d’affirmer que ce volume “‘ may be safely regarded as dated 1826’. L’argumentation 5 See footnote 4. OPINION 369 281 de Sherborn se fonde sur une citation parue dans les “* Annales de la Société Entomologique de France ’”’, t.XI, 1842, p.99. Sil’on se reporte a cette référence, on constate qu’elle se rapporte a une notice due a la plume de M. Duponchel et consacrée 4 la vie et aux travaux de Jean-Victor Audouin. La phrase a laquelle Sherborn fait allusion, est la suivante : “‘ En 1826, le gouvernement voulant enfin terminer le grand ouvrage sur l’expédition d’Egypte, ce fut encore M. Audouin que l’Administration du Muséum désigna au ministre de [instruction publique pour donner l’explication des planches relatives aux mol- lusques et aux animaux articulés, dont l’infortuné M. Savigny n’avait pas eu le temps de rédiger le texte avant de devenir aveugle’’. Or, il est manifeste que la date de 1826 mentionnée dans cette phrase résulte @une erreur du biographe. La lettre du Ministre de l’Interieur (et non du Ministre de l’Instruction Publique comme I’écrit Duponchel) est datée du 19 mars 1825. Le choix de J.-V. Audouin par l’administra- tion du Muséum ne peut donc qu’étre antérieure a la décision du Ministre et a la lettre dans laquelle il la notifie. En conclusion, il me parait que c’est année 1825, et non l’année 1826, qui doit étre retenue comme date de publication de louvrage de J.-V. Audouin. Pour étre complet signalons que dans la seconde édition de l’ouvrage (édition in 4°), la livraison relative a l’explication des planches de Crustacés fait partie du Tome XXII ; elle est datée de 1827. Le volume de planches correspondant est daté de 1826. Etymologie et genre du terme de ‘‘ Tylos ”’ Tylos vient du mot grec TdAos (callosité, bosse). Ce nom est masculin. Espéce type du genre ‘‘ Tylos ”’ L’espéce type du genre Tylos est incontestablement :— Tylos latreillei Audouin, 1825 (= Tylos armadillo Latreille, 1829). Le terme de ‘‘ Tylos ’’ reconnu par tous les carcinologistes Depuis la date de son institution, c’est a dire depuis cent vingt-cing ans, le terme de Tylos a été adopté par tous les carcinologistes. Il serait hors de proportion avec I’étendue de cette note de recenser tous les auteurs qui ont fait usage de ce terme. Stebbing (1910, p. 227), et plus récemment, Holthuis (1951, p. 128) en ont dressé des listes assez complétes auxquelles je me permets de renvoyer le lecteur. Il est peu de termes génériques s’appliquant a des Isopodes qui aient été reconnus de fagon si constante et si universelle et dont la — 282 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS synonymie soit aussi bréve. L. Koch (1856, p. 422) a donné a Tylos latreille le nom de Rhacodes inscriptus ; mais, ce terme, révélateur dune profonde ignorance de la bibliographie isopodologique, est, aussitot que né, tombé en désuctude. Subdivisions systématiques tirant leur dénomination du terme de 66 Tylos 99 Milne-Edwards (1840, p. 186) a créé la “‘ division des Tylosiens ” pour le seul genre Tylos. J. Dana (1852, p. 301 ; 1853, p. 715) a, dans le méme but, institué la sous-famille des ‘‘ Tylinae’’. Enfin, Budde- Lund (1885, p. 272) a élevé cette coupure systématique au rang de famille ; illa nomme “‘ Tylides’’. Sous le nom plus correct de TYLIDAE, cette famille a été reconnue par tous les carcinologistes modernes. Conclusion En conclusion, une unanimité, rarement atteinte en zoologie systématique, a depuis cent vingt-cing ans consacré le terme de Tylos qui est adopté par tous les carcinologistes. Propositions présentées devant la Commission de Nomenclature La Commission de Nomenclature, agissant en vertu des Pleims Pouvoirs qui lui ont été délégués, décide : (1) (a) de supprimer le nom générique Tylos Meigen, 1800, Nouv. Class. Mouches : 31 ; (b) de valider le nom générique Tylos (Latreille MS.) Audouin 1825, Descript. Egypte; Tere Edit., 1 (4) : 96 (espéce typique par monotypie: 7y/os latreillei Audouin 1825, Descript. Egypte, Vere Edit., 1 (4) :97). Genre du terme: masculin. , (2) @insérer dans l’ Official List of Generic Names in Zoology le nom de 7ylos Audouin 1825, validé in (1)(b) ; (3) d@insérer dans I’ Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology, le nom de Tylos Meigen, 1800, supprimé in (A)(a) ; (4) d@insérer dans |’ Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology le nom de Jatreillei Audouin 1825, comme publié dans la combinaison binominale Tylos latreillei. Bibliographie AUDOUIN (J. V.).—1825. Explication sommaire des Planches de Crustacés de l’Egypte et de ia Syrie, publiées par Jules-César Savigny, OPINION 369 283 Membre de I’Institut, offrant un exposé des caractéres naturels des genres, avec la distinction des espéces, par Victor Audouin.—in Description de l’Egypte ou Recueil des Observations et des Recherches qui ont été faites en Egypte pendant l’Expédition de l’ Armée francaise publié par les ordres de sa Majesté ’ Empereur Napoléon le Grand.— Histoire Naturelie. Tome premier ; Quatriéme partie ; pp. 77—98. 1827.—Seconde Edition, dédiée au Roi, publi¢ée par C. L. F Panckoucke. Tome XXII. Histoire Naturelle ; Zoologie; Ani- maux Invertébrés (Suite).—pp. 249—290. BUDDE-LUND (G.).—1885. Crustacea Isopoda Terrestria, per Familias et Genera et Species descripta.—Hauniae. 320 pp. DANA (J. D.).—1852. On the Classification of the Crustacea Choristo- poda or Tetradecapoda.—Amer. J. Sci. Arts. (2) 14 : 297—316. DANA (J. D.).—1853. Crustacea in United States Exploring Expedition during the years: 1838, 1839, 1840, 1841, 1842 under the command of Charles Wilkes, U.S.N. Vol. 14. Part Il. Philadelphia. 1618 pp.; 96 pl. DUPONCHEL.—1842. Notice sur la vie et les travaux de Jean-Victor Audouin.—Ann. Soc. ent. France. 2 : 95—171. HOLTHUIS (L. B.).—1951. On the objection, from the carcinological point of view, of accepting the name “‘ Tylos ’’ Meigen 1800 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) and the consequent Rejection of the name “Tylos”’ (Latreille MS.) Audouin, 1826 (Class Crustacea, Order Isopoda).—Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 128. KOCH (L.).—1856. Crustacea, im ROSENHAUER (W. G.), Die Tiere Andalusiens nach dem Resultate einer Reise zusammengestellt, nebst den Beschreibungen von 249 neuen oder bis jetzt noch unbeschriebenen Gattungen und Arten. Erlangen. 429 pp.; Taf. J-Ill. LATREILLE (P. A.).—1829. Crustacés, Arachnides et partie des Insectes, in Le Régne animal, distribué d’apres son organisation pour servir de base a l’histoire naturelle des animaux et dintroduction a Vanatomie comparée, par M. le Baron Cuvier.—Nouvelle Edition, revue et augmentée.—Tome IV. Paris. MILNE-EDWARDS (H.).—1840. Histoire Naturelle des Crustacés, com- prenant l’anatomie, la physiologie et la classification de ces animaux. Tome HI. Paris 605 pp. SHERBORN (C. D.).—1897. On the Dates of the Natural History portion of Savigny’s “‘ Description de l’Egypte ’’.—Proc. zool. Soc. London. 1897 : 285—288. STEBBING (T. R. R.).—1910. Reports on the Marine Biology of the Sudanese Red Sea.—XIV. On the Crustacea Isopoda and Tanaidacea. —J. linn. Soc. Lond. (Zool.) 31 : 215—230, pl. 21—23. 284 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS VANDEL (A.).—1951. Objection to proposal submitted by Professor Martin L. Aczél in favour of the Addition of the name “‘ Tylos”’ to the “‘ Official List of Generic Names in Zoology ’”’.—Bull. zool. Nomencl. 2 : 345. 15. Objection to Professor Aczél’s proposal from the point of view of Isopod nomenclature raised by Dr. L. B. Holthuis (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) : On 27th July 1951 Dr. L. B. Holthuis (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) addressed the following letter to the Commission objecting to Professor Aczél’s application on the ground that its adoption would lead to the rejection of the generic name TJylos currently commonly used in the Class Crustacea (Holthuis, 1951, Bull. zool. Nomencl. © : 128) :— Though I am not too well acquainted with Southern European and extra-European Isopods, I am glad to give you my views on the Tylos problem (1951, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 2 : 156—160), raised in.the letter which Professor Albert Vandel of Toulouse has written to you on this subject. The species of the Isopod Tylos (Latreille MS.) Audouin, 1826, inhabit the sandy sea shores at or slightly above high-water mark. The genus has a wide distribution in the tropical and subtropical regions of the world, Atlantic coast of Europe, south of Brittany, France ; shores of the Mediterranean and the Black Sea; West African coast from Senegambia northwards, including the Cape Verde and Canary. Islands, the Azores and Madeira; Atlantic coast of America from Florida to Columbia, and also from the Bermudas and the West Indies ; Pacific coast of America from California to Patagonia, also from the Galapagos Islands ; Indo-West-Pacific region from the Red Sea and South Africa to Japan and New Zealand. So far as I am aware, the generic name Tylos Audouin (often attributed to Latreille) is at present used for this genus of Isopods by all carcinologists. Van Name (1936, Bull. amer. Mus. nat. Hist. 71) used this name in his monograph “‘ The American Land and Fresh- water Isopod Crustacea’’; so also did Barnard (1932, Ann. S. Afr. Mus. 30 : 179) in his treatment of the South African terrestrial Isopoda, and Jackson (1941, Smithson. misc. Coll. 99 (No. 8)) in his “‘ Check-list of the terrestrial and fresh-water Isopoda of Oceania’’. Further, the foremost European isopodologists such as A. Vandel, K. Verhoeff, H. Strouhal and A. Arcangeli use the name 7y/os for this well-known genus of Isopods. I am unable to find in the literature any proposal to replace the name 7y/os Audouin on the ground that it is nomen- clatorially invalid. 5 | OPINION 369 285 The genus Ty/os Audouin is the type genus of the family TYLIDAE, which is recognised by all isopodologists. The foregoing evidence, in my opinion, shows clearly that from the carcinological point of view, it is highly desirable that the generic name Tylos Audouin should be preserved for the genus of Isopoda now known by that name. 16. Objection to Professor Aczél’s proposal from the point of view of Isopod nomenclature received from Dr. Werner Herold (Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin): On 11th October 1951 Dr. Werner Herold (Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin) addressed the following letter to the Commission objecting to Professor Aczél’s proposal and urging the validation of the name Tylos Latreille for use in its accustomed sense in the Order Isopoda (Class Crustacea, Order Isopoda) (Herold, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 173) :— Ich bitte zu entschuldigen, dass ich aus Zeitmangel erst heute auf die Nomenklatur-Angelegenheit Tylos zurickkomme. Vom Standpunkt der Isopoden-Bearbeiter aus séhe ich im Fortfall der Genusbezeichnung Tylos eine sehr erhebliche Schwierigkeit. Seit 1826 ist dieser Genusname unbeanstandet benutzt worden und es gibt kein Synonym, das man als Ersatz vorschlagen k6nnte. Der Name Jylos ist nicht nur fortgesetzt von allen Isopoden-Spezialisten gebraucht worden, sondern ist auch vielfach in die Literatur ber die Tierwelt der Hohlen iibergegangen. Eine Anderung der Bezeichnung des Isopodengenus Tylos wiirde zweifellos erhebliche Verwirrung anrichten. Vom Standpunkt des Isopoden-Spezialisten aus trete ich daher trotz der Prioritat der Dipterengattungsbezeichnung unbedingt fiir Beibe- haltung der Bezeichnung Ty/os Latreille, 1826, ein. 17. Support for Professor Vandel’s counter-proposal received from Dr. Isobel Gordon (British Museum (Natural History), London) : On 29th October 1951 Dr. Isobel Gordon (British Museum (Natural History)), addressed a letter to the Commission commenting upon a number of cases affecting the nomenclature of the Class Crustacea, including the present case, as regards which she wrote as follows (Gordon, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 173) :— I would like to support Professor A. Vandel in pleading for the retention of the generic name Jy/os (Latreille MS.) Audouin, [1826] (Class Crustacea, Order Isopoda). 286 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 18. Support for the proposed suppression of the generic name ** Tylos *’? Meigen, 1800, for the purpose of validating the generic name ‘‘ Tylos’’ Audouin as used in the Order Isopoda (Class Crustacea) received from Professor Charles H. Blake (Massa- chusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass., U.S.A.) : On 8th August 1951 Professor Charles H. Blake (Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Department of Biology, Cambridge, Mass.., U.S.A.) addressed a letter to the Commission commenting upon three applications then before the Commission for the use of the Plenary Powers, in which, after rejecting as unsound the proposals submitted as regards two of these names (Crangon ; Ligia), he intimated his support for the use of those Powers for the purpose of providing a valid juridical basis for the continued use of the long-established generic name 7y/os Audouin in the Order Isopoda. The portion of Professor Blake’s letter dealing with this latter name was as follows (Blake, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 183) :— It would appear that Meigen himself wished to suppress his names of 1800 in favour of those of 1803. And the Commission might, in Opinion 28, have been better advised to follow Meigen rather than the letter of the law. However, the instant case Tylos versus Micropeza is not so simple as some of the other cases may be. There is a genus Tylos in the Isopod Crustacea proposed by V. Audouin in 1825.® This genus, which is the type genus of the family and the sole genus of the family, has enjoyed uninterrupted use since that time. There exists only one possible synonym due to L. Koch in 1856. In spite of the testimony of von Ebner in 1868, the title of Koch’s name to be considered a synonym of Ty/os is clouded. It has never been employed as an accepted generic name since 1856. We may set aside this uninter- rupted use of the generic name 7 ylos against the fact that on Aczél’s own showing the name was used in the Diptera only occasionally so recently as 1932 and certainly Micropeza is fully as well known. Parenthetically, the family name TYLIDAE in the Crustacea dates back at least to 1885, while in the Diptera it dates only from 1931. Therefore, in this case it would seem as though there would be less ultimate confusion if Tylos of Meigen were declared ineligible, not on the basis of a reversal of Opinion 28, but rather on the basis that it comes into conflict with a name in another group which has enjoyed a century and a quarter of uninterrupted use ; use which dates back to the days when Meigen’s own wishes with regard to the names of 1800 were followed. ® See footnote 4. OPINION 369 287 19. Report by the Secretary on the question of the authorship and date to be attributed to the generic name ‘‘ Tylos ’’ as used in the Order Isopoda (Class Crustacea) : The inconsistencies in the literature as to the authorship and date to be attributed to the generic name Tylos as used as the name for a genus in the Order Isopoda (Class Crustacea) made it necessary for Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, to investigate this matter, it being a question which it was essential should be cleared up before the Commission reached a decision on the present case, since, whichever decision the Commission might take, it would be necessary for it to cite the foregoing name in its Ruling on the present case ; for, if the Commission were to approve Professor Aczél’s proposal, it would need to place on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology the generic name Jylos as used in the Class Crustacea, while, if it were to approve Professor Vandel’s counter-proposal, it would need to place that generic name on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology. Mr. Hemming’s Report, which was completed on 6th April 1952, was as follows (Hemming, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 177—178) :— On the authorship and date of publication of the generic name ‘‘ Tylos ”’ (Class Crustacea, Order Isopoda) By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. (Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature) The present note is concerned with the question of the date to be assigned to the generic name Ty/os (Latreille MS.) introduced by Jean-Victor Audouin for a genus of Crustacea (Order Isopoda) in the text prepared by that author for the Crustacea Section of the work by M. J. C. L. de Savigny entitled Description de l’Egypte, the plates of which were prepared in the period “‘ 1805—1812’’. This question becomes relevant to the work of the Commission because of the application for the validation of this name submitted by Professor A. Vandel (Toulouse) (1951, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 2 : 347; id., 1952, ibid. 6 : 174—176) in opposition to the proposal previously submitted by Professor Martin L. Aczél (Tucumdn) (1951, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 2 : 156—157) that the earlier name Jylos Meigen, 1800 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) should be placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology. 2. The authorship of the crustacean name 7y/os has been attributed by some authors to Audouin and by others to P. A. Latreille ; the 288 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS date of publication has been treated by some authors as “‘ 1825” and by others as “‘ 1826’. The position as regards these matters is discussed in the following paragraphs. 3. Authorship of the name ‘‘ Tylos ’’ as applied to a genus of Crustacea: As fully explained by Professor Vandel in the second of the two papers referred to above,’ the duty of preparing the text of the Crustacea Section of Savigny’s Description de l’ Egypte was undertaken by Audouin at the request of the French Government signified in a letter dated **19 mars 1825’. In the absence of evidence to the contrary it must therefore certainly be concluded that for the purposes of zoological nomenclature Audouin is the author of all names published for the first time in the foregoing Section of Savigny’s work. The: only circumstances in which any other author could be accepted as the author of a new name in the Section prepared by Audouin would be if it could be shown that, in the case of some particular name, Audouin had done no more than publish a new name proposed by some other author, that other author’s manuscript description for the genus or species concerned being at the same time published by Audouin, that description therefore forming the “‘ indication ”’ required by Article 25 of the Régles. 4. Those authors who have treated Latreille and not Audouin as. the author of the name Tylos have based that view upon the passage in which the name Tylos was first introduced, which has been quoted by Professor Vandel in the more recent of the papers referred to above.’ It is clear from this passage that Audouin recognised that the (at that time unpublished) name 7y/os had been proposed in manuscript by Latreille, but, in publishing that name, Audouin did not quote from Latreille’s manuscripts and the words characterising the genus Tylos then published by Audouin were written by that author and not by Latreille. The position is therefore that, as published in the Crustacea Section of Savigny’s Description, the name Tylos, though a manuscript name of Latreille’s, was provided with its “‘ indication ”’ by Audouin and not Latreille and must therefore for the purposes of zoological nomenclature be attributed to Audouin and not to Latreille. If it were desired to indicate the full history of this name, the citation “Tylos (Latreille MS.) Audouin’’ could, as Professor Vandel has remarked, be conveniently employed. 5. Date of publication of the name ‘‘ Tylos ’’ as applied to a genus of Crustacea : The Crustacea Section of the text of Savigny’s Description de Il’ Egypte is undated and it is necessary therefore to rely upon indirect methods for determining the date to be accepted for names published in it. Those authors who have accepted the date “‘ 1825” have relied upon the fact that, as pointed out by Professor Vandel (see paragraph 3 above), the task of preparing this text was committed to Audouin by the Minister of the Interior in a letter dated 19th March, 1825, and * For the paper here referred to see paragraph 14 of the present Opinion. OPINION 369 289 they have assumed that between that date and 3lst December, 1825 the text was prepared by Audouin and actually published by the authorities. Sherborn (1897, Proc. zool. Soc. Lond., 1897 : 287) examined this question and came to the conclusion that the date ** 1826’? was to be preferred to the date “‘1825’’; this view was re-stated by that author in 1931 Undex Anim., Pars secund. : 6700) and had also in the meanwhile been adopted in 1913 by the compiler of the Catalogue of Books . . . in the British Museum (Natural History) (4 : 1816). Sherborn’s ground for taking this view was based on an examination of all the evidence which he had been able to collect, including (1) a statement by Engelmann (Bib/. Hist. nat. : 340) that the Crustacea Section and six other Sections of Part 4 of volume 1 of the Description were published in 1826 (2) the letter dated ‘* 19 mars 1925 ”’ committing the Crustacea Section to Audouin (to which I have referred above) and a paper by Duponchel (1842) where it is stated that it was in 1826 that Audouin was invited to undertake this task (3) a statement by Dr. John Anderson that he had “ ascertained that Savigny’s sight failed him and that no manuscripts of any kind were handed over to Audouin, so that Audouin had to begin de novo’’. 6. The evidence discussed above is of interest from a bibliographical point of view but up to 1948 it had no definite bearing on the question of the dates to be assigned to new names in the Crustacea Section of the Description, for prior to that year there existed no provisions in the Régles for determining the date to be assigned to a zoological name where the date of publication of that name was not known. In 1948 however, the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology decided to insert in the Régles provisions for regulating this matter (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 223—225). Under that decision a name is to be deemed to have been published on the date specified in the work concerned as the date of publication (if any such date is so specified) unless and until evidence is forthcoming to show that that date is incorrect and, where no date of publication is given in the work con- cerned, a name published in that book is to be treated as having been published on a date determined in accordance with a series of rules there laid down, the general effect of which is that such a name is to take priority only as from a date by which evidence may be found that publication had actually taken place. 7. Turning back to the Crustacea Section of Savigny’s Description, we find that the only date mentioned in it is the date “* 19 mars 1825”’, as the date on which the Minister of the Interior asked Audouin to undertake the preparation of the text. So far as the original publication is concerned, the only evidence provided is that at earliest Audouin cannot have begun to write the text until after having received the Minister’s invitation of 19th March, 1825. Publication cannot therefore have taken place until such time as, after 19th March, 1825, (1) Audouin wrote the text and (2) that text was printed and published, a twofold 290 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS process which must have occupied a considerable time and is most unlikely to have been completed in so short a period as nine and a half months (mid-March to end-December), more especially in view of the evidence of Dr. Anderson that Audouin received no manuscripts from Savigny and had therefore to write the entire text himself. In such circumstances publication could hardly have taken place within twelve months at the earliest of the time when Audouin was invited to prepare the text. In other words, the year 1826 must be regarded as the earliest year in which this Section can have been published. There is no direct evidence that this Section was in fact published as early as 1826 and the possibility that publication did not take place until 1827 or even later cannot be excluded. We have, however, the statement by Engelmann that publication took place in 1826 and the similar conclusion reached by Sherborn. On balance, it would seem reasonable to conclude (1) that the name Ty/os Audouin was published before the end of 1826 but (2) that it is extremely improbable that it was published before the opening of that year. On this basis we should adopt the year “1826” as that in which this name was published. That date, being derived solely from indirect sources, should, when cited, be enclosed within square brackets, as prescribed in such cases by the International Congress of Zoology (see 1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. A’ :)226, Point (c)): 8. Conclusions: The conclusions derived from the foregoing review may be summarised as follows :— (1) The name 7y/os, as a name for a genus of Crustacea, was originally proposed in manuscript by Latreille ; it was first published by Audouin ; the “ indication ’’ by which it was accompanied when it was so published was provided by Audouin and not by means of a quotation from a manuscript of Latreille’s. The name 7y/os is therefore attributable for nomenclatorial purposes to Audouin and not to Latreille, though it would be permissible, if it were so desired, to cite this name as “ Tylos (Latreille MS) Audouin ”’. (2) The work in which the name 7y/os Audouin was published is undated, and the date to be attributed to that name can therefore be ascertained only by indirect evidence. On balance it appears that the most probable date for the publication of this name is 1826. (3) In the light of (1) and (2) above, this name should be cited as ** Tylos Audouin, [1826]”’ or if so preferred, as “ Tylos (Latreille MS.) Audouin, [1826] ”’. 20. Submission to the Commission in 1954 of alternative methods for reaching a settlement of the ‘‘ Tylos *’’ problem : Owing, in OPINION 369 291 the first instance, to the need for devoting the entire resources of the Office of the Commission to the preparations for the meetings in regard to zoological nomenclature arranged to be held at Copenhagen in July 1953 and, later, to the need for arranging for the preparation and publication of the book containing the Official Record of the decisions taken in this field by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, it was not until the beginning of 1954 that it was possible to resume con- sideration of the present case. The procedural issues were somewhat complicated by reason of the fact that, in addition to the original proposal submitted by Professor Aczél (paragraph 1 of the present Opinion) and Dr. Smart’s counter-proposal (paragraph 4 of the present Opinion), both of which were con- cerned exclusively with the impact on the literature of the Order Diptera (Class Insecta) of whatever decision was taken by the Commission, there had been received during the course of the discussion of this case a second counter-proposal drawn up from an entirely different standpoint. This second counter-proposal was submitted by Professor Vandel (paragraph 14 of the present Opinion) from the point of view of the literature of the Order Isopoda (Class Crustacea) and was designed to secure the validation of the name Jy/os Audouin, [1826], for use in that Order by the suppression under the Plenary Powers of the earlier homonym Tylos Meigen, 1800. Thus, whatever decision the Commission might take, it would be necessary to supplement to some extent the proposal submitted ; if the Commission were to decide in favour of retaining the name J7y/os Meigen, it would need to incorporate in its decision not only the proposals sub- mitted by Professor Aczél but in addition also such Rulings as would be needed to cover the rejection of Professor Vandel’s counter-proposal ; if on the other hand the Commission were to decide, so far as the Diptera portion of the case was concerned, to reject Professor Aczél’s proposal and to approve Dr. Smart’s counter-proposal in favour of the name Micropeza Meigen, it would need to incorporate in its Ruling such additional par- ticulars as would be needed at the same time to give approval to Professor Vandel’s proposal in relation to the name of the Isopod genus Tylos. Mr. Hemming accordingly prepared for the consideration of the Commission two alternative Rulings, both of which would provide a decision, though in opposite senses, on all the questions raised in Professor Aczél’s application and in the 292 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS counter-applications submitted respectively by Dr. Smart and Professor Vandel. The alternative Rulings so prepared were the following :— Alternative ** A ”’ (combination of the Smart and Vandel proposals favouring “ Tylos”’ Audouin (Isopoda) and “‘ Micropeza’’ (Diptera) and opposed to ‘“‘ Tylos’’ (Diptera)) (1) Under the Plenary Powers the name 7Jylos Meigen, 1800, is hereby suppressed for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy. (2) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology :—(a) Tylos (Latr. MS) Audouin, [1826] (gender: masculine) (type species, by monotypy : Tylos latreillei Audouin, [1826]); (b) Micropeza Meigen, 1803 (gender : feminine) (type species, by monotypy : Musca corrigiolata Linnaeus, 1767). (3) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology :—(a) latreillei Audouin, [1826], as published in the combination Ty/los latreillei (specific name of type species of Tylos Audouin, [1826]) ; (b) corrigiolata Linnaeus, 1767, as published in the combination Musca corrigiolata (specific name of type species of Micropeza Meigen, 1803). (4) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology :— Tylos Meigen, 1800, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers under (1) above. ; Alternative ‘* B ”’ (combination of the Aczél (pro-“ Tylos”’ Meigen, 1800) proposal with the consequential action needed if the Vandel (pro-“‘ Tylos Audouin) proposal (= Alternative “‘ A” above) is rejected) (1) The generic name Tylos Meigen, 1800 (gender: masculine) (type species, by selection by Coquillet (1910): Musca corrigiolata OPINION 369 293 Linnaeus, 1767) is hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology. (2) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology :— (a) Micropeza Meigen, 1803 (a junior objective synonym of Tylos Meigen, 1800); (b) Tylos (Latr., MS) Audouin, [1826] (a junior homonym of Jy/os Meigen, 1800). (3) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology :—(a) corrigiolata Linnaeus, 1767, as published in the combination Musca corrigiolata (specific name of type species of Tylos Meigen, 1800) ; (b) Jatreillei Audouin, [1826], as published in the combination Tylos latreillei. Itl—THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 21. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(54)25 : On 6th March 1954 a Voting Paper (V.P.(54)25) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote “‘ for the proposal relating to the names Ty/os Meigen (Diptera), Ty/os Audouin (Isopoda) and Micropeza Meigen (Diptera) set out in the annexed sheet either as Alternative “A’ (supporting ZJylos (Isopoda) and Micropeza (Diptera)) or as Alternative *B’ (supporting Tylos (Diptera) as against Tylos (Isopoda) and Micropeza (Diptera)) ”’. The Alternatives referred to as Alternatives “A” and “B” in the foregoing Voting Paper are those set out in paragraph 20 of the present Opinion. 22. The Prescribed Voting Period for Voting Paper V.P.(54)25 : As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 6th June 1954. 294 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 23. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)25 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)24 was as follows :— (a) Votes in favour of Alternative “A” had been given by the following nineteen (19) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Holthuis; Hering; Riley; Lemche; Vokes; do Amaral; Esaki; Dymond; Bonnet; Boschma ; Hemming; Mertens; Jaczewski; Pearson; Sylvester- Bradley ; Bradley (J.C.); Hank6; Stoll; Cabrera ; (b) Votes in favour of Alternative“ B” : None ; (c) Voting Papers not returned : None. 24. Declaration of Result of Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)25 : On 6th June 1954, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(54)25, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 23 above and declaring that the proposal submitted as Alternative “ A ”’ in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. OPINION 369 295 25. Position of the generic name ‘‘ Tylos ’’ Heyden, 1826, as a possible senior homonym of ‘‘ Tylos ’’ Audouin, [1826] : When in January 1955 Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, came to prepare the Opinion required to give effect to the decision in regard to the names Tylos Meigen, 1800, and Tylos Audouin, [1826], taken by the Commission in its vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)25, a problem emerged which had not previously been considered by the Commission, namely the possibility that the generic name Tylos Heyden, 1826 (Class Arachnida) might be a senior homonym of the generic name Tylos Audouin, [1826] (Class Crustacea), the preservation of which it had been the object of the Commission to secure. Accordingly, after consultations in regard to the current status of the name 7y/os Heyden in the Class Arachnida, Mr. Hemming on 26th January 1955 submitted the following paper to the Commission for consideration :— Need for dealing with the generic name ‘‘ Tylos ’’ Heyden, 1826 (Class Arachnida) in connection with the validation under the Plenary Powers of the generic name ‘‘ Tylos ”’ (Latreille MS.) Audouin, [1826] (Class Crustacea, Order Isopoda) By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. (Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature) The present paper is concerned with a small point which has arisen in the course of preparing the Opinion required to give effect to a decision taken by the Commission to validate under its Plenary Powers the important generic name TJy/os (Latreille MS.) Audouin, [1826] in the Isopoda. The facts of this case are set out briefly below. 2. By a vote taken last year (on Voting Paper V.P.(54)25) the Commission unanimously decided (by a full vote of the nineteen members of the Commission) to suppress the generic name Tylos Meigen, 1800 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera), a name which had only come into use fairly recently and which was still rejected by many dipterists in favour of the long-established name Micropeza Meigen, 1803. Although originally put forward by dipterists as a means for preserving the name Micropeza (Smart, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 2 : 158— 296 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 159), this proposal was found to be of even greater interest to specialists in the Order Isopoda (Class Crustacea), since for as long as the name Tylos Meigen, 1800, remained an available name, the very well- known generic name Tylos in the Isopoda, which has given its name to a long-established family TYLIDAE, was technically invalid, as a junior homonym of Tylos Meigen in the Diptera (Vandel, ibid. 2 : 347 ; 6 : 174—176). 3. Both the authorship and the date of publication of the Isopod generic name Tylos have been the subject of discussion. This name has been attributed by some authors to Latreille and by others to Audouin. It has commonly, though incorrectly, been treated as having been published in 1825. These subjects were discussed while the Tylos application was under consideration in a note in which I showed (a) that, although the name Tylos was first proposed in manu- script by Latreille, it was first published by Audouin, to whom therefore it must be attributed, and (b) that, although there was some doubt as to when this name was first published, publication could not have taken place before the year 1826 (Hemming, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 177—178).§ 4. For so long as the name Tylos Audouin was considered to have been published in 1825, all that was needed to validate it was the suppression by the Commission under its Plenary Powers of the earlier name Tylos Meigen, 1800. This was the proposal which was therefore laid before the Commission. Unfortunately, at the time when I reached the conclusion that the Isopod Tylos could not be dated earlier than 1826, I overlooked the existence of a generic name Tylos in the Class Arachnida also published in 1826 and therefore possibly before the Isopod Ty/os. This was the name Ty/los Heyden 1826 (sis (Oken) 1826 : 610). This complication only came to light recently when I made a final check-up of the bibliographical references involved in this case. 5. In view of the fact that Tylos Heyden was an invalid junior homonym of Tylos Meigen and that no communication on behalf of Tylos Heyden had been received from any arachnologist at the time when the prescribed Public Notice was given of the proposed use of the Plenary Powers for the purpose of validating the Isopod name Tylos Audouin, [1826], it seemed highly unlikely that there could be any objection from the arachnological point of view to the suppression of the name Jylos Heyden. I took the view, however, that the first step which required to be taken was to ascertain the current status of the name 7y/os Heyden in the Class Arachnida. 6. I accordingly consulted Dr. G. O. Evans, the specialist in charge of the Arachnida at the British Museum (Natural History). Dr. 8 The text of the paper here referred to has been reproduced in paragraph 19 of the present Opinion. OPINION 369 297 Evans has now (12th January 1955) informed me that the name Tylos Heyden was established for a genus of mites, that its type species (Tylos doliaris Heyden, 1826, then a new species) is unrecognisable, that the name has not been used in the literature of the Class Arachnida by any author during the last seventy-five years and con- sequently that there would not be the slightest objection to the suppression of this name for the purpose of providing a secure nomenclatorial basis for the name Ty/os Audouin in the Isopoda. 7. The very helpful communication received from Dr. Evans makes it clear that the field is now set for the Commission to take the action still required to complete the decision already adopted that the name Tylos Audouin, [1826] (Class Crustacea, Order Isopoda) be validated under the Plenary Powers. I accordingly now ask the International Commission to supplement the decision which it has already taken in this matter by the following action, namely :— (1) the suppression under the Plenary Powers of the generic name Tylos Heyden, 1826, for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy ; (2) the addition of the generic name Tylos Heyden, 1826, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers under (1) above, to the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology. 26. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(55)2 : On 26th January 1955, a Voting Paper (V.P.(O.M.(55)2) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “the adoption of the supplementary proposals relating to the generic name Ty/os Audouin, [1826], recommended in paragraph 7 of the memorandum by the Secretary, numbered Z.NAS.)501, submitted simultaneously with the present Voting Paper ” [i.e. in paragraph 7 of the memorandum reproduced in paragraph 25 of the present Opinion]. 27. The Prescribed Voting Period for Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.) (55)2: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the One-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 26th February 1955. 298 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 28. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.) (55)2 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(55)2 was as follows :—® (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following twenty-one (21) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Sylvester-Bradley ; Lemche ; Boschma ; Riley ; Hering ; Vokes; Mayr; Kuhnelt; Bodenheimer; Key; Jaczewski; Esaki; Stoll; do Amaral; Hemming ; Dymond; Tortonese; Bradley (J.C.); Méiller; Cabrera ; Bonnet ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) On Leave of Absence, two (2) : Holthuis ; Mertens ; (d) Voting Papers not returned, two (2) : Hanko!® ; Prantl. ® Between the taking of the vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54) 25 and of that on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(55)2, one Member of the Commission (Dr. Joseph Pearson) had retired and seven new Commissioners had been elected, the total membership thus being increased from 19 to 25. The newly-elected Commissioners were the following :— Dr. K. H. L. Key (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisa- tion, Canberra, A.C.T., Australia) Dr. Alden H. Miller (Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California, Berkeley, California, U.S.A.) Doc. Dr. Ferdinand Prantl (Ndrodni Museum v Praze, Prague, Czechoslovakia) oe Dr. Wilhelm Kiihnelt (Zoologisches Institut der Universitat, Vienna, Austria Professor F. S. Bodenheimer (The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel) Professor Ernst Mayr (Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College, Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A.) Professor Enrico Tortonese (Istituto e Museo di Zoologia della Universita di Torino, Torino, Italy) 1° Commissioner Hanko returned (on 11th March, 1955) a late affirmative vote. OPINION 369 299 29. Declaration of Result of Vote on Voting Paper V.P. (O.M.) (55)2 : On 27th February 1955, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(55)2, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 28 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. 30. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On ist March 1955, Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)25, as supplemented by its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(55)2. 31. Original references: The following are the original references for the names placed on Official Lists and Official Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— corrigiolata, Musca, Linnaeus, 1767, Syst. Nat. (ed. 12) 1(2) : 955 latreillei, Tylos, Audovin, [1826], in Savigny, Descr. Egypte 1(4) (Expl. somm. Planch. Crust.) : 97 Micropeza Meigen, 1803, Mag. ~. Insektenk. (Illiger) 2 : 276 Tylos Meigen, 1800, Nouv. Class. Mouches deux Ailes : 31 Tylos Audouin, [1826], in Savigny, Descr. Egypte 1(4) (Expl. somm. Planch. Crust.) : 96 Tylos Heyden, 1826, Isis (Oken) 1826 : 610 32. Family-group name aspect : The application dealt with in the present Opinion was published in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature prior to the establishment of the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953. It has not been possible since then to deal with this aspect of the present case. This question is, however, now being examined on a separate File to which the Registered Number Z.N.(G.) 125 has been allotted. 300 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 33. At the time of the submission of the present application the name applicable to the second portion of a binomen was ‘trivial name”. This was altered to “ specific name” by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, which at the same time made corresponding changes in the titles of the Official List and Official Index of names of this category. These changes in terminology have been incorporated in the Ruling given in the present Opinion. 34. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Commission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 35. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Sixty-Nine (369) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this First day of March, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Five. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING Printed in England by MetcatFe & Cooprr LimitED, 10-24 Scrutton St., London EC 2 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 20. Pp. 301—320 OPINION 370 Validation under the Plenary Powers of the generic name Archaeocidaris MCCoy, 1844 (Class Echinoidea) by the suppression under the same Powers of the generic name Echinocrinus Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1841 LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1955 Price Ten Shillings (All rights reserved) Issued 2nd December, 1955 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 370 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts., England) President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President: Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. BoscHMA (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (Ast January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) a nee PEARSON (Tasmanian Museum, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia) (27th uly 1948) Dr. Henning LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948) Professor Teiso ESAKI (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mr. Norman Denbigh RILey (British Museum (Natural History), London) (9th June 1950) Professor Tadeusz JACZEWSKI Unstitute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950) Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (Sth July 1950) Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt- Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (5th July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice- President) ace J. R. DyMOND (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 1953 Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. VoxKes (Joins Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezdégazdasdgi Muzeum Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. STOLL (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) Dr. L. B. HoLtuHuts (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Nether- lands) (12th August 1953) OPINION 370 VALIDATION UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS OF THE GENERIC NAME ‘‘ ARCHAEOCIDARIS ”? M°COY, 1844 (CLASS ECHINOIDEA) BY THE SUPPRESSION UNDER THE SAME POWERS OF THE GENERIC NAME ** ECHINOCRINUS ” AGASSIZ (J.L.R.), 1841 RULING :—(1) Under the Plenary Powers the generic name Echinocrinus Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1841, is hereby sup- pressed for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy. (2) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name No. 893 :— The original application by Dr. Mortensen has been reproduced in paragraph 2 of the present Opinion. 352 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 65. At the time when the present application was submitted to the Commission the only guidance available to specialists as to the treatment to be accorded to the names of genera based upon misidentified type species was that afforded by the Commission’s Opinion 65 (1924, Smithson. Publ. 2256 ; 152—169), in which the Commission had given a ruling which implied that in the case of a genus falling in the foregoing class it was the nominal species actually cited which was normally to be accepted as the type species ; the same subject was dealt with by the Commission at its Session held in Lisbon in 1935, the decision then reached being later embodied in Opinion 168 (1945, Opinions Decls. int. Comm. zool. Nomencl. 2 : 411—430). In that Opinion the general principle laid down in Opinion 65 was amplified and confirmed but the central issue, that is, what species should be accepted as the type species of a genus which specialists agreed was based upon a misidentified type species, still remained unsettled. This important question was considered exhaustively by the International Commission when in Paris it had under consideration the recommendation to be submitted to the International Congress of Zoology for the clarification of the rulings given in the foregoing Opinions as a preliminary to the incorporation of those rulings, so clarified, into the Régles themselves. The Commission then agreed to recommend (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 158—159) that words should be inserted in the Régles providing (1) that, subject to (2) below, the nominal species designated or indicated as the type species of a nominal genus at the time when the generic name in question is first published or, where no such species was either so designated or indicated by the original author, the species later selected to be the type species, is to be deemed to have been correctly identified by the original author of the generic name, but (2) that, where there are grounds for considering that the species in question had in fact been misidentified by the original author the case in question is to be submitted to the International Commission. On receiving such a case, the Commission, if satisfied that such a misidentification had occurred, is to use its Plenary Powers to designate as the type species of the genus either the species intended by the original author, when citing the name of the erroneously determined species, or, if the identity of that species is doubtful, a species in harmony with current nomenclatorial usage, except where the Commission is of the opinion that such a use of the Plenary Powers would result in greater confusion than uniformity. The recommendation so submitted by the Inter- national Commission was subsequently approved by the International Congress of Zoology. It is therefore in the light of the foregoing provision that the problem raised by the present application must be judged. 66. It is immediately evident that the problem now to be considered is totally different from that envisaged in the application submitted to the Commission : (1) It is the species to which the name Palae- echinus sphaericus MCCoy, 1844, properly applies which would be the type species of Eriechinus Pomel, 1883 (and, therefore, also of Typhi- echinus Neumayr, 1889) if it were not for the evidence brought forward OPINION 372 353 by Dr. Mortensen and his colleagues that, following de Koninck (1869), Pomel (1883) and Neumayr (1889) misidentified the species to which they applied the Palaeechinus sphaericus MCCoy, 1844, the species so misidentified being Palaeechinus lucazei Julien, 1896. (2) In view of the foregoing evidence of misidentification it is obligatory under the Rég/es that the question of the species to be recognised as the type species of Eriechinus Pomel (and Typhlechinus Neumayr) should be submitted to the International Commission for decision and on the submission of such an application it becomes the duty of the Commission to settle the above question. (3) If the Commission were to be satisfied that Pomel and Neumayr had each misidentified Palaeechinus lucazei Julien as Palaeechinus sphaericus M©Coy, it would then be the duty of the Commission to use its Plenary Powers to designate Palaeechinus lucazei Julien to be the type species of both Eriechinus Pomel, 1883, and of Typhlechinus Neumayr, 1889, unless it was satisfied that the designation of that species to be the type species of those genera would lead to confusion. But it was the whole point of the application submitted by Dr. Mortensen and his colleagues that it would be confusing to accept the above species as the type species of these genera (because to do so would make Lovenechinus Jackson, 1912, a junior subjective synonym of the above generic names) and it was for this reason that the foregoing applicants asked the Com- mission to suppress the above two generic names. If the Commission were to accept the view that it would be confusing to recognise Palae- echinus lucazei Julien as the type species of Eriechinus Pomel (and Typhlechinus Neumayr), the only other species which it would be possible for it to designate as the type species of these genera would be the true Palaeechinus sphaericus MCCoy, 1844. According however to the application submitted to the Commission, the above species was then treated by specialists as belonging to another genus, namely Maccoya Pomel, 1883. If this is the taxonomic view still held by specialists, the position would be that Eriechinus Pomel, 1883, and Maccoya Pomel, 1883, are no more than different names for the same genus ; both were published in the same work on the same date and, as Eriechinus has page precedence over Maccoya®, it would replace that name, unless the Commission were to take steps to prevent this from happening. 67. It will be seen from the foregoing analysis first that the problem involved in the present case is one which can be resolved only by obtaining a decision from the Commission ; second, that it would still be necessary to invoke the use of the Plenary Powers to suppress the generic names Eriechinus Pomel and Typhlechinus Neumayr unless it were felt that there would be no objection to the name Eriechinus 6 At the time when the above passage was written, the Page Precedence Rule governed, as here stated, the relative precedence to be accorded to names published in the same book and on the same date. In 1953 at Copenhagen this provision was repealed by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology which reinstated the First Reviser Rule for use in such cases (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 66-—67, Decisions 123 and 124), 354 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Pomel replacing either (a) the name Lovenechinus Jackson, 1912 (which is was the purpose of the present application to avoid) or (b) the name Maccoya Pomel, 1883, a contingency which was not considered in the application submitted to the Commission. 68. In these circumstances, the questions on which the advice of interested specialists is sought are : (1) Would it be confusing to accept the true Palaeechinus sphaericus M©Coy, 1844, as the type species of Eriechinus Pomel, 1883? If so, would the confusion be such as to call for the use of the Plenary Powers for the purpose of suppressing the name Eriechinus Pomel, 1883? (2) Would it be confusing to accept Palaeechinus lucazei Julien, 1896, as the type species of the genus Eriechinus Pomel (and of the genus Typhlechinus Neumayr)? If so, would the confusion be such as to call for the use of the Plenary Powers for the purpose of suppressing both the foregoing generic names ? (3) If it is considered that neither of the foregoing results would lead to sufficient confusion to call for the use of the Plenary Powers, which of the only two remaining courses of action open to the Commission would be preferred (a) the designation by the Commission of Palae- echinus sphearicus MCCoy, 1844, to be the type species of Eriechinus Pomel, 1883 (which, according to the information furnished in the application, would lead to Maccoya Pomel, 1883, falling as a junior synonym of Eriechinus Pomel, 1883) or (b) the designation by the Commission of Palaeechinus lucazei Julien, 1896, to be the type species of Eriechinus Pomel (in which case, according to the information furnished in the application, Lovenechinus Jackson, 1912, would fall as a junior subjective synonym of Eriechinus Pomel, 1883) ? 13. Issue of Public Notices: Under the revised procedure prescribed by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 51—56), Public Notice of the possible use by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature of its Plenary Powers in the present case was given on 15th April 1952 (a) in Double-Part 7/8 of volume 7 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which was published the appeal to specialists reproduced in paragraph 12 of the present Opinion) and (b) to the other prescribed serial publications. 14. Comments received in response to the Public Notice issued in April 1952: The Public Notice issued in the present case, published in April 1952 concurrently with Mr. Hemming’s appeal to specialists for advice, elicited comments from two specialists, each of whom supported the action recommended by Dr. Mortensen. The specialists concerned were :—(1) Professor Dr. H. Engel (Zoologisch Museum, Amsterdam, The Netherlands) ; (2) Dr. Austin H. Clark (Smithsonian Institution, U.S. National OPINION 372 B15 )5) Museum, Washington, D.C., U.S.A.), one of the original co- applicants in the present case. The communications so received are given in the immediately following paragraphs. No objection to the use of the Plenary Powers for the purposes recommended by Dr. Mortensen was received from any source. 15. Support received from Professor Dr. H. Engel (Zoologisch Museum, Amsterdam, The Netherlands) : On 17th April 1952, Professor Dr. H. Engel (Zoologisch Museum, Amsterdam, The Netherlands) addressed a letter to the Commission, commenting upon a number of cases dealt with in the then just published Part 7/8 of volume 7 of the Bulletin. The following is an extract from the foregoing letter of the portion relating to the present case :—‘‘ It seems desirable to suppress Eriechinus for Loven- echinus (Case 26, p. 244) (Z.N.(S.) 613).”’ 16. Support received from Dr. Austin H. Clark (Smithsonian Institution, U.S. National Museum, Washington, D.C., U.S.A.) : On 20th May 1952, Dr. Austin H. Clark (Smithsonian Institution, U.S. National Museum, Washington, D.C., U.S.A.) addressed a letter to the Commission commenting on the cases of Echinoderm nomenclature dealt with in Part 7/8 of volume 7 of the Bulletin. The following is an extract from the foregoing letter of the portion relating to the present case :—“‘I recommend that . . . Loven- echinus . . . be placed on the List of nomina conservanda in the sense in which they are used in Mortensen’s Monograph of the Echinoidea.”’ Iil—THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 17. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)9 : In May 1954, Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, prepared for the consideration of the Commission a brief note, summarising the history of the present case, giving an account of the interim decision taken in Paris in 1948, of the action subsequently taken to secure the views of interested specialists, and of the comments so elicited. This note was submitted to the Commission on 12th May 1954, to- gether with a Voting Paper (V.P.(O.M.)(54)9), in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or 356 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS against, “ the proposal relating to the name Lovenechinus Jackson, 1912, as set out at the foot of the present Voting Paper.” The draft Ruling so submitted is not reproduced here, for its terms were identical with those of the Ruling given at the head of the present Opinion. 18. The Prescribed Voting Period : As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the One-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 12th June 1954. 19. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)9 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)9 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following sixteen (16) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Sylvester-Bradley ; Lemche ; Riley ; Holthuis ; Hering ; Dymond ; Vokes; Stoll; Esaki; Hanké ; Hemming ; Boschma ; Bradley (J.C.) ; Cabrera ; Bonnet ; Pearson ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) On Leave of Absence, one (1) : Mertens ; (d) Voting Papers not returned, two (2)° : do Amaral ; Jaczewski. * After the close of the Prescribed Voting Period an affirmative vote was received from each of the Commissioners here concerned; from Commissioner Jaczewski on Ist July 1954 ; from Commissioner do Amaral on 3rd July 1954, OPINION 372 357 20. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 13th June 1954, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)9, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 19 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. 21. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘* Opinion ”’ : On 17th March 1955, Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)9. ; 22. Original References: The following are the original references for the names placed on Official Lists and Official Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— Eriechinus Pomel, 1883, Class. méth. Gen. Echin. viv. foss. : 114 Lovenechinus Jackson, 1912, Mem. Bost. Soc. nat. Hist. 7 : 207, 324 missouriensis, Oligoporus, Jackson, 1896, Bull. geol. Soc. Amer. 7 : 184—186, Pl. 9, figs. SO—52 Typhlechinus Neumayr, 1889, Stdmme des Thierr. 1 : 363 23. Family-Group-Name Aspect : The application dealt with in the present Opinion was submitted to the Commission many years before the establishment of the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology. It was not found possible to investigate this aspect of this case prior to the submission to the Commission of Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)9. This question is however now being examined on a separate file to which the Registered Number Z.N.(G.) 125 has been allotted. 24. At the time of the submission of the present application the name applicable to the second portion of a binomen was “trivial name”. This was altered to “specific name” by the 358 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, which at the same time made corresponding changes in the titles of the Official List and Official Index of names of this cate- gory. These changes in terminology have been incorporated in the Ruling given in the present Opinion. 25. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Com- mission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 26. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Seventy-Two (372) of the International Com- mission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Seventeenth day of March, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Five. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS. HEMMING Printed in England by Metcatre & Cooper LimiTED, 10-24 Scrutton St., London E C 2 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, c.M.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 23. Pp. 359—368 OPINION 373 Designation under the Plenary Powers of a type species in harmony with accustomed usage for the genus Palaeopsylla Wagner, 1903 (Class Insecta, Order Siphon- aptera) LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1955 Price Five Shillings (All rights reserved) Issued 2nd December, 1955 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 373 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President: Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts., England) President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice President : Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. BoOscHMA (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (Ast January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) Dr. aerate a (Tasmanian Museum, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia) (27th July 194 Dr. Henning LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948) Professor Teiso ESAKI (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mr. Norman Denbigh RILey (British Museum (Natural History) London) (9th June 1950) Professor Tadeusz JACZEwSKI (Unstitute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950) Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (Sth July 1950) Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (Sth July 1950) ; Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice- President) ee J. R. DyMonpD (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (A2th August — 5 Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. VoKes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezdégazdasdgi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. STOLL (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) Dr. L. B. Ho.tuuis (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (12th August 1953) OPINION 373 DESIGNATION UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS OF A TYPE SPECIES IN HARMONY WITH ACCUSTOMED USAGE FOR THE GENUS ‘‘ PALAEOPSYLLA ”’ WAGNER, 1903 (CLASS INSECTA, ORDER SIPHONAPTERA) RULING :—(1) Under the Plenary Powers, (a) all designations, indications or selections of a type species for the genus Palaeopsylla Wagner, 1903 (Class Insecta, Order Siphonaptera) made prior to the present Ruling are hereby set aside, and (b) the nominal species Palaeop- sylla similis Dampf, 1910, is hereby designated to be the type species of the foregoing genus. (2) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 896 and 897 respectively :— (a) Amphipsylla Wagner, 1909 (gender: feminine) (type species, by selection by Jordan & Roths- child (1913) : Amphipsylla schelkovnikovi Wagner, 1909) ; (b) Palaeopsylla Wagner, 1903 (gender: feminine) (type species, by designation under the Plenary Powers under (1)(b) above : Palaeopsylla similis Dampf, 1910). (3) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 517 and 518 respectively :— (a) schelkovnikovi Wagner, 1909, as published in the combination Amphipsylla schelkovnikovi (specific name of type species of Amphipsylla Wagner, 1903) ; (b) similis Dampf, 1910, as published in the combina- tion Palaeopsylla similis (specific name of type species of Palaeopsvlla Wagner, 1903). JAN5 1956 362 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS I.—THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 21st January 1951 Mr. G. H. E. Hopkins (British Museum (Natural History), The Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts, England) submitted the following application for the use of the Plenary Powers to designate for the genus Palaeopsylla Wagner, 1903 (Class Insecta, Order Siphonaptera) a type species in harmony with accustomed usage :— Proposed use of the Plenary Powers to designate a type species for the genus ‘‘ Palaeopsylla’’ Wagner, 1903 (Class Insecta, Order Siphonaptera) in harmony with the generally accepted use of that name By G. H. E. HOPKINS, O.B.E., M.A. (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts.) The object of the present application is to ask the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature to use its Plenary Powers to set aside a valid, but overlooked or ignored, selection of a type species for the genus Palaeopsylla Wagner, 1903, and to designate as the type species of this genus the species that is universally accepted as such, thus avoiding the serious and quite unnecessary confusion that would inevitably result from the strict application of the normal Rules in this case. 2. Wagner described the genus Palaeopsylla in 1903 (Hor. Soc. ent. ross. 36 : 137), including in it “‘ drei palaarktische Arten : P. sibirica W., P. dasycnemus Rothsch. und P. gracilis T. Die von mir beschriebene Typhlopsylla intermedia . . . muss auch zu der Gattung Palaeopsylla- gestellt worden ’’. Of the species mentioned by Wagner, Ctenopsylla sibirica Wagner, 1898, is now placed in Amphipsylla Wagner, 1909, Typhlopsylla dasycnemus Rothschild, 1897, in Doratopsylla Jordan and Rothschild, 1912, Typhlopsylia gracilis Taschenberg, 1880, is referred to Palaeopsylla as a synonym of Palaeopsylla minor (Dale, 1878), while Typhlopsylla intermedia Wagner, 1902, is now in Tritopsylla da Cunha, 1929. It is claimed (and the claim was accepted as correct by Wagner) that the species that Wagner described in 1903 (Hor. Soc. ent. ross. 36 : 142, pl. 2, fig. 2) as Palaeopsylla gracilis Tasch. was not Taschenberg’s species but one subsequently described by Dampf in 1910 (Schr. phys. 6kon. Ges. K6nigs. 51 : 327, figs. 4, 5d) as Palaeopsylla similis. 3. In 1905 (Proc. U.S. nat. Mus. 29 : 129) Baker included “‘ Paleop- sylla Wagner (type sibirica) ’’ in a key to genera of fleas ; the name of the genus is misspelt, but is given correctly on p. 135 of the same paper. OPINION 373 363 4. No subsequent author has accepted Baker’s undoubtedly valid selection of a type species for Palaeopsylla Wagner, 1903. Wagner himself (1909, Bull. Mus. Caucase 4 : 196, 201)* included ‘* Typhlop- sylla sibirica Wagn.”’ (i.e. Ctenopsylla sibirica Wagner, 1898) in his new genus Amphipsylla. Dampf (1910, Schr. phys. kon. Ges. KGnigs. 51 : 324—330), though not making any assertion as to the type species of Palaeopsylla in this excellent review of the genus, included in it only species which are still considered to be congeneric with Typhlop- sylla gracilis Taschenberg. In his Katalog der palaearktischen Aphanip- teren (1930) Wagner made (: 20) the first assertion as to the type species of Palaeopsylla subsequent to that of Baker, giving it as “‘ gen. typ similis’ and listing “* gracilis Wagn. 1902’’ (which should be 1903) as an error of determination and a synonym of Palaeopsylla similis Dampf, 1910. This selection, though 25 years too late, has (with one exception) been universally accepted, either implicitly or (as in Costa Lima and Hathaway, 1946, Pulgas, bibliografia, catalogo e animais por elas sugados : 202) explicitly. The exception is only partial: Stiles and Stanley (1932, Bull. U.S. nat. Inst. Hlth. 159 : 836), though stating that the type species of Palaeopsylla Wagner, 1903, was sub judice, listed under this generic name only species congeneric with Typhlopsylla gracilis Taschenberg and Palaeopsylla similis Dampf. The statement of Stiles and Stanley that the case was sub judice should mean that it had been referred to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, but this was apparently never done. 5. Reverting to Amphipsylla, Wagner (1909 : 196, 201) included in this genus a new species, A. schelkovnikovi Wagner, 1909 (: 197, 201) and also Typhlopsylla sibirica Wagn., without indicating which of these species he considered to be the type species (the statement of Stiles and Stanley, 1932 : 841, that A. schelkovnikovi Wagner is the type species by original designation is incorrect). Jordan and Rothschild (1913, Zoologist 1913 (869) : 402), in a paper on the genus Amphipsylla Wagner, 1909, stated “‘ Genotype shelkovnikovi [sic], Wagn. (1909) ”’. This is undoubtedly a definite type selection, and it would have been effective in preserving Amphipsylla Wagner in the sense in which it is universally used but for Baker’s prior action in selecting a species (Ctenopsylla sibirica Wagner, 1898) that is undoubtedly congeneric with Amphipsylla_ schelkovnikovi Wagner as type species of Palaeopsylla : because of Baker’s action, however, Amphipsylla Wagner 1909, is a subjective synonym of Palaeopsylla Wagner, 1903, under a strict application of the Régles. No author appears ever to have used the name Amphipsylla Wagner for any other group of species than that which includes Amphipsylla schelkovnikovi Wagner, 1909. * The double page-references to this paper are due to it having been published both in Russian and in German, the first page-reference in each instance being to the Russian version. 364 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 6. The position is, therefore, that if the Régles are to be strictly applied the name Palaeopsylla Wagner, 1903, must be transferred from the group of species to which it is universally applied (which would be left nameless) to the group equally universally known as Amphipsylla Wagner, 1909, which belongs to a different family. No conceivable purpose could be served by this transfer. 7. In order to avoid the state of chaos that would result from strict application of the Régles to this case, I now ask the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature :— (1) to use its Plenary Powers :— (a) to set aside all designations, indications or selections of a type species for the genus Palaeopsylla Wagner, 1903, made prior to the decision now proposed to be given ; (b) to designate Palaeopsylla similis Dampf, 1910, to be the type species of Palaeopsylla Wagner, 1903 ; (2) to place on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology the two names mentioned below :— (a) Palaeopsylla Wagner, 1903 (gender of generic name: feminine) (type species, by designation as proposed under (1) (b) above, under the Plenary Powers : Palaeo- psylla similis Dampf, 1910) ; (b) Amphipsylla Wagner, 1909 (gender of generic name: feminine) (type species, by designation of Jordan and Rothschild, 1913 : Amphipsylla schelkovnikovi Wagner, 1909) ; (3) to place the under-mentioned trivial names on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology :— (a) similis Dampf, 1910, as published in the combination Palaeopsylla similis (trivial name of type species of Palaeopsylla Wagner, 1903) ; (b) schelkovnikovi Wagner, 1909, as published in the com- bination Amphipsylla schelkoynikovi (trivial name of type species of Amphipsylla Wagner, 1909). Il—THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application: Upon the receipt of Mr. Hopkins’ application, the question of the use of the OPINION 373 365 Plenary Powers for the purpose of designating for the genus Palaeopsylla Wagner, 1903, a type species in harmony with accustomed usage was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 627. 3. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 13th May 1952 and was published on 23rd July 1952 in Part 8 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Hopkins, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 239—241). 4, Issue of Public Notices: Under the revised procedure prescribed by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 51—56) Public Notice of the possible use by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature of its Plenary Powers in the present case was given on 23rd July 1952 (a) in Part 8 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Mr. Hopkins’ application was published) and (b) to the other prescribed serial publications. In addition, such Public Notice was given to certain general zoological serial publications and also to a number of entomological serials in Europe and America. 5. No objection received to the action proposed: The issue of the Public Notices specified in paragraph 4 above elicited no objection to the use of the Plenary Powers in the manner proposed in Mr. Hopkins’ application. IlI.—THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 6. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(54)35 : On 17th March 1954 a Voting Paper (V.P.(54)35) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, ‘the proposal relating to the name Palaeopsylla Wagner, 1903, 366 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS as set out in paragraph 7 at the foot of page 240 and the top of page 241 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature” [i.e. in paragraph 7 of the application reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion]. 7. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 17th June 1954. 8. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)35 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)35 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following nineteen (19) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Riley ; Holthuis ; Vokes ; Hering ; Bonnet ; Boschma ; Lemche ; Dymond; do Amaral; Esaki; Mertens ; Jaczewski ; Sylvester-Bradley ; Bradley (J.C.) ; Hanko ; Pearson ; Stoll; Hemming; Cabrera ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) Voting Papers not returned : None. 9, Declaration of Result of Vote: On 18th June 1954, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(54)35, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in para- graph 8 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the OPINION 373 367 foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. 10. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘° Opinion ”’ : On 22nd March 1955 Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)35. 11. Original References: The following are the original references for the names placed on Official Lists by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— Amphipsylla Wagner, 1909, Mitt. Kaukas. Mus. 4: 196, 201 (This paper was published both in Russian and in German. The first page- reference is to the Russian text, the second, to the German text.) Palaeopsylla Wagner, 1903, Hor. Soc. ent. ross. 36 : 137 schelkovnikovi, Amphipsylla, Wagner, 1909, Mitt. Kaukas. Mus. 4 : 197, 201 (For an explanation of the double page reference see note above to Amphipsylla Wagner, 1909.) similis, Palaeopsylla, Dampf, 1910, Schr. phys. 6kon. Ges. KGnigs. 51 : 327, figs. 4, 5d 12. The following is the reference for the selection of a type species for Amphipsylla Wagner, 1909, specified in the Ruling given in the present Opinion :—Jordan & Rothschild, 1913, Zoologist 1913 (869) : 402. 13. Family-Group name aspects : The application dealt with in the present Opinion was published in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature prior to the establishment of the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953. It has been ascertained that an addition, or additions, to the foregoing Official List and/or to the corresponding Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology will need to be made in order to complete the action, which, under the General Directives given to the International Commission by the International 368 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Congress of Zoology, is required to be taken in the present case. This questicn is now being examined on a separate File to which the Registered Number Z.N.(G.) 125 has been allotted. 14. At the time of the submission of the present application the name applicable to the second portion of a binomen was “ trivial name”. This was altered to “ specific name ”’ by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, which at the same time made corresponding changes in the titles of the Official List and Official Index of names of this category. These changes in terminology have been incorporated in the Ruling given in the present Opinion. 15. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in - dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Commission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 16. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Seventy-Three (373) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twenty-Second day of March, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Five. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING Printed in England by Mretcarre & Cooper Limitep, 10-24 Scrutton St., London EC 2 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, c.M.c., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 24. Pp. 369—378 OPINION 374 Acceptance of the generic name Antirhynchonella as from Oehlert, 1887 (Class Brachiopoda) and the addition of that name to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1955 Price Five Shillings (All rights reserved) Issued 2nd December, 1955 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 374 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts., England) President : Professor James Chester. Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President : Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. BoscHMA (Rijksmuseum van WNatuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (Ast January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) Dr. Joseph PEARSON (Tasmanian Museum, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia) (27th July 1948) Dr. Henning LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948) Professor Teiso ESAKI (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Se aay Denbigh RILEY (British Museum (Natural History), London) (9th une 1950 Professor Tadeusz JACZEWSKI (Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950) Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (Sth July 1950) Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (Sth July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice- President) Dea J. R. DyMonpD (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 53 Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. Voxes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezégazdasdgi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (A12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. SToLt (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) Dr. L. B. HoLtuuis (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Nether- lands) (12th August 1953) OPINION 374 ACCEPTANCE OF THE GENERIC NAME ‘“ ANTIRHYN- CHONELLA ”’ AS FROM OEHLERT, 1887 (CLASS BRACHIOPODA) AND THE ADDITION OF THAT NAME TO THE “ OFFICIAL LIST OF GENERIC NAMES IN ZOOLOGY ”’ RULING :—(1) It is hereby ruled that the generic name Antirhynchonella as published in 1871 in the index to volume 2 of Quenstedt’s Die Brachiopoden is a nomen nudum possessing no status in zoological nomenclature. (2) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name No. 898 :—Antirhynchonella Oehlert, 1887 (gender : feminine) (type species, by original designation : Atrypa linguifera Sowerby (J. de C.), 1839) (Class. Brachiopoda). (3) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name No. 519 :—linguifera Sowerby (J. de C.), 1839, as published in the combination Atrypa linguifera (specific name of type species of Antirhynchonella Oehlert, 1887). (4) The under-mentioned generic names or reputed generic names are hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 313 and 314 respectively :— (a) Antirhynchonella Quenstedt, 1871 (a nomen nudum) ; (b) Barrandella Hall & Clarke, 1894 (a junior objective synonym of Antirhynchonella Oehlert, 1887). JAN5 1956 372 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS I—THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 2nd November 1951 Dr. Thomas W. Amsden (The Johns Hopkins University, Department of Geology, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) addressed a preliminary letter to the Office of the Commission on the question of the status of the generic name Antirhynchonella as published in 1871 in the index to volume 2 of Quenstedt’s Die Brachiopoden, and on 4th April 1952, following correspondence with the Secretary, he submitted the following application on this subject to the International Commission :— Request for a Ruling that the alleged name ‘‘ Antirhynchonella ”’ Quenstedt, 1871, is a ‘“‘nomen nudum’? (Phylum Brachiopoda, Class Articulata) By THOMAS W. AMSDEN (The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) The present application arises out of the need for determining whether the alleged generic name Antirhynchonella Quenstedt, 1871 (Phylum Brachiopoda, Class Articulata) possesses any status in zoological nomenclature. The circumstances of this case are set forth in the following paragraphs. 2. The name Antirhynchonella was first published in 1871 in the index at the end of Quenstedt’s Die Brachiopoden, Petrefactenkunde Deutschlands (2 : 727). This name was not cited by Quenstedt in the summary which he gave of the genera and subgenera recognised in his work. Nor does it appear on the page ( : 231) of volume 2 cited in the index against this name. On the last named page there does, however, occur the following passage in which this word appears in the vernacular (German) form “ Antirhynchonellen ’’ :— Aechte Pentameren haben entweder an der Stirn correspondirende Valven, oder Sinus und Wulst ist entgegengesetzt den Rhynchonellen, gleichsam Antirhynchonellen. Selbst die faustgrosse eifOrmige tenuistriatus Walmst. auf Gothland, vom Habitus des glatten Esthonus (Eichwald Lethaea ross. I pag. 789) bewhart diesen markirten Unterschied. Dagegen zeichnen die Englander einen kleinen glatten Pentamerus linguifer Murch. Siluria 22.21 aus, der seine Zunge entgegengesetzt zur Bauchschale hinauf wendet. 3. The next usage of the name Antirhynchonella was by Oehlert in 1887 (in Fischer’s Manuel de Conchyliologie 11 : 1311), where it was attributed to Quenstedt. Ochlert treated it as the name of a section of OPINION 374 373 Conchidium and clearly used it as a subgeneric name. Oehlert gave a diagnosis for Antirhynchonella and designated Atrypa_ linguifera Sowerby (J. de C.), 1839 (in Murchison, Silurian System : 629) as the type species, though (following Quenstedt in the passage quoted above) Oehlert incorrectly attributed this name to Murchison. 4. The status of the name Antirhynchonella was considered again by Hall & Clarke in 1894 (Nat. Hist. New York, Paleontology 2 : 245, footnote) ; these authors seem to have been in some doubt as to whether Quenstedt had used this name in a generic sense, pointing out that in the text he had not used the word as a Latin noun but had referred only to the “‘ Antirhynchonellas ’’, the Latin form appearing only in the index. In spite of this doubt Hall & Clarke apparently decided to accept the name Antirhynchonella as an available name as from Quenstedt, but they rejected Oehlert’s action in designating Atrypa linguifera Sowerby as the type species of this genus for the following reason: “If any species can be taken as typical of ANTIRHYNCHONELLA, it is Conchidium tenuistriatus Walmstedt, men- tioned in immediate connection with the single use of this name, and not Pentamerus linguifera, which is cited by Quenstedt as an illustration of the fact that the position of the fold and sinus in the pentameroids iS sometimes the same as in the Rhynchonellas. Antirhynchonella, if adopted, would be simply synonymous with Conchidium”. Hall & Clarke took the view that the species bearing the trivial name fenuiis- triatus Walmstedt should be referred to the genus Conchidium and erected a new nominal genus Barrandella (: 241, 245) for those pentameroid brachiopods having the structure of Atrypa linguifera Sowerby. 5. Most later authors have accepted Hall & Clarke’s interpretation (e.g. Schuchert & Cooper, 1932, Mem. Peabody Mus. nat. Hist. 4 (1) : 173, 181). 6. It appears to the present applicant however, that the manner in which the name Antirhynchonella was published in 1871 in the index to Quenstedt’s book cannot properly be regarded as acceptable. In the first place, there is no evidence at all that Quenstedt himself was responsible for the appearance of this name in the index to his book, it being just as probable that this entry in the index was due to a misreading of the passage on page 231 (quoted at the beginning of the present application) on the part of the compiler of the index. Second, even if Quenstedt himself compiled the index and was thus responsible for the appearance of the name Antirhynchonella on page 727, such a method of publication cannot, it is suggested, properly be held to have provided the name Antirhynchonella Quenstedt with an ‘indication ” for the purposes of Proviso (a) to Article 25 of the Régles. For (as has been shown) the name Antirhynchonella does not 374 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS appear on the page ( : 231) cited in the index, the only reference on that page which can be held to have any connection with this subject being the vernacular word ‘‘ Antirhynchonellen”’. But as long ago as 1907 the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature ruled (in its Opinion 1) that a “‘ vernacular name ”’ is not to be accepted as an “‘ indication ’’, and in 1948 this portion of Opinion 1 was incorporated into the Régles by the International Congress of Zoology (see 1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4:149). The conclusion inevitably follows that, even if Quenstedt did on the occasion cited above publish a generic name Antirhynchonella, that name as so published (on p.727) must be regarded as being a nomen nudum, the reference there given being to page 231, where the name was mentioned only as a vernacular name. 7. In these circumstances the name Antirhynchonella dates for the purposes of the Law of Priority only from Oehlert, 1887, and the type species is unquestionably Atrypa linguifera Sowerby, 1839, the species then so designated by Oehlert. The acceptance of this species as the type species of Antirhynchonella runs counter to the interpretation given to it by Hall & Clark and most later authors, but in the present case this is not a disadvantage, since Pentamerus tenuistriatus Walm- stedt, the species accepted by Hall & Clarke as the type species of Antirhynchonella, is one, of which the internal structure has never, to my knowledge, been adequately defined, whereas the structure of Atrypa linguifera Sowerby has been closely studied and is well known. The only change following the acceptance of this species as the type species of Antirhynchonella Oehlert, 1877, will be the disappearance in synonymy of the name Barrandella Hall & Clark, 1894, which is an objective synonym of Antirhynchonella Oehlert, having the same species as its type species. No serious inconvenience would follow this change ; it would not affect any name of supra-generic rank. 8. The International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature is accordingly asked :— (1) to rule that, as published in 1871 in the index to Quenstedt’s Die Brachiopoden the name Antirhynchonella is a nomen nudum ; (2) to place the name Antirhynchonella Oehlert, 1887 (gender of generic name : feminine) (type species by original designation : Atrypa linguifera Sowerby (J. de C.), 1839) on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology ; (3) to place the trivial name /inguifera Sowerby (J. de C.), 1839, as published in the combination Atrypa linguifera (trivial name of type species of Antirhynchonella Oehlert, 1887) on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology : OPINION 374 375 (4) to place on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic - Names in Zoology :— (a) the name Antirhynchonella Quenstedt, 1871 (a nomen nudum) ; (b) the name Barrandella Hall & Clarke, 1894 (a junior objective synonym of Antirhynchonella Oehlert, 1887). 9. The problem dealt with in the present application has arisen in the course of the preparation of the section on pentamerid brachiopods for the forthcoming Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology, and it will therefore be greatly appreciated if the International Commission can afford to this application all practicable priority. II—THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt of Dr. Amsden’s application, the question of the date as from which the generic name Antirhynchonella ranked as having been published for the purposes of Article 25 of the Régles, was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 632. 3. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 13th May 1952 and was published on 23rd July 1952 in Part 8 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Amsden, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 242—244). 4. No objection received to the action proposed. The publication of the present application elicited no objection to the action sought in the present case. III—THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 5. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(54)36 : On 17th March 1954, a Voting Paper (V.P.(54)36) was issued in which the Members 376 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “the proposal relating to the name Antirhynchonella as alleged to have been published by Quenstedt in 1871, as set out in para- graph 8 on page 244 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature ”’ [i.e. in paragraph 8 of the application reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion]. 6. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 17th June, 1954. 7. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)36: At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)36 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following nineteen (19) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Riley ; Sylvester-Bradley ; Holthuis; Vokes ; Hering ; Bonnet ; Boschma; Lemche ; Dymond; do Amaral ; Mertens; Esaki; Hemming; Jaczewski; Bradley (J.C.) ; Hanko ; Pearson ; Stoll; Cabrera ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) Voting Papers not returned : None. 8. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 18th June 1954, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(54)36, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 7 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the décision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. OPINION 374 Him) 9. General question of the status of names published only in the indexes of works, in the body of which vernacular names are used for the taxa concerned. : In the course of the Prescribed Voting Period correspondence took place between Commissioners Holthuis and Boschma and the Secretary on the question of principle involved in the status of names published in indexes which was raised indirectly in the present case. It was agreed in this correspondence that the various type of case which might arise should be investigated by the Secretary with the view to the submission of proposals for the adoption by the Commission of a Declaration clarifying the meaning of the Rég/es in this regard. This investigation was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 929. It is hoped that proposals on this subject will be published in an early Part of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomen- clature’. 10. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 25th March 1955 Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)36. 11. Original References: The following are the original references for the names placed on Official Lists and Official Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— Antirhynchonella Quenstedt, 1871, Die Brachiopoden Petrifactenk. Deutschlands 2 : 727 Antirhynchonella Oehlert, 1887, in Fischer’s Manuel Conchyliol. tie: 1311 Barrandella Hall & Clarke, 1894, Nat. Hist. New York. Pal. 2: 241, 245 linguifera, Atrypa, Sowerby (J. de C.), 1839, in Murchison, Silur. Syst. : 629 12. Family-group-name aspects: Dr. Thomas Amsden, the applicant in the present case, has reported (in Jitt.) that the 1 The proposals here referred to were published on 7th July 1955 in Part 8 of volume 11 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (: 246—249). 378 OPINIONS. AND DECLARATIONS generic name Antirhynchonella has not been taken as the base for a family-group name. 13. At the time of the submission of the present application the name applicable to the second portion of a binomen was ‘trivial name”. This was altered to “ specific name” by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, which at the same time made corresponding changes in the titles of the Official List and Official Index of names of this category. These changes in terminology have been incorporated in the Ruling given in the present Opinion. 14. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Commission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 15. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Seventy-Four (374) of the International Com- mission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twenty-Fifth day of March, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Five. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING Printed in England by Murcatre & Coorrr Limirep, 10-24 Scrutton St., London EC 2 oh ==, RENDERED BY THE INTER- ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE | Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS NATIONAL COMMISSION ON Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, c.M.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 25. Pp. 379—390 OPINION 375 Designation under the Plenary Powers of a type species in harmony with current usage for the genus Heterandria Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1853 (Class Osteichthyes) LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1955 Price Six Shillings (All rights reserved) | Issued 2nd December, 1955 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 375 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts., England) President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President : Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. BoscHMA (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (Ast January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) Dr. Joseph PEARSON (Tasmanian Museum, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia) (27th July 1948) Dr. Henning LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948) Professor Teiso EsAKI (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mr. Norman Denbigh RiLey (British Museum (Natural History), London) (9th June 1950) Professor Tadeusz JACZEWSKI Unstitute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950) Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (5th July 1950) Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (Sth July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice- President) Professor J. R. DyMOND (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 1953) Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. Vokes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezdégazdasdgi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. STOLL (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) Dr. L. B. HoLtHuts (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Nether- lands) (12th August 1953) OPINION 375 DESIGNATION UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS OF A TYPE SPECIES IN HARMONY WITH CURRENT USAGE FOR THE GENUS ‘“‘ HETERANDRIA ”’ AGASSIZ (J.L.R.), 1853 (CLASS OSTEICHTHYES) RULING :—(1) Under the Plenary Powers, (a) all designations or selections of type species for the genus Heterandria Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1853 (Class Osteichthyes) made prior to the present Ruling are hereby set aside, and (b) the nominal species Heterandria formosa Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1855, is hereby designated to be the type species of the foregoing genus. (2) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 899 to 901 respectively :— (a) Heterandria Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1853 (gender : femi- nine) (type species, by designation under the Plenary Powers under (1)(b) above : Heterandria formosa Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1853) ; (b) Gambusia Poey, 1854 (gender: feminine) (type species, by selection by Jordan & Copeland (1876) ; Gambusia punctata Poey, 1854) ; (c) Poeciliopsis Regan, 1913 (gender : feminine) (type species, by selection by Henn (1916): Poecilia presidionis Jordan & Culver, 1895). (3) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 520 to 522 respectively :— (a) formosa Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1855, as published in the combination Heterandria formosa (specific name of type species of Heterandria Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1853) ; JAN 5 1956 382 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (b) punctata Poey, 1854, as published in the combina- tion Gambusia punctata (specific name of type species of Gambusia Poey, 1854) ; (c) presidionis Jordan & Culver, 1895, as published in the combination Poecilia presidionis (specific name of type species of Poeciliopsis Regan, 1913). I.—THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE The problem involved in the present case was first brought to the notice of the Commission in an informal communication dated 24th December 1948, received from Dr. Reeve M. Bailey (University of Michigan, Museum of Zoology, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A.). On 12th August 1949 Dr. Bailey followed up this communication by submitting an application in regard to this case. At that time the whole resources of the Office of the Commission were being directed to the preparation and publication of the Official Records of the discussions at the Session held by the Commission in Paris in July 1948, and it was not until towards the close of 1950 that it was possible to resume work on the preparation for publication in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomen- clature of applications relating to individual nomenclatorial problems. 1n consequence of certain decisions by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948, regarding the scope and content of Opinions rendered by the Commission, certain minor adjustments were required in all applications at that time awaiting attention. Following correspondence between the Secretary and the applicant, the required adjustments in the present case were made in the early part of 1952 and on OPINION 375 383 29th March of that year the following application was submitted to the Commission :— Proposed use of the Plenary Powers to designate a type species for the genus ‘‘ Heterandria ’’ Agassiz, 1853 (Class Osteichthyes, Order Cyprinodontida) in harmony with current usage By REEVE M. BAILEY (University of Michigan, Museum of Zoology, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A.) The object of the present application is to invite the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature to use its Plenary Powers for the purpose of designating as the type species of the genus Heterandria Agassiz, 1853 (Class Osteichthyes, Order Cyprinodontida, Family POECILIIDAE) a species in harmony with current usage and thus to prevent the confusion resulting from the transfer of this generic name to a different genus which would be necessary under a strict application of the normal provisions of the Régles. The history of this case and the details of the proposals now submitted are given in the following paragraphs. 2. Recent authors have regarded the genus Heterandria Agassiz, 1853 (July) (Amer. J. Sci. Arts (2) 16 : 135) as comprising only the single species Heterandria formosa Agassiz, 1855 (Amer. J. Sci. Arts (2) 19 : 136), a tiny poecillid fish from the south-eastern United States. Agassiz gave a definition for this genus but did not cite any nominal species as belonging to it. 3. Up to 1948 it would have been necessary to determine the species to be regarded as having been originally included in this genus (and thus as being eligible for selection as the type species) in accordance with the procedure laid down in the Commission’s Opinion 46 (1912, Smithson. Publ. 2060 : 104—107), but in that year the International Congress of Zoology at its Paris meeting substituted a revised and simplified method for determining the species to be regarded as the type species of a nominal genus established without cited nominal species (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4: 159—160, 346). Under this decision the species first referred to such a genus by a later author is, or are, the only species which are to be treated as having been originally included species and therefore as being eligible for selection as the type species of the genus concerned ; where only one such species was so cited, that species becomes the type species of the genus by monotypy. 4. The first authors to refer any nominal species to the genus Heterandria Agassiz were Baird and Girard who in 1853 (September) 384 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (Proc. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad. 6 : 390) described four new nominal species as belonging to this genus. These species were H. affinis : H. nobilis : H. patruelis (now regarded as a subjective synonym of affinis) ; H. occidentalis. Under the ruling referred to in paragraph 3 above, these nominal species are alone eligible for selection as the type species of Heterandria Agassiz. 5. Of the four nominal species cited above, the first three are currently considered to be congeneric with Gambusia punctata Poey, 1854 (Mém. Hist. nat. Cuba 1 : 384), the type species, by selection by Jordan & Copeland (1876, Bull. Buffalo Soc. nat. Sci. 3 : 142) of the genus Gambusia Poey, 1854 (Mém. Hist. nat. Cuba : 382). The fourth species (H. occidentalis) is regarded as being congeneric with Poecilia presidionis Jordan & Culver, 1895 (Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci. (2) 5 : 413), the type species, by selection by Henn (1916, Ann. Carnegie Mus. 10 : 119), of the genus Poeciliopsis Regan, 1913 (Proc. zool. Soc. Lond. 1913 : 996). 6. Thus, the strict application of the ordinary rules in this case would lead to the transfer of the generic name Heterandria Agassiz from the genus for which it is always employed (the genus typified by 4. formosa Agassiz, 1855) either to the genus now known as Gambusia Poey, 1854, or to the genus now known as Poeciliopsis Regan, 1913. At the same time a new name would be required for the genus to be used for H. formosa. It must further be noted that either of the above changes would lead to serious disturbance in nomenclature at the tribe and subfamily name level. (1) The genus Gambusia Poey is the type genus of the tribe GAMBUSIINI Hubbs, 1924 (Misc. Publ. Mus. Zool. Univ. Mich. 13:7). (2) It is the type genus also of the subfamily GAMBUSIINAE Gill, 1893 (Nat. Acad. Sci. 6: 133). (3) The genus Heterandria Agassiz is the type genus of the tribe HETERANDRIINI Hubbs, 1924 (Misc. Publ. Mus. Zool. Univ. Mich. 13:7). (4) The genus Poeciliopsis Regan is the type genus of the subfamily POECILIOPSINAE Hubbs, 1924 (ibid. 13 : 9). 7. The genus Gambusia is a rather large genus and is now almost cosmopolitan owing to the widespread introductions which have been made in various areas as a measure of mosquito control. The genus Poeciliopsis contains about six species, which are distributed on the Pacific slope from Arizona to Colombia. 8. In view of the widespread confusion which would follow the strict application of the normal rules in this case, it is here proposed that the Commission should intervene by using its Plenary Powers to give valid force to the present practice by which H. formosa Agassiz is recognised as the type species of the genus Heterandria Agassiz. OPINION 375 385 The following ichthyologists have been consulted on this problem and support the present application :— Dr. William A. Gosline Department of Zoology and Entomology, Dr Dr Dr Dr Dr . Carl L. Hubbs . Robert R. Miller . George S. Myers . Luis Rene Rivas . Leonard P. Schultz University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Territory of Hawaii. Scripps Institution of Oceanography, La Jolla, California Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan Natural History Museum, Stanford Uni- versity, California Department of Zoology, University of Miami, Miami, Florida U.S. National Museum, Washington, D.C. 9. The concrete proposals now submitted are that the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature should :— (1) use its Plenary Powers to set aside any designations or selections of type species for the genus Heterandria Agassiz, 1853, made prior to the decision now proposed to be taken and to designate Heterandria formosa Agassiz, 1855, to be the type species of the foregoing genus ; (2) place the following generic names on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology :— (a) Heterandria Agassiz, 1853 (gender of generic name: feminine) (type species, by designation under the Plenary Powers, as proposed in (1) above: Heterandria formosa Agassiz, 1855) ; (b) Gambusia Poey, 1854 (gender of generic name : feminine) (type species, by selection by Jordan & Copeland (1876) : Gambusia punctata Poey, 1854) ; (c) Poeciliopsis Regan, 1913 (gender of generic name: feminine) (type species, by selection by Henn (1916): Poecilia presidionis Jordan & Culver, 1895) ; (3) place the following trivial names on the Official List of Specific ; Trivial Names in Zoology :— (a) formosa Agassiz, 1855, as published in the combination Heterandria formosa (trivial name of type species of Heterandria Agassiz, 1853) ; 386 OPINIONS AND: DECLARATIONS (b) punctata Poey, 1854, as published in the combination Gambusia punctata (trivial name of type species of Gambusia Poey, 1854) ; (c) presidionis Jordan & Culver, 1895, as published in the combination Poecilia presidionis (trivial name of type species of Poeciliopsis Regan, 1913). Il—THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt of Dr. Reeve Bailey’s preliminary enquiry, the question of the possible use of the Commission’s Plenary Powers for the purpose of designating for the genus Heterandria Agassiz a type species in harmony with current usage was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 382. 3. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 13th May 1952 and was published on 23rd July 1952 in Part 9 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Bailey, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 263—265). 4. Issue of Public Notices: Under the revised procedure prescribed by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 51—56), Public Notice of the possible use by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature of its Plenary Powers in the present case was given on 23rd July 1952 (a) in Part 9 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Dr. Bailey’s applica- tion was published) and (b) to the other prescribed serial publica- tions, In addition, such Public Notice was given to a number of general zoological serial publications. OPINION 375 387 5. Support for the present application : The present application was supported at the time of its submission by the six specialists named in paragraph 8 of Dr. Bailey’s paper (paragraph 1 of the present Opinion). In addition, the issue of the Public Notices specified in paragraph 4 above elicited support for the solution sought in the present case from Dr. K. S. Misra (Zoological Survey of India, Calcutta) in a letter dated 22nd January 1953, from which the following is an extract of the portion setting out Dr. Misra’s views on this case :—‘“I am of the opinion that H. formosa Ag. should be recognised as the type species of the genus Heterandria Agassiz ’”’. 6. No objection received to the action proposed : The publica- tion of the present application elicited no objection to the action sought in the present case. l1I—THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 7. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(54)37 : On 24th March 1955, a Voting Paper (V.P.(54)37) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “the proposal relating to the name Heterandria Agassiz, 1853, as set out in paragraph 9 on page 265 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature” [i.e. in paragraph 9 of the application reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion]. 8. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 24th June 1954. 388 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 9. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)37: At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)37 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following nineteen (19) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Riley ; Holthuis ; Lemche ; Hering; Vokes ; Bonnet ; Dymond; Esaki; Boschma; Sylvester-Bradley ; Bradley (J.C.) ; Hanko ; do Amaral; Pearson ; Stoll ; Hemming ; Cabrera; Mertens; Jaczewski ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) Voting Papers not returned : None. 10. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 26th June 1954, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(54)37, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in para- graph 9 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Com- mission in the matter aforesaid. 11. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 27th March 1955, Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)37. OPINION 375 389 12. Original References: The following are the original references for the names placed on the Official Lists by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— formosa, Heterandria, Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1855, Amer. J. Sci. Arts (2) 19 : 136 Gambusia Poey, 1854, Mém. Hist. nat. Cuba 1 : 382 Heterandria Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1853, Amer. J. Sci. Arts (2) 16 : 135 Poeciliopsis Regan, 1913, Proc. zool. Soc. Lond. 1913 : 996 presidionis, Poecilia, Jordan & Culver, 1895, Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci. (2) 5 : 413 punctata, Gambusia, Poey, 1854, Mem. Hist. nat. Cuba 1 : 384 13. The following are the references for the selections of type species for the under-mentioned genera ence in the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— For Gambusia Poey, 1854: Jordan & Copeland, 1876, Bull. Buffalo Soc. nat. Sci. 3 : 142 For Poeciliopsis Regan, 1913: Henn, 1916, Ann. Carnegie Mus. 10 : 119 14. Family-Group Name aspects: The application dealt with in the present Opinion was published in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature prior to the establishment of the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953. It has been ascertained that an addition, or additions, to the foregoing Official List and/or to the corresponding Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology will need to be made in order to complete the action, which, under the General Directives given to the International Commission by the Inter- national Congress of Zoology, is required to be taken in the present case. This question is now being examined on a separate File to which the Registered Number Z.N.(G.) 125 has been allotted. 15. At the time of the submission of the present application the name applicable to the second portion of a binomen was “trivial name”. This was altered to “specific name” by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 390 “OPINIONS ‘AND DECLARATIONS 1953, which at the same time made corresponding changes in the titles of the Official List and Official Index of names of this category. These changes in terminology have been incorporated in the Ruling given in the present Opinion. 16. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Commission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon bim in that behalf. 17. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Seventy-Five (375) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twenty-Seventh day of March, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Five. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING Printed in England by Metcatre & Cooper Limitep, 10-24 Scrutton St., London EC 2 _ — NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 26. Pp. 391—400 OPINION 376 Suppression under the Plenary Powers of the generic name Lobacantha Kirby (W.), 1837, for the purpose of rendering the generic name Platypria Guérin-Méneville, 1840 (Class Insecta, Order Coleoptera) the oldest available name e for the genus concerned = LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1955 Price Five Shillings (All rights reserved) OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS | RENDERED BY THE INTER- Issued 2nd December, 1955 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 376 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts., England) ; President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President : Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. BoscHMA (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (Ast January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) we haar yy, (Tasmanian Museum, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia) (27th uly Dr. Henning LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948) Professor Teiso Esaki (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mie Easy Denbigh RILEY (British Museum (Natural History), London) (9th une 1950 Professor Tadeusz JACZEWsKI (Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950) Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (Sth July 1950) Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (5th July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice- President) een J. R. DymMonpD (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. Voxes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12 August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezdégazdasdgi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. STOLL (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) Dr. L. B. HoLtuuts (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Nether- lands) (12th August 1953) ——_ a ee oe OPINION 376 SUPPRESSION UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS OF THE GENERIC NAME “ LOBACANTHA ” KIRBY (W.), 1837, FOR THE PURPOSE OF RENDERING THE GENERIC NAME ‘“ PLATYPRIA ’? GUERIN-MENEVILLE, 1840 (CLASS INSECTA, ORDER COLEOPTERA) THE OLDEST AVAILABLE NAME FOR THE GENUS CONCERNED RULING :—(1) Under the Plenary Powers the generic name Lobacantha Kirby (W.), 1837, is hereby suppressed for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy. (2) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name No. 902 :—Platypria Guérin-Méneville, 1840 (gender : feminine) (type species, by selection by Maulik — (1919) : Hispa echidna Guérin-Méneville, 1840) (Class Insecta, Order Coleoptera). (3) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name No. 523 :—echidna Guérin-Méneville, 1840, as published in the combination Hispa echidna (specific name of type species of Platypria Guérin-Méneville, 1840). (4) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with the Name No. 315 :—Lobacantha Kirby (W.), 1837, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers under (1) above. 394 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS I.—THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 27th July 1951 Herr Erich Uhmann (Stollberg-Sachsen, Germany) submitted to the Commission (through Professor Dr. E. M. Hering (Zoclogisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin)) a preliminary application for the suppression under the Plenary Powers of the generic name Lobacantha Kirby, 1837 (Class Insecta, Order Coleoptera), a senior, but totally overlooked, subjective synonym of the name Platypria Guérin-Méneville, 1840. Certain minor adjustments were needed in the form of this application in order to bring it into line with the requirements prescribed by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948, and these were completed by 21st March 1952 when the following application was submitted by Herr Uhmann:— Proposed use of the Plenary Powers for the purpose of suppressing the generic name ‘‘ Lobacantha’’ Kirby, 1837, and thus rendering available the name ‘‘ Platypria ’’ Guérin-Meneville, 1840 (Class Insecta, Order Coleoptera)* By ERICH UHMANN (Stollberg-Sachsen, Germany) I desire to petition the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature to use its Plenary Powers for the purpose of suppressing the generic name Lobacantha Kirby, 1837 (in Richardson, Faun. bor.- amer. (4) : 227), thereby rendering the well-known name Platypria Guérin-Méneville, 1840 (Rey. zool., Paris 1840 : 139) (Class Insecta, Order Coleoptera, Family CHRYSOMELIDAE, Subfamily HISPINAE), the oldest available name for the genus in question. 2. The following are the relevant particulars relating to the names involved in this case :— (1) Lobacantha Kirby, 1837 This name was introduced by Kirby as follows : ‘“* We have therefore here types of three subdivisions viz. Hispa proper, 1 This paper was numbered by Herr Uhmann as Number 115 in his series ‘** Contribution to a knowledge of the Hispinae (Coleoptera, Chrysomelidae). OPINION 376 395 Anoplitis, and Lobacantha, as I would denominate H. erinacea and affinities, from the lobes crowned with spines . . . which project from the elytra ’’. The type species of this genus is therefore Hispa erinacea Fabricius, 1801 (Syst. Eleuth. 2 : 59, no. 3) by monotypy. This generic name has been completely overlooked and is not to be found in a single paper or catalogue so far published. (2) Platypria Guérin-Méneville, 1840 Guérin gave a diagnosis for this genus and placed in it five nominal species. This generic name was introduced by Guérin in a discussion of the genus Hispa, and the five species placed by Guérin in Platypria were cited by him in combination with the generic name Hispa. The first of the five species in question was a species then described for the first time (: 139), to which Guérin gave the name Hispa echidna. The first author to select a type species for the genus Platypria Guérin was Maulik who in 1919 (Faun. Brit. Ind. Coleopt. Hisp. Cassid. : 256) so selected Hispa echidna Guérin. 3. The species which are the respective type species of Lobacantha Kirby, 1837, and Platypria Guérin, 1840, are currently regarded by specialists as being congeneric with one another. Accordingly, the generic name Platypria Guérin is a subjective junior synonym of the name Lobacantha Kirby. 4. The generic name Platypria Guérin has, however, been widely used in the literature of the last century and is a name of importance in applied entomology, being the name currently used for such economic species as P. andrewesi Weise, which occurs in India, P. echinogale Gestro, which occurs in Sumatra, and P. erinacea (Fabricius) and P. hystrix (Fabricius), both Indian species. For the foregoing reasons it would be most undesirable that the name Platypria Guérin should now be sunk as a synonym of Lobacantha Kirby, in view especially of the fact that the latter name has never been used at all except on the single occasion on which it was first published by Kirby. 5. In the interest of nomenclatorial stability, | therefore now ask the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature :— (1) to use its Plenary Powers to suppress the generic name Lobacantha Kirby, 1837, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy ; 396 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (2) to place the generic name Platypria Guérin-Méneville, 1840 (gender of generic name : feminine) (type species, by selection by Maulik (1919): Hispa echidna Guérin-Méneville, 1840) on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology ; (3) to place the generic name Lobacantha Kirby, 1837, as proposed, under (1) above, to be suppressed under the Plenary Powers, on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology ; (4) to place the trivial name echidna Guérin-Meéneville, 1840, as published in the binominal combination Hispa echidna (trivial name of type species of Platypria Guérin-Méneville, 1840) on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology. . Il.—THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt of Herr Uhmann’s application, the question of the possible use of the Plenary Powers for the purpose of suppressing the generic name Lobacantha Kirby was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 593. 3. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 19th May 1952 and was published on 23rd July of that year in Part 9 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Uhmann, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 266—267). 4. Issue of Public Notices: Under the revised procedure prescribed by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, OPINION 376 397 Paris, 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 51—56), Public Notice of the possible use by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature of its Plenary Powers in the present case was given on 23rd July 1952 (a) in Part 9 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Herr Uhmann’s application was published), and (b) to the other prescribed serial publications. In addition, such Public Notice was given also to certain general zoological serial publications and to a number of entomological serials in Europe and America. 5. No objection received to action proposed : The issue of the Public Notices specified in paragraph 4 above elicited no objection to the action proposed from any source. Ill—THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 6. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(54)38 : On 24th March 1954, a Voting Paper (V.P.(54)38) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “the proposal relating to the name Platypria Guérin, 1840, as set out in paragraph 5 on page 267 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature” [i.e. in paragraph 5 of the application reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion]. 7. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 24th June, 1954. 398 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 8. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)38 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)38 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following nineteen (19) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Riley ; Holthuis ; Lemche ; Hering ; Vokes ; Bonnet ; Dymond; Esaki; Mertens; Jaczewski; Boschma ; Sylvester-Bradley ; Bradley (J.C.) ; Hank6é ; do Amaral ; Hemming ; Pearson; Stoll ; Cabrera ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) Voting Papers not returned : None. 9. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 26th June 1954, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(54)38, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in para- graph 8 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. 10. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 27th March 1955 Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)38. OPINION 376 399 11. Original References: The following are the original references for the names placed on Official Lists and Official Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— echidna, Hispa, CGuérin-Méneville, 1840, Rev. zool., Paris 1840 : 139 Lobacantha Kirby (W.), 1837, in Richardson, Fauna bor.-amer. (4) : 227 Platypria Guérin-Méneville, 1840, Rev. zool., Paris 1840 : 139 12. The following is the reference for the selection of a type species for the genus Platypria Guérin-Meéneville, 1840, specified in the Ruling given in the present Opinion :—Maulik, 1919, Faun. Brit. Ind., Coleopt. Hisp. Cassid. : 256. 13. Family-Group-Name aspects : No family-group-name prob- lem arises in the present case, as the genus Platypria Guérin- Méneville is not the type genus of a family-group taxon, being currently referred to the subfamily HISPINAE of the family CHRYSOMELIDAE (see paragraph 1 of Herr Uhmann’s application reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion). 14. At the time of the submission of the present application the name applicable to the second portion of a binomen was “trivial name”. This was altered to “ specific name” by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, which at the same time made corresponding changes in the titles of the Official List and Official Index of names of this category. These changes in terminology have been incorporated in the Ruling given in the present Opinion. 15. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Commission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 400 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 16. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Seventy-Six (376) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twenty-Seventh day of March, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Five. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING —e———eeee—————— — ——— Printed in England by Mercatre & Cooper Limitep, 10-24 Scrutton St., London EC 2 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, cC.M.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 27. Pp. 401—410 OPINION 377 Suppression under the Plenary Powers of the specific name tereticauda Eschscholtz, 1833, as published in the combination Triton tereticauda, for the purpose of rendering the specific name /ugubris Hallowell, 1849, as published in the combination Salamandra lugubris, the oldest available name for the species concerned (Class Amphibia, Order Caudata) LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1956 Price Five Shillings (All rights reserved) Issued 24th January, 1956 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 377 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts., England) President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President: Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. BoscHMA (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (Ast January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) Dr. Joseph PEARSON (Tasmanian Museum, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia) (27th July 1948) Dr. Henning LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948) Professor Teiso Esaki (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mr. a eoea} Denbigh RiLey (British Museum (Natural History), London) (9th June 195 Professor Tadeusz JACZEWSKI (Unstitute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950) Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (Sth July 1950) Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt- Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (Sth July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice- President) Professor J. R. DyMOND (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 1953) Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N. > U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. Vokes (Johns Hopkins University, Balmer Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezdégazdasdgi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. STOLL (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (A2th August 1953) Dr. L. B. HoLtuuts (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Nether- lands) (12th August 1953) — —— ee ee eee OPINION 377 SUPPRESSION UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS OF THE SPECIFIC NAME “TERETICAUDA” ESCHSCHOLTZ, - 1833, AS PUBLISHED IN THE COMBINATION ‘TRITON TERETICAUDA ”, FOR THE PURPOSE OF RENDERING THE SPECIFIC NAME “LUGUBRIS” HALLOWELL, 1849, AS PUBLISHED IN THE COMBINATION “SALAMANDRA LUGUBRIS”, THE OLDEST AVAILABLE NAME FOR THE SPECIES CONCERNED (CLASS AMPHIBIA, ORDER CAUDATA) RULING :—(1) Under the Plenary Powers the specific name tereticauda Eschscholtz, 1833, as published in the combination Triton tereticauda, is hereby suppressed for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy. (2) The specific name specified in (1) above, as there suppressed under the Plenary Powers, is hereby placed ‘on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology with the Name No. 131. (3) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name No. 903 :—Aneides Baird (S.F.), [1849] (gender : masculine) (type species, by monotypy : Sala- mandra lugubris Hallowell, 1849) (Class Amphibia). (4) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name No. 524 :—lugubris Hallowell, 1849, as published in the combination Salamandra lugubris (specific name of type species of Aneides Baird (S.F.), 1849). (5) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid FEB 2 3 1956 404 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Nos. 318 and 319 respectively :— (a) Anaides Baird (S.F.), [1849] (a junior homonym of Anaides Westwood, 1842) ; (b) Autodax Boulenger, 1887 (a junior objective syno- nym of Aneides Baird, [1849], the Valid Original Spelling for the name of which Anaides is an Invalid Original Spelling). I.—THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 21st March 1952, Dr. Karl P. Schmidt (Chicago Natural History Museum, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.) submitted to the Commission the following application for the use of the Plenary Powers for the purpose of suppressing the specific name fereti- cauda Eschscholtz, 1833, as published in the combination Triton tereticauda, in order to prevent that name, which had long been treated as a nomen dubium, from replacing the well-known name lugubris Hallowell, 1849, as published in the combination Salamandra lugubris (Class Amphibia) :— Proposed use of the Plenary Powers to suppress the trivial name ‘* tereticauda ’’ Eschscholtz, 1833, as published in the combination ‘* Triton tereticauda ’’, thus rendering available the trivial name ‘‘ lugubris ’’ Hallowell, 1849, as published in the combination ‘‘ Salamandra lugubris ’’ (Class Amphibia, Order Caudata) By KARL P. SCHMIDT (Chicago Natural History Museum, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.) The present application for the use by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature of its Plenary Powers is submitted under the procedure laid down by the International Congress of Zoology for the prevention of confusion arising through the replacement of ipa a it i i ic a i ii OPINION 377 405 well-known names by names regarded by some specialists as nomina dubia (see 1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 76, point (g) (3)). 2. The nomen dubium concerned is the trivial name tereticauda Eschscholtz, 1833 (as published in the combination Triton tereticauda Eschscholtz, 1833, Zool. Atlas 5 : 14). The nominal species so named was accompanied by an inadequate description but nevertheless it seems likely that the species to which this name was applied is the species now known as Aneides lugubris (Hallowell, 1849) (Salamandra lugubris Hallowell, 1849, Proc. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad. 4 : 126). 3. Aneides lugubris (Hallowell) is a well known species and the trivial name Jugubris has been habitually applied to it. It is moreover the type species of the genus Aneides Baird (S.F.), [1849] (im Baird-Heck, Iconograph. Ency. 2 : 257), a replacement name for Anaides Baird (S.F.), [1849] (icon. Encyclop. Sci. 2 : 257), a junior homonym of Anaides Westwood, 1842 (Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. 8 : 457). Confusion, un- accompanied by any corresponding benefit, would result from the substitution of the trivial name tereticauda Eschscholtz, 1833, for the trivial name /ugubris Hallowell, 1849. 4. The International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature is accordingly asked :— (1) to use its Plenary Powers to suppress the trivial name tereticauda Eschscholtz, 1833, as published in the combination Triton tereticauda, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy ; (2) to place the trivial name /ugubris Hallowell, 1849, as published in the combination Salamandra lugubris (trivial name of type species of Aneides Baird (S.F.), [1849] on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology ; (3) to place the generic name Aneides Baird (S.F.), [1849] (type species, by monotypy : Salamandra lugubris Hallowell, 1849) on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology ; (4) to place the trivial-name tereticauda Eschscholtz, 1833, as pub- lished in the combination Triton tereticauda, as proposed, in (1) above, to be suppressed under the Plenary Powers on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Trivial Names in Zoology ; (5) to place the generic name Anaides Baird (S.F.), [1849] (junior homonym of Anaides Westwood, 1842) on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology. 406 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Il—_THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt of Dr. Schmidt’s application, the question of the possible use of the Plenary Powers for the purpose of suppressing the specific name tereticauda Eschscholtz, 1833, as published in the combination Triton tereticauda, was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 656. 3. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 19th May 1952 and was published on 23rd July of that year in Part 9 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Schmidt, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 267—268). 4. Issue of Public Notices : Under the revised procedure pre- scribed by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 51—56), Public Notice of the possible use by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature of its Plenary Powers in the present case was given on 23rd July 1952 (a) in Part 9 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Dr. Schmidt’s application was published) and (b) to the other prescribed serial publications. In addition, Notice was given also to certain general zoological serial publications. 5. Comments received : The issue of the Public Notices specified in paragraph 4 above elicited support for the present application from the following specialists :—(1) Dr. Richard A. Edgren (Division of Biological Research, Searle & Co., Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.) ; (2) Dr. Jay M. Savage (Stanford University, Natural History Museum, Stanford, California, U.S.A.). The com- munications so received are reproduced in the immediately following paragraphs. No objection to the action proposed was received from any source. 6. Support received from Dr. Richard A. Edgren (Division of Biological Research, Searle & Co., Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.) ; OPINION 377 407 On 24th November 1952, Dr. Richard A. Edgren (Division of Biological Research, Searle & Co., Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.) addressed a letter to the Commission commenting upon a number of then recently published applications. The following is an extract from that letter of the portion relating to the present case :— I wish to express my opinions on the following: . . . (3) I am in favor of the suppression of tereticauda Eschscholtz, 1833, to validate lugubris Hallowell, 1849. , 7. Support received from Dr. Jay M. Savage (Stanford Uni- versity, Natural History Museum, Stanford, California, U.S.A.) : On 28th November 1952, Dr. Jay M. Savage (Stanford University, Natural History Museum, Stanford, California, U.S.A.) addressed a letter to the Commission commenting upon the present and certain other applications then recently published in the Bulletin. The following is the portion of that letter dealing with the present case :— In going over recent issues of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature, I find a number of applications to the Commission that I feel qualified to express an opinion on. These are listed below by Z.N.(S.) numbers for ready reference: .. . Z.N.(S.) 656. Agree with Dr. Schmidt’s views. I1l—THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 8. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(54)39 : On 24th March 1954, a Voting Paper (V.P.(54)39) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “the proposal relating to the specific name /ugubris Hallowell, 1849, as published in the combination Salamandra lugubris, as set out in paragraph 4 on page 268 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature” {i.e. in paragraph 4 of the application reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion]. 408 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 9. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 24th June 1954. 10. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)39 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)39 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following nineteen (19) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Riley ; Holthuis ; Lemche ; Hering ; Vokes ; Bonnet ; Dymond; Esaki; Boschma; Sylvester-Bradley ; Bradley (J.C.); Hanko; do Amaral; Jaczewski ; Hemming ; Pearson; Stoll; Cabrera ; Mertens ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) Voting Papers not returned : None. 11. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 26th June 1954, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P. (54)39, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 10 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Com- mission in the matter aforesaid. 12. Correction of a minor omission: On Ist March 1955, Dr. Karl P. Schmidt (the applicant in the present case) drew the OPINION 377 409 attention of the Office of the Commission to the fact that in 1887 (Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. (5) 19 : 67) Boulenger had published the name Autodax as a substitute name for Anaides Baird, [1849]. Dr. Schmidt pointed out that this action was invalid, the invalid spelling Anaides having been replaced by Baird himself by the spelling Aneides ; the name Autodax Boulenger, 1887, was therefore a junior objective synonym of Aneides Baird, [1849], and as such should be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology. Upon the receipt of this communica- tion, Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, executed a Minute directing that in the Ruling to be given in the present Opinion the name Autodax Boulenger, 1887, be entered on the Official Index as proposed. 13. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 28th March 1955, Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54) 39, subject to the adjustment, as specified in paragraph 12 above, of the minor omission there noted. 14. Original References : The following are the original refer- ences for the names placed on Official Lists and Official Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— Anaides Baird (S.F.), [1849], Heck’s Icon. Encyclop. Sci. 2 : 256 Aneides Baird (S.F.), [1849], Heck’s Icon. Encyclop. Sci. 2 : 257 lugubris, Salamandra, Hallowell, 1849, Proc. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad. 4 : 126 tereticauda, Triton, Eschscholtz, 1833, Zool. Atlas 5 : 14 Autodax Boulenger, 1887, Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. (5) 19 : 67 15. Family Group Names: It has been ascertained that no family-group-name problem arises in the present case, the genus Aneides Baird, [1849], being currently placed in the family PLETHODONTIDAE. 16. At the time of the submission of the present application the name applicable to the second portion of a binomen was “ trivial 410 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS name’. This was altered to “ specific name ” by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, which at the same time made corresponding changes in the titles of the Official List and Official Index of names of this category. These changes in terminology have been incorporated in the Ruling given in the present Opinion. 17. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Commission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 18. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Seventy-Seven (377) of the International Com- mission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twenty-Eighth day of March, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Five. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING Oe Printed in England by Mercatrr & Cooper Limitep, 10-24 Scrutton St., London EC 2 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 28. Pp. 411—420 OPINION 378 Designation, under the Plenary Powers, of a type species in harmony with current usage for the genus Pontonia Latreille, 1829 (Class Crustacea, Order Deca- poda), a genus based upon a misidentified type species. LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, $.W.7 1956 Price Five Shillings (All rights reserved) Issued 24th January, 1956 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 378 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts., England) President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President : Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) ; Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. BoscHMA (Rijksmuseum van WNatuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (Ast January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) Dr. Joseph PEARSON (Zasmanian Museum, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia) (27th July 1948) Dr. Henning LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948) Professor Teiso ESAKI (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mr. Norman Denbigh RILEY (British Museum (Natural History), London) (9th June 1950) Professor Tadeusz JACZEWSKI CUInstitute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) ({5th June 1950) Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (Sth July 1950) Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (Sth July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (42th August 1953) (Vice- President) fae J. R. DymMonpD (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 53 Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. Voxes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezégazdasdgi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. SToLuL (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) Dr. L. B. Hoituuts (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Nether- lands) (12th August 1953) OPINION 378 DESIGNATION UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS OF A TYPE SPECIES IN HARMONY WITH CURRENT USAGE FOR THE GENUS “PONTONIA” LATREILLE, 1829 (CLASS CRUSTACEA, ORDER DECAPODA), A GENUS BASED UPON A MISIDENTIFIED TYPE SPECIES RULING :—(1) It is hereby ruled that the genus Pontonia Latreille, 1829, is a genus based upon a mis- identified type species and accordingly under the Plenary Powers :—(a) all designations and selections of type species for the foregoing genus made prior to the present Ruling are hereby set aside, and (b) the nominal species Palaemon pinnophylax Otto, 1821, is hereby designated to be the type species thereof. (2) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name No. 904 :—Pontonia Latreille, 1829 (gender : feminine) (type species, by designation under the Plenary Powers under (1) (b) above : Palaemon pinnophylax Otto, 1821). (3) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name No. 525 :—pinnophylax Otto, 1821, as published in the combination Palaemon pinnophylax (specific name of type species of Pontonia Latreille, 1829). I. THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 21st September 1951, Dr. L. B. Holthuis (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) submitted the following application to the Commission for the use of the Plenary FEB 2 3 1956 414 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Powers to designate a species in harmony with current usage to be the type species of the genus Pontonia Latreille, 1829, on the ground that that genus had been founded upon a misidentified type species :— Proposed use of the Plenary Powers to designate ‘‘ Palaemon pinnophylax ’’? Otto, 1821, as the type species of the genus ‘* Pontonia ’’ Latreille, 1829 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda) By L. B. HOLTHUIS (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) Latreille, 1829 (Cuvier’s Régne anim. (ed. 2) 4 : 96), in the original description of the genus Pontonia mentioned only one species : ““Alpheus thyrenus [sic], Risso, Crust., ii, 2 ; Astacus thyrenus [sic] petag., v, 5 ; Desmar., ibid., pag. 229’’. Like Latreille, Risso, 1816 (Hist. nat. Crust. Nice : 94, pl. 2, fig. 2) identified his Alpheus tyrhenus with Astacus tyrrhenus Petagna, 1792 (Institut. entom. : 418, pl. 5, fig. 3). The latter species thus obviously is the type species of the genus Pontonia Latreille. 2. Up till 1947 the name Astacus tyrrhenus Petagna was generally considered to belong to the species described and figured by Risso, 1816, under the name Alpheus tyrhenus [sic]. This species, which is a commensal shrimp belonging to the tribe Caridea, accordingly obtained the specific name Pontonia tyrrhena (Petagna). The generic name Pontonia always has been given to this genus of commensal caridean shrimps ; the genus Pontonia has even become the typical genus of the subfamily PONTONIINAE (family PALAEMONIDAE). ‘There has never been any doubt as to the systematic position of the genus Pontonia, and the generic name Pontonia has been used by practically all carcinologists to indicate that genus. 3. In 1947 the present author (Holthuis, 1947, Zool. Meded. 27 : 319, 320) showed that the excellent figure which accompanies the short original description of Astacus tyrrhenus Petagna leaves not the least doubt that this species is entirely different from that described and figured by Risso as Alpheus tyrhenus [sic.]. Astacus tyrrhenus proves to be identical with the species best known under the name Callianassa laticauda Otto, 1821, which does not even belong to the Caridea, but forms part of the tribe Thalassinidea. The latter species thus has to bear the specific name Callianassa tyrrhena (Petagna). The first valid specific name for the species described and figured by Risso, 1816, as Alpheus tyrhenus proves to be Palaemon pinnophylax Otto, 1821 (Consp. Anim. marit. non edit. : 12). OPINION 378 415 4. Latreille, 1829, placed his new genus Pontonia in his ‘‘ cinquiéme section, celle des Salicoques (Carides)’’ (: 91), with the other caridean genera like Hymenocera, Gnathophyllum, Alpheus, and Hippolyte, while he recognised as a distinct genus the genus Callianassa, which was placed by him in his “‘ quatriéme section, celle des Homards (Astacini, Latr.)’ (: 82). It thus is obvious that Latreille, 1829, erected his new genus for Alpheus tyrhenus Risso, 1816, a species which is identical with Palaemon pinnophylax Otto, 1821, but which was incorrectly identified both by Risso, 1816, and Latreille, 1829, with Astacus tyrrhenus Petagna, 1792. In this original sense the generic name Pontonia Latreille always has been used since 1829. 5. The fact that Latreille misidentified Alpheus tyrhenus Risso with Astacus tyrrhenus Petagna has, however, no bearing on the determina- tion of the type species of the genus Pontonia. According to the revised Régles, “‘ the original author of a generic name [is] to be assumed to have identified correctly the nominal species referred by him to the genus so named ’”’ (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 (4/6) : 158). Under the Régles the species Astacus tyrrhenus Petagna, 1792, is thus undoubtedly the type species of the genus Pontonia Latreille, 1829. Consequently the generic name Pontonia Latreille, 1829, becomes a synonym of the generic name Callianassa Leach, 1814, and is not available for the genus of commensal caridean shrimps for which it always has been employed, and for which it certainly was intended by its original author. The strict application of the Régles in this way would cause an undesirable confusion since not only would it make it necessary to substitute a new name for the well-known generic name Pontonia, as accepted by most authors, but also it would involve changing the name of the subfamily PONTONIINAE. In order to prevent this unnecessary confusion I recommend that the International Com- mission on Zoological Nomenclature should :— (1) use its Plenary Powers :— (a) to set aside all designations or selections of type species for the genus Pontonia Latreille, 1829, made prior to the proposed decision ; and having done so (b) to designate Palaemon pinnophylax Otto, 1821, to be the type species of the foregoing genus ; (2) place on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology the generic name Pontonia Latreille, 1829 (type species, as proposed in (1) above to be designated under the Plenary Powers : Palaemon pinnophylax Otto, 1821) (gender of generic name : feminine) ; (3) place on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology the trivial name pinnophylax Otto, 1821, as published in the combination Palaemon pinnophylax (trivial name of type species of Pontonia Latreille, 1829). 416 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Ul. THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt of Dr. Holthuis’s application, the question of the use of the Plenary Powers for the purpose of varying the type species of the genus Pontonia Latreille was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.)619. 3. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 30th January 1952 and was published on 23rd July of that year in Part 9 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Holthuis, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 271—272). 4. Issue of Public Notices: Under the revised procedure prescribed by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 51—56), Public Notice of the possible use by the International Commission on Zoo- logical Nomenclature of its Plenary Powers in the present case was given on 23rd July 1952 (a) in Part 9 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Dr. Holthuis’s application was published) and (b) to the other prescribed serial publications. In addition, Public Notice was given also to certain general zoological serial publications. 5. Comments received : The issue of the Public Notices specified in paragraph 4 above elicited comments from the following specialists :—(1) Dr. K. S. Misra (Zoological Survey of India, Calcutta) ; (2) Dr. Ricardo Zariquiey (Enfermedades de la Infancia, Barcelona, Spain). The communications so received are reproduced in the immediately following paragraphs. 6. Objection received from Dr. K. S. Misra (Zoological Survey of India, Calcutta): On 22nd January 1953, Dr. K. S. Misra (Zoological Survey of India, Calcutta) addressed a letter to the Commission, commenting upon four applications. The present was the third of the applications concerned and as regards it Dr. Misra wrote as follows :— The genus Pontonia Latreille will have to be rejected and a new generic name created. Popularity of the generic name should not be the chief criterion for retaining invalid names, like Pontonia Latreille, 1829. OPINION 378 417 7. Support received from Dr. Ricardo Zariquiey (Enfermedades de la Infancia, Barcelona, Spain): On 25th February 1953, Dr. Ricardo Zariquiey (Enfermedades de la Infancia, Barcelona, Spain) addressed a letter to the Commission indicating his support for this and for certain other applications submitted by Dr. L. B. Holthuis. The following is an extract from the letter so received :— He recibido las Commission’s References .. . Z.N.(S.) 619... propuestas por el Dr. L. B. Holthuis, estando en todo conforme con las proposiciones del citado Doctor. 8. Note prepared by the Secretary for consideration by the Commission in connection with the Voting Paper prepared in this case : On 16th March 1954, Mr. Hemming prepared the following note on the scope of the problem involved in the present case :— Nature of the problem: This is a case of a genus (Pontonia) established with a misidentified type species. The species cited by the author (Latreille) was Astacus tyrrhenus Petagna, 1792, a name asso- ciated by Latreille and later authors up to 1947 with a commensal shrimp of the group Caridea to which Otto in 1821 gave the name Palaemon pinnophylax. In 1947 Holthuis showed that the true A. tyrrhenus Petagna was an entirely different species belonging not to the Caridea but to the Thalassinidea. The applicant states that Pontonia has always been used in the sense of Latreille, that it forms the basis of a subfamily name, and that the strict application of the normal rule would lead to “‘ undesirable confusion ’’. This case falls therefore to be dealt with under the special procedure devised by the Paris Congress (Bull. 4 : 159). Under that procedure in a case of this kind the function of the Commission is limited to deciding whether the genus was based on a misidentified type species ; if so satisfied, it is bound to use its Plenary Powers to designate, as the type species, the species intended by the original author, except where this would disturb nomenclatorial practice. III. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 9. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(54) 40: On 24th March 1954, a Voting Paper (V.P.(54)40) was issued in which, in the light of the note reproduced in paragraph 8 above, the Members of the 418 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, ‘‘ the proposal that the Commission should express itself as satisfied that the genus Pontonia Latreille, 1829, was based upon a mis- identified type species and therefore that approval should be given to the proposals set out at the end of the paper on page 272 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature [i.e. in paragraph 5 of the application reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion]. 10. The Prescribed Voting Period : As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 24th June 1954. 11. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)40 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)40 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following nineteen (19) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Riley ; Holthuis ; Lemche ; Hering ; Vokes ; Bonnet ; Dymond ; Esaki ; Boschma ; Sylvester-Bradley ; Bradley (J.C.) ; do Amaral ; Hank6o ; Pearson ; Stoll ; Hemming ; Cabrera ; Mertens ; Jaczewski ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) Voting Papers not returned : None. 12. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 26th June 1954, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper OPINION 378 419 V.P.(54)40, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 11 above and declaring that the proposal sub- mitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. 13. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 28th March 1955, Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)40. 14. Original References: The following are the original references for the names placed on Official Lists by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— pinnophylax, Palaemon, Otto, 1821, Consp. Anim. marit. non edit. : 12 Pontonia Latreille, 1829, in Cuvier, Régne anim. (ed. 2) 4 : 96 15. The application dealt with in the present Opinion was published in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature prior to the establishment of the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953. It has been ascertained that an addition, or additions, to the foregoing Official List and/or to the corre- sponding Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology will need to be made in order to complete the action, which, under the General Directives given to the International Commission by the International Congress of Zoology, is required to be taken in the present case. This question is now being examined on a separate File to which the Registered Number Z.N.(G.) 125 has been allotted. 16. At the time of the submission of the present application the name applicable to the second portion of a binomen was “trivial name”. This was altered to “specific name” by the 420 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, which at the same time made corresponding changes in the titles of the Official List and Official Index of names of this category. These changes in terminology have been incorporated in the Ruling given in the present Opinion. 17. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Com- mission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 18. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Seventy-Eight (378) of the International Com- mission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twenty-Eighth day of March, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Five. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING Printed in England by MretcaLtFe & Cooper LimiTEp, 10-24 Scrutton St., London EC 2 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, c.M.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 29. Pp. 421—430 OPINION 379 Designation under the Plenary Powers of a type species in harmony with accustomed usage for the genus Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758 (Class Insecta, Order Lepidoptera) LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1956 Price Five Shillings (All rights reserved) Tssued 24th January, 1956 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 379 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts., England) President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y.» U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President : Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) : Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. BoscHMA (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (Ast January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (Eva Peron, F.C.N.G.R., Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) Dr. Joseph PEARSON (Tasmanian Museum, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia) (27th July 1948) Dr. Henning LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948) Professor Teiso EsAkI (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mr. Norman Denbigh RiLey (British Museum (Natural History), London) (9th June 1950) Professor Tadeusz JACZEWSKI (Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950) Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (Sth July 1950) Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (Sth July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice- President) Professor J. R. DyMOND (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 1953) Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. Voxes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezégazdasdgi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. STOLL (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) Dr. L. B. Hoituuts (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Nether- lands) (12th August 1953) OPINION 379 DESIGNATION UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS OF A TYPE SPECIES IN HARMONY WITH ACCUSTOMED USAGE FOR THE GENUS “SPHINX” LINNAEUS, 1758 (CLASS INSECTA, ORDER LEPIDOPTERA) RULING :—(1) Under the Plenary Powers, (a) all selections of type species for the genus Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758 (Class Insecta, Order Lepidoptera), made prior to the present Ruling, are hereby set aside, and (b) the nominal species Sphinx ligustri Linnaeus, 1758, is hereby designated to be the type species of the foregoing genus. (2) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name No. 905 :—Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758 (gender : feminine) (type species, by designation under the Plenary Powers under (1)(b) above: Sphinx ligustri Linnaeus, 1758) (Class Insecta, Order Lepidoptera). (3) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name No. 526 :—/igustri Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the combination Sphinx ligustri (specific name of type species of Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758). I THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 8th February 1947, Dr. Jiri Paclt (then of Ndrodni Museum v Praze, Prague, Czechoslovakia and now of Bratislava, Czecho- slovakia) submitted an application asking the Commission to use its Plenary Powers for the purpose of designating for the genus Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758, a type species in harmony with accustomed usage. The present was one of the applications which, owing FEB 2 3 1956 424 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS to the pressure of work in connection with proposals for the reform of the Régles and the small amount of time available for considering individual cases, it was necessary for the Commission at its Session held in Paris in 1948 to postpone for later con- sideration. For a period of some eighteen months immediately - following the close of the Paris Session the entire resources of the Office of the Commission were concentrated upon the prepara- tion and publication of the Official Records of that Session and it was not until the latter part of 1950 that it was possible to resume work on the preparation of applications relating to individual nomenclatorial problems for publication in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature. Even when this stage was reached, some further delay was unavoidable, for, in consequence of certain Directives given to the Commission by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948, regarding the scope and content of Opinions, a certain amount of revision was necessary in the case of all applications outstanding at that time. In the present case these adjustments were completed by 14th July 1952, on which date the following revised application was sub- mitted to the Commission by Dr. Paclt :— Proposed use of the Plenary Powers to designate a type species for ‘“‘ Sphinx ’’ Linnaeus, 1758 (Class Insecta, Order Lepidoptera) in harmony with accustomed usage By JIRI PACLT (Bratislava, Czechoslovakia) The generic name Sphinx was published in 1758 by Linnaeus (Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1 : 489), by whom it was applied to those moths (the Hawkmoths) which he regarded as generically distinct from the rest of the moths, which he placed in the genus Phalaena. 2. Stephens in 1828 (Jl. Brit. Ins., Haust. 1 : 121) selected Sphinx ligustri Linnaeus, 1758 (Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1 : 489) to be the type species of this important genus, and this selection was later repeated by Westwood & Humphreys (1843, Brit. Moths 1 : 13).* * Tt should be noted that some authors have argued that Sphinx ligustri Linnaeus, 1758, became the type species of Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758, by tautonymy, through the action taken by Linnaeus in 1761 (Faun. svec. (ed. 2) : 287), but this argu- ment is unacceptable, for the principle of tautonymy is applicable only on the first publication of a name. OPINION 379 425 3. With very few exceptions, entomologists ever since Stephens’ - day have accepted Sphinx ligustri Linnaeus as the type species of this genus. It is unfortunate therefore that Stephens’ selection of this species is antedated by that by Latreille who in 1810 (Consid. gén. Crust. Arachn. Ins. : 440) selected Sphinx euphorbiae Linnaeus, 1758 (Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1 : 492) to be the type species. No author since Latreille has accepted this species as the type species of Sphinx Linnaeus or has placed it in that genus, sensu stricto. 4. I am of the opinion that it would be highly undesirable to disturb the use of the name Sphinx Linnaeus for Sphinx ligustri Linnaeus and its congeners, having regard to the facts that :—(1) with very few exceptions the generic name Sphinx Linnaeus has been uniformly used for Sphinx ligustri Linnaeus and great confusion would result if it were necessary to abandon this practice ; (2) the application of the ordinary rules in this case would involve a confusing transfer of the name Sphinx Linnaeus to the genus to which Sphinx euphorbiae Linnaeus is referred, thus displacing the name Celerio Oken, 1815, a name which has for a long time been applied to that genus. 5. I accordingly ask the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature :— (1) to use its Plenary Powers (a) to set aside all type selections for the genus Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758, made prior to the decision now proposed to be made, and (b), having done so, to designate Sphinx ligustri Linnaeus, 1758, to be the type species of that genus ; (2) to place the name Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758 (gender of generic name : feminine), with the type species specified in (1) above, on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology ; (3) to place the trivial name /igustri Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the combination Sphinx ligustri, on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology. Il. THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt of Dr. Paclt’s application, the question of the use of the Plenary Powers for the purpose of varying the type species of the genus 426 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758, was alloted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 280. 3. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 15th July 1952 and on 29th August of that year was published in Part 10 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Paclt, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 291). 4. Issue of Public Notices : Under the revised procedure pre- scribed by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 51—56), Public Notice of the possible use by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature of its Plenary Powers in the present case was given on 29th August 1952, (a) in Part 10 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Dr. Paclt’s application was published) and (b) to the other prescribed serial publications. In addition, Notice was given to certain general zoological serial publications and to a number of entomological serials in Europe and America. 5. Comments received : The issue of the Public Notices specified in paragraph 4 above elicited a joint comment from Dr. J. G. Franclemont and Dr. Wm. T. M. Forbes (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.), both of whom supported Dr. Paclt’s proposals. The communication so received is reproduced in the immediately following paragraph. No objection to the action proposed was received from any source. 6. Support received from Dr. J. G. Franclemont and Dr. Wm. T. M. Forbes (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) : On 18th September 1952, Dr. J. G. Franclemont (then of the United States Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine, Washington, D.C., U.S.A.) wrote a letter to the Commission pointing out that, contrary to the statement in the application submitted in this case, Stephens (1828) did not select a type species for the genus Sphinx Linnaeus and that the first author to select Sphinx ligustri Linnaeus to be the type species of this genus was Curtis (1828). On 22nd November OPINION 379 427 1952, Dr. Franclemont (who had now moved to Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) addressed a further communication to the Commission indicating his support and that of Dr. Wm. T. M. Forbes (Cornell University) for the action proposed in this case. Dr. Franclemont’s letter of 18th September 1952 was published in December 1952 (Franclemont, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 9 : 144). It is not however reproduced here because the point made in that letter was made again in the communication which he submitted on 22nd November 1952 on behalf of Dr. Forbes and himself. That communication was as follows :— Dr. Forbes and I agree that the Commission should fix Sphinx ligustri Linnaeus, 1758, as the type species of the genus Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758 ; this species has been the traditional type of the genus. However, it was Curtis, not Stephens, who designated Sphinx ligustri Linnaeus, 1758 as the type species of Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758, in January 1828 (British Entomology 5 :195). It should be pointed out that Rothschild and Jordan in their revision of the family SPHINGIDAE considered Sphinx ocellata Linnaeus, 1758, as the type species of Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758 ; this was the result of the application of the “first species rule’’. Dr. Paclt is correct, insofar as we can determine, in stating that no one followed Latreille’s 1810 selection of Sphinx euphorbiae Linnaeus, 1758, as the type species of Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758. III. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 7. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(54)41 : On 24th March 1954, a Voting Paper (V.P.(54)41) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “the proposal relating to the name Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758, set out in paragraph 5 on page 291 of volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature ”’ [i.e. in paragraph 5 of the application reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion]. 8. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 24th June 1954. 428 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 9. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)41 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)41 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following nineteen (19) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Riley ; Holthuis ; Lemche ; Hering ; Vokes ; Bonnet ; Dymond; Esaki; Mertens; Boschma; Jaczewski ; Sylvester-Bradley ; Bradley (J.C.) ; Hanko ; do Amaral ; Hemming ; Pearson; Stoll ; Cabrera ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) Voting Papers not returned : None. 10. Declaration of Result of Vote : On 26th June 1954, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(54)41, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 9 above and declaring that the proposal sub- mitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. 11. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 29th March 1955, Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given in the present Opinion and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)41. a a a OPINION 379 429 12. Original References: The following are the original references for the names placed on Official Lists by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— ligustri, Sphinx, Linnaeus, 1758, Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1 : 489 Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758, Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1 : 489 13. Family-Group-name aspects : The application dealt with in the present Opinion was published in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature prior to the establishment of the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953. It has been ascertained that an addition to the foregoing Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology will need to be made in order to complete the action, which, under the General Directives given to the International Commission by the International Congress of Zoology, is required to be taken in the present case. This question is now being examined on a separate File to which the Registered Number Z.N.(G.) 125 has been allotted. 14. At the time of the submission of the present application the name applicable to the second portion of a binomen was “trivial name’. This was altered to “specific name” by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, which at the same time made corresponding changes in the titles of the Official List and Official Index of names of this category. These changes in terminology have been incorporated in the Ruling given in the present Opinion. 15. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Opinion is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Com- mission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 430 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 16. The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Three Hundred and Seventy-Nine (379) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twenty-Ninth day of March, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Five. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING NOTICE TO SUBSCRIBERS The publication of this volume will be complete on the issue of two further Parts. The first of these (Part 30) will, it is proposed, contain a ‘ Direction ’? embodying decisions by the International Commission in regard to family-group-name problems arising in con- nection with generic names dealt with in ‘* Opinions ”’ included in the present volume. Part 31 will contain the Title Page and Table of Contents of the present volume, together with the authors’ and subject indexes. Printed in England by Metcatre & Cooprer Limitep, 10-24 Scrutton St., London EC 2 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, C™.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 30. Pp. 431—452 DIRECTION 41 Adaition to the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology or, as the case may be, to the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology of the family-group names involved in Volume 11 of the Opinions and Declarations rendered by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, other than family-group names already dealt with in those Opinions. LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1956 Price Twelve Shillings and Sixpence (All rights reserved) Issued 17th May, 1956 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN DIRECTION 41 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President: Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts., England) President: Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President : Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election, as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. Boschma (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (1st January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel Cabrera (La Plata, Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) Dr. Henning Lemche (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948) Professor Teiso Esaki (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre Bonnet (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mr. Norman Denbigh Riley (British Museum (Natural History) London) (9th June 1950) Professor Tadeusz Jaczewski (Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950) Professor Robert Mertens (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (Sth July 1950) Professor Erich Martin Hering (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (Sth July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (S. Paulo, Brazil) (42th August 1953) (Vice-President) Professor J. R. Dymond (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 1953) ee J. on Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) President Professor Harold E. Vokes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla Hanko (Mezdgazdasagi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. Stoll (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) r. P. C. Sylvester-Bradley (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) Dr. L. B. Holthuis (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (iat August 1953) Dr. K. H. L. Key (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Canberra, A.C.T., Australia) (15th October 1954) Dr. Alden H. Miller (Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California, Berkeley, California, U.S.A.) (29th October 1954) Doc. Dr. Ferdinand Prantl (Ndrodni Museum v Praze, Prague, Czechoslovakia) (30th October 1954) Professor Dr. Wilhelm Kiihnelt (Zoologisches Institut der Universitat, Vienna, Austria) (6th November 1954) Professor F. S. Bodenheimer (The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel) (11th November ) Professor Ernst Mayr (Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College, Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A.) (4th December 1954) Professor Enrico Tortonese (Museo di Storia Naturale ““ G. Doria’, Genova, Italy) (16th December 1954) DIRECTION 41 ADDITION TO THE ‘‘ OFFICIAL LIST OF FAMILY-GROUP NAMES IN ZOOLOGY ”’ OR, AS THE CASE MAY BE, TO THE ‘ OFFICIAL INDEX OF REJECTED AND INVALID FAMILY-GROUP NAMES IN ZOOLOGY ”’ OF THE FAMILY-GROUP NAMES INVOLVED IN VOLUME 11 OF THE “OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE”, OTHER THAN FAMILY-GROUP NAMES ALREADY DEALT WITH IN THOSE ‘** OPINIONS ”’ RULING :—_(1) The under-mentioned family-group names involved in the cases dealt with in the Opinions included in volume 11 of the Opinions and Declarations rendered by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature are hereby placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) DREISSENIDAE (correction of DREISSENADAE) Gray (J.E.), 1840 (type genus : Dreissena van Beneden, 1835) (first published in correct form as DREIS- SENIDAE by Gray (J.E.), 1847) (Class Pelecypoda) (Opinion 351) (Name No. 76) ; (b) PHILLIPSIDAE (correction of PHILLIPSIDAE) Oehlert (D.), 1886 (type genus : Phillipsia Portlock, 1843) (Class Trilobita) (Opinion 352) (Name No. 77) ; (c) ANCYLINAE (correction of ANCYLIDIA) Rafinesque (C.S.), 1815 (type genus : Ancylus Miiller (O.F.), 1774) (name proposed by Rafinesque as the name for a “sous-famille”; first published with an approved termination (as ANCYLINAE) by Fischer (P.), [1883]) (Class Gastropoda) (Opinion 363) (Name No. 78) ; (d) ACROLOXINAE Thiele (J.), 1931 (type genus: Acro- loxus Beck, 1837) (Class Gastropoda) (Opinion 363) (Name No. 79) ; JUN 8 1956 434 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (ec) TOERNQUISTIIDAE Hupé (P.), 1953 (type genus: Toernquistia Reed, 1896 (Class Trilobita) (Opinion 367) (Name No. 80) ; (f) TYLINAE Dana (J.D.), 1852 (type genus: Tylos Audouin, [1826]), (Class Crustacea, Order Iso- poda) (Opinion 369) (Name No. 81) ; (g) MICROPEZIDAE Loew, 1862 (type genus : Micropeza Meigen, 1803) (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) (Opinion 369) (Name No. 82) ; (h) ARCHAEOCIDARIDAE M‘Coy, 1849 (type genus: Archaeocidaris M°Coy, 1844) (Class Echinoidea) (Opinion 370) (Name No. 83) ; (i) AMPHIPSYLLINA Toff, 1936 (type genus : Amphipsylla Wagner, 1909) (name proposed by Ioff as the name for a “ Tribus”) (Class Insecta, Order Siphonaptera) (Opinion 373) (Name No. 84) ; (j) HETERANDRIINI Hubbs, 1924 (type genus: Heteran- dria Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1853) (name proposed by Hubbs as the name for a tribe) (Class Osteich- thyes) (Opinion 375) (Name No. 85) ;: (k) GAMBUSIINAE Gill, 1893 (type genus: Gambusia Poey, 1854) (Class Osteichthyes) (Opinion 375) (Name No. 86) ; (1) POECILIOPSINAE Hubbs, 1924 (type genus : Poeciliop- sis Regan, 1913) (Class Osteichthyes) (Opinion 375) (Name No. 87) ; (m) PONTONIINAE (correction of PONTONINAE) Kingsley, 1878 (type genus: Pontonia Latreille, 1829) (Class Crustacea, Order Crustacea) (Opinion 378) (Name No. 88) ; (n) SPHINGIDAE (correction of SPHINGIDES) Latreille, [1802—1803] (type genus: Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758) (Class Insecta, Order Lepidoptera) (Opinion 379) (Name No. 89). DIRECTION 41 435 (2) The under-mentioned family-group names, each of which is either an Invalid Original Spelling for, an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling of, or a junior objective synonym of, a family-group name placed on the Official List of Family- Group Names in Zoology by the Ruling given in (1) above, are hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) DREISSENADAE Gray (J.E.), 1840 (type genus: Dreissena van Beneden, 1835) (an Invalid Original Spelling for DREISSENIDAE) (Opinion 351) (Name No. 62) ; (b) DREISSENSIINAE Fischer (P.), 1887 (type genus: Dreissena van Beneden, 1835) (a junior objective synonym of DREISSENIDAE (correction of DREIS- SENADAE) Gray (J.E.), 1840) (Opinion 351) (Name No. 63) ; (c) PHILLIPSIDAE Oehlert (D.), 1886 (type genus: Phil- lipsia Portlock, 1843) (an Invalid Original Spelling for PHILLIPSIIDAE) (Opinion 352) (NameNo. 64) ; (d) ANCYLIDIA Rafinesque (C.S.), 1815 (type genus: Ancylus Miller (O.F.), 1774) (an Invalid Original Spelling for ANCYLINAE) (Opinion 363) (Name No. 65) ; (e) ANCYLEA Menke (C.T.), 1830 (type genus: Ancylus Miller (O.F.), 1774) (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling for ANCYLIDAE) (Opinion 363) (Name No. 66) ; (f) TYLIDAE Czerny, 1930 (type genus: Tylos Meigen, 1800) (a junior objective synonym of MICRO- PEZIDAE Loew, 1862, the type genera of each of these nominal family-group taxa having the same species (Musca corrigiolata Linnaeus, 1767) as type species) (Opinion 369) (Name No. 67) ; (g) PONTONINAE Kingsley, 1878 (type genus : Pontonia Latreille, 1829) (an Invalid Original Spelling for PONTONIINAE) (Opinion 378) (Name No. 68) ; 436 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (h) SPHINGES Scopoli, 1777 (invalid, because, although published as the name for a suprageneric group, the group so established did not include the genus Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758) (Opinion 379) (Name No. 69) ; (i) SPHINGIDES Latreille, [1802—1803] (type genus : Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758) (an Invalid Original Spelling for SPHINGIDAE) (Opinion 379) (Name No. 70) ; (j) SPHINGOIDES Burmeister, 1829 (type genus: Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758) (an Erroneous Subsequent Spel- ling for SPHINGIDAE (correction of SPHINGIDES) Latreille, [1802—1803]) (Opinion 379) (Name No. 71); (k) SPHINGITES Newman, [1836] (type genus: Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758) (an Erroneous Subsequent Spel- ling for SPHINGIDAE (correction of SPHINGIDES) Latreille, [1802—1803]) (Opinion 379) (Name No. 72) ; (1) SPHINGIADAE Harris, 1839 (type genus: Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758) (an Erroneous Subsequent Spel- ling for SPHINGIDAE (correction of SPHINGIDES) Latreille, [1802—1803]) (Opinion 379) (Name No. i); (m) SPHINGOIDAE Wallengren, 1865 (type genus : Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758) (an Erroneous Subsequent Spel- ling for SPHINGIDAE (correction of SPHINGIDES) Latreille, [1802—1803]) (Opinion 379) (Name No. 74) ; (n) SPHINGIDA Haeckel, 1896 (type genus: Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758) (an Erroneous Subsequent Spel- ling for SPHINGIDAE (correction of SPHINGIDES) Latreille, [1802—1803]) (Opinion 379) (Name No. 75). DIRECTION 41] 437 I. THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THE PRESENT ** DIRECTION ” The present Direction contains Rulings given by the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature on the family- group name implications of all the cases involved in Volume 11 of Opinions and Declarations rendered by the International Com- mission on Zoological Nomenclature, other than in cases where those implications have been dealt with in the individual Opinions concerned. The proposals on which the Ruling given in the present Direction are based were submitted to the Commission in two instalments. The first instalment related to the family- group name problems involved in Opinions 351—361 which at the time when the proposals in regard thereto were submitted to the Commission were expected to form the concluding portion of Volume 10 in the Opinions and Declarations Series, but which later it was decided should form the opening portion of Volume 11. The second instalment of proposals dealt with in the present Direction is concerned with the family-group name implications in the cases dealt with in Opinions 362—379 which now form the concluding portion of Volume 11. 2. Proposals relating to the family-group name implications of the cases dealt with in ‘‘ Opinions ’’ 351—361 : On 18th April 1955, Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, submitted to the Commission a paper containing recommendations for dealing with the family- group-name implications in the cases dealt with in Opinions 334—361 which, as explained in paragraph 1 above, it was then proposed should constitute Volume 10 of the Opinions and Declarations Series. When later it was decided to close the fore- going volume with Opinion 360, a Direction was prepared in which was incorporated the portion of the paper submitted to the Commission on 18th April 1955 which was concerned with Opinions 334—350. This Direction, which was Direction 28 was published on 12th August 1955 (Ops. Decls. int. Comm. Zool. 438 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Nomencl. 10 : 493—510). The portion of the paper referred to above which dealt with Opinions 351—361 was as follows :— Proposed addition to the ‘‘ Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology ”’ or, as the case may be, to the ‘* Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology ’’ of family-group names involved in the cases dealt with in Volume 101 of the ‘* Opinions and Declarations ’’ Series (‘‘ Opinions ”’ 351— 361?) By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E., Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature The purpose of the present paper is to lay before the Commission the family-group-names problems involved in the cases dealt with in Opinions 351—361?, which collectively will form Volume 10* in the Opinions and Declarations Series, and to seek decisions from the Commission in those cases where, under the General Directives issued to the Commission by the International Congress of Zoology, names require to be placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology or on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Names of this category. 3. In each case consultations have been held with specialists in the group concerned and the Commission is much indebted to these specialists for the assistance which they have given in supplying the necessary information and in co-operating in the preparation of the proposals now submitted. The names of the specialists who have assisted in this matter are given in the following list, together with an indication of the cases on which each has given advice :— Dr. J. Wyatt Durham (University of California, Department of Paleontology, Berkeley, California, U.S.A.) : Mortonella (Opinion 358) ; Mr. A. E. Ellis (Epsom College; Epsom, England): Dreissena (Opinion 351) 2 As originally submitted, this paper was concerned with the family-group-name implications of the Opinions then proposed to be included in Volume 10 of the Opinions and Declarations Series. Later, these Opinions concerned were distributed between Volumes 10 and 11. The portion of this paper concerned with Volume:10 as so remodelled has already been published in Direction 28. As originally submitted, this paper dealt with Opinions 334—361 and not only with Opinions 351—361, as here shown. ee a DIRECTION 41 439 Dr. William K. Emerson (University of California, Museum of Paleonto- logy, Berkeley, California, U.S.A.) : Antalis (Opinion 361) ; Dr. L. B. Holthuis (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) : Acanthephyra (Opinion 359) ; Dr. K. H. L. Key (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Division of Entomology, Canberra, A.C.T., Australia) : Chortoicetes, Austroicetes (Opinion 357) ; Dr. C. J. Stubblefield (Geological Survey and Museum, London) : Cummingella, Phillipsia, Weberides (Opinion 352) ; [Paragraphs 4 and 5 were concerned respectively with problems arising in connection with Opinions 340 and 341. These Opinions were included in Volume 10 of the Opinions and Declarations Series. The paragraphs relating to them have been published in Direction 28.| 6. The family-group name position involved in each of the Opinions concerned is examined in turn in Annexe 2? to the present paper. Proposals are submitted in each case where action is called for under the General Directives referred to in paragraph 1 above but has not yet been taken. eINEINGE OE 2, Proposals for the addition to the ‘‘ Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology ’’ or, as the case may be, to the ‘‘ Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology ”’ of the family-group names involved in the cases dealt with in the ** Opinions ”’ included in Volume 10+ of the ‘‘ Opinions and Declarations ’’ Series (‘‘ Opinions ’’ 351—361)® OPINION 351 (Dreissena) : The following name to be placed on the Official List :— DREISSENIDAE Gray (J.E.), 1840, in Turton, Manual Land Freshwater Shells Brit. Islands (new ed.) :277 (type genus: Dreissena 3 Annexe 1 to the present paper was concerned with Opinion 340. It has been published in Direction 28 but is omitted here, as the above Opinion has been published in Volume 10 of the Opinions and Declarations Series. 4 See Footnote 1. 5 See Footnote 2. 440 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS van Beneden, 1835) (correction of DREISSENADAE ; first published in correct form, aS DREISSENIDAE, by Gray (J.E.), 1847, Proc. zool. Soc. Lond. 15 : 199) ; The following names to be placed on the Official Index :— (a) DREISSENADAE Gray (J.E.), 1840 (an Invalid Original Spelling for DREISSENIDAE) ; (b) DREISSENSIINAE Fischer (P.), 1887, Manuel Conchyliol. : 965 (type genus : Dreissena van Beneden, 1835) (a junior objective synonym Of DREISSENIDAE Gray (J.E.), 1847). OPINION 352 (Cummingella, etc.) : The following name to be placed on the Official List :— PHILLIPSIDAE (correction of PHILLIPSIDAE) Oehlert (D.), 1886> Bull. Soc. Etud. sci. Angers (n.s.) 15 :127 (type genus: Phillipsia Portlock, 1843) ; The following name to be placed on the Official Index :— PHILLIPSIDAE Oehlert (D.), 1886 (type genus : Phillipsia Portlock, 1843) (an Invalid Original Spelling for PHILLIPSIIDAE). Note :—Neither the name Cummingella Reed, 1942, nor the name Weberides Reed, 1942, has been taken as the base for a family-group name. OPINION 353 (Hoplites) : The family-group name aspect of this case has been dealt with by the Commission in its vote on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)27, and the decision so taken has been embodied in Opinion 353 (now in the press)®. OPINION 354 (fasciata, Aplysia) : OPINION 355 (punctata, Laplysia) : No family-group name problem arises in either of these cases. OPINION 356 (Gryphaea) : The family-group name aspect of this case has been dealt with by the Commission in its vote on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(54)26, and the 6 This Opinion has since been published as Part 3 of Volume 11 of the Opinions and Declarations Series. DIRECTION 41 441 decision so taken has since been embodied in Opinion 356 (now in the press).” OPINION 357 (Chortoicetes) : OPINION 358 (Mortonella) : OPINION 359 (Acanthephyra) : None of the generic names dealt with in these Opinions has been taken as the base for a family-group name. OPINION 360 (knorri, Ostrea): No family-group-name problem arises in this case. OPINION 361 (Antalis) : The generic name dealt with in this Opinion has not been taken as the base for a family-group name. 3. Proposals relating to the family-group-name implications of the cases dealt with in ‘‘ Opinions ’’ 362—379 : On 23rd January 1956, Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, submitted to the Commission the following paper containing recommendations relating to the family-group-name implications of the cases dealt with in Opinions 363—379, the Opinions which form the concluding portion of Volume 11 of the Opinions and Declarations Series :— Proposed completion of the family-group name portions of the cases dealt with in ‘*‘ Opinions *? 362—-379 By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E., Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature The purpose of the present paper is to submit to the Commission a statement regarding the family-group-name problems involved in those of the Opinions included in Volume 11 of the Opinions and Declarations Series on which such decisions have not yet been taken. In this connection I must recall that on 18th April of last year I sub- mitted a paper (Z.N.(S.) 916) in which I sought similar decisions from the Commission in regard to the Opinions then proposed to be included in Volume 10 of the foregoing Series. The Opinions so involved were Opinions 334—361. Later, it was found that Volume 10 would be 7 This Opinion has since been published as Part 6 of Volume 11 of the Opinions and Declarations Series. 442 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS unduly large if it comprised all the Opinions cited above and it was accordingly decided to close that volume at the end of Opinion 350, the remaining eleven Opinions being held over for inclusion in the next volume (Volume 11). It is now proposed that that volume should comprise 29 Opinions, namely Opinions 351—379. The family-group name problems involved in the first eleven of these Opinions have already been settled by the Commission in its vote (on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(55)(15) on the paper numbered Z.N.(S.) 916 referred to above. Accordingly, all that it is now necessary for the Commission to do in order to complete the action needed at the family-group-name level in connection with the Opinions included in Volume 11 of the Opinions and Declarations Series 1s that it should deal with such problems as they arise in this field in connection with Opinions 362—379. This is the subject dealt with in the present paper. 2. The recommendations now submitted are based partly upon investigations of the literature undertaken by this Office and partly upon information kindly supplied by a number of specialists whose aid has been sought in this matter. The Commission is much indebted to the specialists who have been so kind as to co-operate in this way. The names of the specialists concerned are given in the following list, together with an indication of the cases on which each has given advice :— Dr. Thomas W. Amsden (The Johns Hopkins University, Department of Geology, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) : Antirhynchonella (Opinion 374) Dr. Reeve M. Bailey (Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A.) : Heterandria, Gambusia, Poeciliopsis (Opinion 375) Dr. W. E. China (British Museum (Natural History), London) : Jakoy- levia (Opinion 368) Dr. L. R. Cox (British Museum (Natural History), London) : Ancylus (Opinion 363) Mr. A. E. Ellis (Epsom College, Epsom, England): Ancylus (Opinion 363) ; ‘Ancylastrum (Opinion 364) Professor Dr. E. M. Hering (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt- Universitat zu Berlin) : Sphinx (Opinion 379) Dr. L. B. Holthuis (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) : Pontonia (Opinion 378) i DIRECTION 41 443 Mr. G. H. E. Hopkins (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts., England): Amphipsylla, Palaeopsylla (Opinion 373) Dr. B. Hubendick (Naturhistoriska Riksmuseet, Stockholm, Sweden) : Ancylus (Opinion 363) ; Dr. Helen Muir-Wood (British Museum (Natural History), London) : Tornquistia (Opinion 367) ; Yakovlevia (Opinion 368) Mr. H. A. Oldroyd (British Museum (Natural History), London) : Micropeza, Tylos (Opinion 369) Dr. Jiri Paclt (Slovenska Akadémia Vied, Faunistické Laboratérium, Bratislava, Czechoslovakia) : Sphinx (Opinion 379) Dr. Karl P. Schmidt (Chicago Natural History Museum, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.) : Aneides (Opinion 377) Dr. C. J. Stubblefield (Geological Survey and Museum, London) : Toernquistia (Opinion 367) Herr Erich Uhmann (Stollberg-Sachsen, Germany) : Platypria (Opinion 376) Professor A. Vandel (Université de Toulouse, Laboratoire de Zoologie de la Faculté des Sciences, Toulouse, France) : Tylos (Opinion 369) 3. The family-group-name position involved in each of the Opinions concerned is examined in turn in the paper which forms the Annexe to the present note. Proposals are submitted in each case where action is called under the General Directives issued to the International Commission by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, when establishing the Official List of Family- Group Names in Zoology and the corresponding Official Index of rejected and invalid names of the family-group category. ANNEXE Proposals for the addition to the ‘‘ Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology ’’ or, as the case may be, to the ‘‘ Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology ”’ of family-group names involved in the cases dealt with in ‘* Opinions ’’ 362—379 OPINION 362 (Geoffroy, 1762, Traité Sommaire) This Opinion is concerned only with the status of the above book. 444 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS OPINION 363 (Ancylus Miller (O.F.), 1774) The following names to be placed on the Official List :— (a) ANCYLINAE (correction of ANCYLIDIA) Rafinesque (C.S.), 1815, Analyse de la Nature : 143 (type genus : Ancylus Miller (O.F.), 1774) (proposed by Rafinesque as the name for a “ sous- famille ’’) (first published with an approved termination (as ANCYLINAE) by Fischer (P.), [1883] (@anuel Conchyliol. : 504) (Class Gastropoda) (b) ACROLOXINAE Thiele (J.), 1931, Handb. syst. Weichtierk. 1 : 484 (type genus : Acroloxus Beck, 1837) (Class Gastropoda). The following names to be placed on the Official Index :— (a) ANCYLIDIA Rafinesque (C.S.), 1815 (type genus : Ancylus Miller (O.F.), 1774) (an Invalid Original Spelling for ANCYLINAE) (b) ANCYLEA Menke (C.T.), 1830, Synopsis meth. Moll. : 11 (type genus : Ancylus Miller (O.F.), 1774) (an Erroneous Subse- quent Spelling for ANCYLIDAE). OPINION 364 (Ancylastrum Bourguignat, 1853) The generic name Ancylastrum Bourguignat, 1853, has not been taken as the base for a family-group name. OPINION 365 (Crotalus atrox Baird & Girard, 1853) OPINION 366 (Caudisona polysticta Cope, 1865) No family-group name problem arises in connection with either of these Opinions, both of which are concerned only with specific names. OPINION 367 (Toernquistia Reed, 1896, and Tornquistia Paeckelmann, 1930) The following name to be placed on the Official List :— TOERNQUISTIDAE Hupé (P.), 1953, Traité de Paléontologie (ed. J. Piveteau) 3 : 198 (type genus : Toernquistia Reed, 1896) (Class Trilobita) Note :—The generic name Tornquistia Paeckelmann, 1930 (Class Brachiopoda) has not been taken as the base for a family-group name, this genus being currently placed in the family CHONETIDAE. OPINION 368 (Jakowleffia Puton, 1875, and Yakovlevia Fredericks, 1925) Neither of the above generic names has been taken as the base for a family-group name. The genus Jakowleffia Puton, 1875 (Class se le !hCUCU Ce | DIRECTION 41 445 ’ Insecta, Order Hemiptera) is currently placed in the family LYGAEIDAE, while the genus Yakovlevia Fredericks, 1925 (Class Brachiopoda) is placed in the family PRODUCTIDAE (sens. Jat.). OPINION 369 (Tylos Audouin, [1826], and Micropeza Meigen, 1803) The following names to be placed on the Official List :— (a) TYLINAE Dana (J.D.), 1852, Amer. J. Sci. Arts (2) 14 : 301 (type genus : Tylos Audouin, [1826]) (Class Crustacea, Order Isopoda) (b) MICROPEZIDAE Loew, 1862, Smithson. misc. Coll. 6 (Art. 1) : 38 (type genus : Micropeza Meigen, 1803) (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) The following name to be placed on the Official Index :— TYLIDAE Czerny, 1930, in Lindner, Die Fliegen 5(42a) : 1) (type genus : 7ylos Meigen, 1800) (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) Note :—The generic names Tylos Meigen, 1800, and Micropeza Meigen, 1803, are objective synonyms of one another. In Opinion 369 the name Tylos Meigen, 1800, was suppressed by the Commission under its Plenary Powers. OPINION 370 (Archaeocidaris McCoy, 1844) The following name to be placed on the Official List :— ARCHAEOCIDARIDAE MCCoy, 1849, Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. (2) 3 : 253 (type genus : Archaeocidaris MCCoy, 1844) OPINION 371 (Pholidocidaris Meek & Worthen, 1869) OPINION 372 (Lovenechinus Jackson, 1912) No family-group-name problem arises in connection with the names of either of these Echinoid genera. The genus Pholidocidaris Meek & Worthen, 1869, is currently placed in the family LEPIDOCENTRIDAE and the genus Lovenechinus Jackson, 1912, in the family PALAEECHINIDAE. OPINION 373 (Amphipsylla Wagner, 1909, and Palaeopsylla Wagner, 1903) The following name to be placed on the Official List :— AMPHIPSYLLINA Ioff, 1936, Z. Parasitenk. 9 : 73, 76 (type genus: Amphipsylla Wagner, 1909). (The name AMPHIPSYLLINA was introduced as the name for a ‘“‘Tribus”’.) (Class Insecta, Order Siphonaptera) Note :—The generic name Palaeopsylla Wagner, 1903, has not been taken by any author as the base for a family-group name. 446 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS OPINION 374 (Antirhynchonella Oehlert, 1887) No family-group name problem arises in this case. OPINION 375 (Heterandria Agassiz, 1853, etc.) The following names to be placed on the Official List : (a) HETERANDRIINI Hubbs, 1924, Misc. Publ. Mus. Zool. Univ. Mich. 13:7 (type genus: MHeterandria Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1853). (This family-group name was published as the name for a tribe.) (Class Osteichthyes) (b) GAMBUSIINAE Gill, 1893, Nat. Acad. Sci. 6 : 133 (type genus : Gambusia Poey, 1854) (Class Osteichthyes) (c) POECILIOPSINAE Hubbs, 1924, Misc. Publ. Mus. Zool. Univ. Mich. 13 : 9 (type genus : Poeciliopsis Regan, 1913) (Class Osteich- thyes) OPINION 376 (Platypria Guérin-Méneville, 1840) No family-group-name problem arises in this case, the genus Platypria Guérin-Méneville, 1840, being currently placed in the sub- family HISPINAE of the family CHRYSOMELIDAE (Class Insecta, Order Coleoptera). OPINION 377 (Aneides Baird, 1851) The generic name Aneides Baird has never been made the base for a family or subfamily name. The genus Aneides is currently placed in the family PLETHODONTIDAE (Class Amphibia, Order Caudata). OPINION 378 (Pontonia Latreille, 1829) The following name to be placed on the Official List :— PONTONIINAE (correction of PONTONINAE) Kingsley, 1878, Bull. Essex Inst. 10:64 (type genus: Pontonia Latreille, 1829) (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda) The following name to be placed on the Official Index :— PONTONINAE Kingsley, 1878 (type genus : Pontonia Latreille, 1829) (an Invalid Original Spelling for PONTONIINAE) OPINION 379 (Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758) The following name to be placed on the Official List :— SPHINGIDAE (correction of SPHINGIDES) Latreille, [1802—1803], Hist. nat. gén. partic. Crust. Ins. 3 : 400 (type genus : Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758) (first published with an approved termination ilar lia th DIRECTION 41 447 (as SPHINGIDAE) by Samouelle (G.), 1819, Entomologist’s usef. Compend. : 243) (Class Insecta, Order Lepidoptera) Note :—In the above work Latreille cited family names both in a vernacular (French) form and in a Latin form, the name in the French form being printed in Roman capitals and that of the Latin in italics. In the present case the French form of the word was printed as ** SPHINGIDES ”’, the Latin form as ‘‘ Sphingides ’’. The following names to be placed on the Official Index :— (a) SPHINGES Scopoli, 1777, Introd. Hist. nat. : 413 (invalid because, although published as the name for a suprageneric group, the group so established did not include the genus Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758) ; (b) SPHINGIDES Latreille, [1802—1803], Hist. nat. gén. partic. Crust. Ins. 3 : 400 (type genus : Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758) (an Invalid Original Spelling for SPHINGIDAE) ; (c) The following Erroneous Subsequent Spellings for SPHINGIDAE (correction of SPHINGIDES) Latreille, [1802—1803], each of which was published as a family name :— (i) SPHINGOIDES Burmeister, 1829, De Ins. Syst. Nat., Inaug.- Diss. Halle : 27 (ii) SPHINGITES Newman, [1836], Grammar Entom. : 174 (iii) SPHINGIADAE Harris, 1839, in Silliman’s Amer. J. Sci. Art (iv) SPHINGOIDAE Wallengren, 1865, K. svensk. Vet.-Akad. Handl., 5(4) : 17 (v) SPHINGIDA Haeckel, 1896, Syst. Phyl. 3 (Wirb. Thiere) : 710 4. Registration of the present application : When in April 1955, Mr. Hemming submitted to the Commission the proposals which in concert with interested specialists he had drawn up for dealing with the family-group-name implications involved in the Opinions which it was then proposed should be included in Volume 10 of the Opinions and Declarations Series [i.e. the paper, the portions of which relating to Opinions 351—361 have been reproduced in paragraph 2 of the present Direction], the problems so involved were allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 916. As has already been explained, the foregoing Opinions were later transferred to Volume 11 of the Opinions and Declarations Series. When in January 1956, Mr. Hemming submitted to the Commission the 448 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS - paper regarding the remaining Opinions (Opinions 362—379) included in Volume 11 of the present Series [i.e. the paper re- produced in paragraph 3 of the present Direction], the problems so involved were allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 1048. Il. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 5. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(55)15 : On 18th April 1955 a Voting Paper (V.P.(O.M.)(55)15) was issued in which each Member of the Commission was asked (1) to state whether he agreed “that, in conformity with the General Directive relating. to the recording on the various Official Lists and Official Indexes of decisions in regard to particular names and particular books issued to the International Commission by the Thirteenth Inter- national Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948, and with the General Directive supplementary thereto issued to the Commission by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, the entries relating to the family-group names involved in the cases dealt with in the Opinions (Opinions 334—3618) included in Volume 10 of the work Opinions and Declarations, as recommended in paragraph 6 of the paper numbered Z.N.(S.) 916 and as specified in Annexe 2 to that paper, submitted by the Secretary simultaneously with the present Voting Paper [i.e. in paragraph 6 of the application reproduced in paragraph 2 of the present Direction], should be made in the Official List and Official Index for the names of taxa belonging to the family-group, as there proposed ”’ and (2), if he did not so agree as regards any given item, to indicate that item. 6. The Prescribed Voting Period for Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.) (55)15 : As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the One-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 18th May 1955. § See Footnote 1. DIRECTION 41 449 7. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(55)15) : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(55)15 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following twenty-four (24) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Sylvester-Bradley ; Lemche ; Stoll ; Hering ; Tortonese ; Vokes; Mayr; Boschma; Esaki; Miller; Hanko; Prantl ; Key ; Bonnet ; Jaczewski ; Hemming ; Dymond ; Kuhnelt ; do Amaral; Cabrera; Mertens; Riley ; Bodenheimer ; Bradley (J.C.) ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) On Leave of Absence, one (1): Holthuis ; (d) Voting Papers not returned : None. 8. Declaration of Result of Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.) (55)15) : On 19th May 1955, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(55)15, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 7 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was ‘the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. 450 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 9. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(56)2 : On 23rd January 1956, a Voting Paper (V.P.(O.M.)(56)2) was issued in which each Member of the Commission was asked (1) to state whether he agreed “that, in conformity with the General Directive relating to the recording on the various Official Lists and Official Indexes of decisions in regard to particular names and particular books issued to the International Commission by the Thirteenth Inter- national Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948, and with the General Directive supplementary thereto on the subject of family-group names issued to the Commission by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, the entries relating to the family-group names involved in the cases dealt with in Opinions 362—379, being the Opinions included in the latter part of Volume 11 of the work Opinions and Declarations, as recom- mended in the Annexe to the paper numbered Z.N.(S.) 1048, submitted by the Secretary simultaneously with the present Voting Paper [i.e. in the Annexe to the paper reproduced in para- graph 3 of the present Direction], be made in the Official List and Official Index for the names of taxa belonging to the family- group, as there proposed ” and (2), if he did not so agree as regards any given item, to indicate that item. 10. The Prescribed Voting Period for Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.) (56)2: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the One-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 23rd February 1956. 11. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(56)2 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(56)2 was as follows :— ) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following twenty- two (22) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Riley ; Boschma; Holthuis; Hering; Bodenheimer ; Mayr ; Vokes ; Sylvester-Bradley ; Mertens ; Jaczewski ; Kihnelt ; Key; Bradley (J.C.); Stoll; do Amaral ;_ Dymond ; Lemche; Hanké; Tortonese ; Hemming ; Bonnet ; Cabrera ; | i - DIRECTION 4] © 45] (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) Voting Papers not returned : three (3) : Esaki ; Miller ; Prantl. 12. Declaration of Result of Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.) (56)2 : On 24th February 1956, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(56)2, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 11 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Commission in the matter afore- said. 13. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Direction ”” : On 24th February 1956, Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given in the present Direction and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Ruling were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Com- mission in its Votes on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(55)15 and on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(56)2 respectively. 14. Original References : The original references for the names placed respectively on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology and on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology by the Ruling given in the present Direction are as set out (a) in Annexe 2 to the application reproduced in paragraph 2 of the present Direction and (b) in the Annexe to the subsequent application reproduced in paragraph 3 of this Direction. 15. The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Direction is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Commission ye OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 16. The present Direction shall be known as Direction Forty- One (41) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomen- clature. ) Done in London, this Twenty-Fourth day of February, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Six. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING ee. ; Fis tees ! Printed in England by MercatFe & Cooper Limitep, 10-24 Scrutton St., London EC 2 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, c.M.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 11. Part 31. (Concluding Part) “y _N v1 H S U NV, ay ( AUG 21 1953 LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1956 Price One Pound, Four Shillings (All rights reserved) Issued 3rd July, 1956 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME I. Part 31. Pp. 453—480 (also published with this Part : T.P—XVII]) CONTENTS Corrigenda ; Authors’ and Subject Indexes ; Particulars of the dates of publication of the several parts in which the present Volume was published; Instructions to Binders. Also published with this Part: Title Page, Foreword ; Table of Contents. LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Sold on behalf of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by the International Trust at its Publications Office 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W.7 1956 Price One Pound, Four Shillings (All rights reserved) eee Issued 3rd July, 1956 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS PUBLISHED IN THE PRESENT VOLUME A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Karl Jordan (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts, England) President : Professor James Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Vice-President : Senhor Dr. Afranio do Amaral (Sao Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) Secretary : Mr. Francis Hemming (London, England) (27th July 1948) B. The Members of the Commission (Arranged in order of precedence by reference to date of election or of most recent re-election as prescribed by the International Congress of Zoology) Professor H. BOSCHMA (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (ist January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (La Plata, Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) ve Henan LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th uly 1948) Professor Teiso EsAkI (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mr. Norman Denbigh RILEy (British Museum (Natural History), London) (9th June 1950) Professor Tadeusz JACZEWSKI (Institute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland) (15th June 1950) Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-Museum u. Forschungs-Institut Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) (5th July 1950) Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt- Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (Sth July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice President) Professor J. R. DyMOND (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 1953) Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (42th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. Vokes (Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Maryland, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANK6 (Mezdégazdasdgi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August ES Dr. Norman R. StoLi (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y. U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) Dr. L. B. HoLtuuis (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (12th August 1953) Dr. K. H. L. Key (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Canberra, A.C.T., Australia) (15th October 1954) Dr. Alden H. MILLER (Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California, U.S.A.) (29th October 1954) Doc. Dr. Ferdinand PRANTL (Ndrodni Museum v Praze, Prague, Czechoslovakia) (30th October 1954) Professor Dr. Wilhelm KiHNELT (Zoologisches Institut der Universitat, Vienna, Austria) (6th November 1954) noroean F. S. BODENHEIMER (The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel) (11th November 1954 Professor Ernst MAyYR (Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College, Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A.) (4th December 1954) Professor Enrico ToRTONESE (Museo di Storia Naturale ‘“ G. Doria,’’ Genova, Italy) (16th December 1954) Corrigenda page 3. Ruling (3)(a), line 2: substitute “‘ Dreissena’’ for “‘ Driessena”’. page 50. Ruling (3)(d), line 3: insert the word “ objective’ between the words “junior” and ‘“‘synonym.”’ page 54. Line 22: substitute “ Astrobunus ”’ for ‘“‘ Astrobonus ”’. page 264. Line 2: substitute ““ OxYCARENINAE ”’ for ““ OXYCARANINAE ”’. page 381. Ruling (2)(a), line 4: substitute “1855 ’’ for “‘ 1853 ”’. Volume 11 457 INDEX TO AUTHORS OF APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH IN THE PRESENT VOLUME AND OF COMMENTS ON THOSE APPLICATIONS Page Acre M. L. .. 268—270 Alexander, C.P. ~.. aera: Amsden, T. W. 372—375 Andrewartha, A. G. Pr k20 Bailey, R. M. 383—386 Baily, J. L., Jr. 87, 99 Bather, F. A. 304, 326, 345 Blake, C. H. .. as 4286 Bogert, C. M. 220239) Bradley, J. C. ‘65—71 Brighton, A. G. 304, 326, 345 sey)... sf antes, @lark, A. H.... 304, 314, 326, 335, 345, 355 Slack HL... 304, 314, 326 Conant, R. 225, 241 Cooke, C. W. 305, 327, 345—346 Cotireau, J... 304, 314, 326 Gumie, EL. D. 304, 314, 326 Page Davis, D. D. PREG?) Deichmann, E. 304, 314, 326 Diakonov, A.M. 304, 314, 326 Doderlein, L. 304, 314, 326 Durham, J. Wyatt 132—134 Edgren, R. A. 225, 241, 407 Bkmam, Sirs. ee .. 304 Ellis, A. E. 5, 10O—11, 193—194 Emerson, W. K. 164—166 Engel, H. 81—82, 93—94, 313; 3305 055 Faas, A. 304, 326, 345 Fedotov, D. M. 304, 326, 345 Fisher, W. K. 304, 326, 345 Forbes, W. Tt. M. — .: aT Franclemont, J.G. .. 426—427 Gislen, T. .. ys £23305 458 Opinions and Declarations Page Gloyd, H. K. 224, 240 Gordon, Isobel ie pays) Goto, S. 305, 326, 345 Gregory, J. W. 305, 326, 345 Gries, JAy 2. 305, 326, 345 Hawkins, H. L. 305, 326, 345 Hecker, R. 305, 326, 345 Heding, S. 305, 326, 345 Hemming, F. 7—10, 12—16, 20—22, 39—42, 60—63, 65— — 73, 75—716, 83—86, 95—98, 107—109, 125—126, 148, 157, 170, 179—180, 200, 226—227, 248—250, 251, 258—261, 287 —290, 295—297, 311—313, 332—334, 351—354, 417, 438 Henbest, L. G. 306, 327—328, 346 Hennig, W.. 275—276, 276—277 Herold, W. .. ok ee oS Herouard, E. 305, 326, 345 Hofsten, N. v. Pe, ox 805 Holthuis, L. B. 16—18, 142—145, 284—285, 414415 Hopkins, G. HME. 2) 3622364 Hubendick, B. 176—178, 187— 191, 206—209 oe. | Page Husson, A. M. —16—18 Jackson, R. T. 305, 326, 345 Key, K.H.L. 117—119, 122— 123 Kirke, E. 306, 328, 346 Klauber, L. M. 218—220, 234— 236 Klinghardt, F 305, 326, 345 Lambert, J. 305, 326, 345 Lemche, H. 87, 99 Lieberkind, I. 305, 326, 345 Ludbrook, N. H. 164—166 Misra, K.S. .. 387, 416 Mortensen, Th. 308—309, 325— 326, 342—344 Nobre, A. 305, 326, 345 Ohshima, H... 305, 327, 345 Paclt, J. 424425 Volume 11 459 Page Panning, 305, 327, 345 meek. J. H., Jr. 317—320 rerins, C.B. 221—222, 237— 238 Pilsbry, H. A. 2 ve 16F Hope, C,H... . 273% 239 Ravn, I. P. J. 305, 327, 345 Inceside. J.B: Jr: 306, 328, 346 Reichensperger, A. .. 305, 327, 345 Richter, R. 37—38 Savage, J. M. 226, 241, 407 Schmidt, K.P. 223, 239, 404— 405 Schmidt, W. E. 305, 327, 345 Shaw, F. R. .. 277—278 Smart, J. 271—273 Smith,H.M. 222—223, 238— 239 Spencer, W. K- 305, 327, 345 Stefanini, G. 305,327,345 Page Stephenson, L. W. 305% 3277, 345—346 Stone, A. ne a ee is: Stubblefield, C. J. 29—35 Swan, D. C. 120—121 Sylvester-Bradley, P. C. 154—156 Taylor, E. H. 2225 238 Uhmann, E. 394—396 United States Geological Survey 305—306, 327—328, 345—346 Valette, D. O. 305, 327, 345 Vandel, A. 278—279, 279—284 Vaney, C. BOINS21g45 Wanner, J. 305, 327, 345 Watson, H. 194—197, 210—211 Woodring, W. P. 306, 328, 346 Wright, C. W. 52—56 Yakovlev, N. 305, 327, 345 Zariquiey, R. 146, 417 460 Opinions and Declarations SUBJECT INDEX Acanthephyra Milne Edwards (A.), 1881 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 882, with Acanthe- | Phyra armata Milne Edwards (A.), 1881, as type species : gender of name ACROLOXINAE Thiele (J. es Meith (Class Gastropoda), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in ee with Name No. 79, with Acroloxus Beck, 1837, as type genus : 0 5 Acroloxus Beck, 1837 (Class Gastropoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 885, with Patella lacustris Linnaeus, 1758, as type species Ba Ae Be se a ae ; 4 gender of name Amphipsylla Wagner, 1909 (Class Insecta, Order Siphonaptera), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 896, with aged schelkovnikovi Wagner, 1909, as type species 3 gender of name AMPHIPSYLLINA Ioff, 1936 (Class Insecta, Order Siphonaptera), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology with Name No. 84, with ma Wagner, 1909, as type genus Anaides Baird (S.F.), [1849] (a junior homonym of Anaides Westwood, 1842), placed on the Official Index of ata and Invalid Generic Names in n Zeal with Name No. 318 : ae : Ancylastrum Bourguignat, February 1853 (Class Gastropoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 886, with eS eas 0) cumingianus Bourguignat, May 1853, as type species ; gender of name ANCYLEA Menke (C.T.), 1830 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling for ANCYLINAE), placed on the Official Index of feed and Invalid Pe Names in Zoology with Name No. 66 .. ANCYLIDIA Rafinesque (C.S.), 1815 (an Invalid Original Spelling for ANCYLINAE), placed on the Official Index of Sie and Invalid jekee Group Names in Zoology with Name No. 65 ANCYLINAE Coueicn of ANCYLIDIA) Rafinesque (C. S.), 1815 (Class Gastropoda), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in oy with Name No. 78, with Ancylus Miller (O.F.), 1774, as type genus Ancylus Geoffroy (E.L.), 1767 (a name published in a work rejected for nomen- clatorial purposes), placed on the See Index Bh BoesEE and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 303. ; Page 141 141 433 185 185 361 361 434 404 205 205 435 435 433 186 Volume 11 Ancylus Miller (O.F.), 1774 (Class Gastropoda), all previous type selections for, set aside under the Plenary Powers, and ules TS Miller oo Be Ds 1774, designated as type species gender of name placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 884 Aneides Baird (S.F.), [1849] (Class Amphibia), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 903, with Salamandra ices Hallowell, 1849, as type species Antalis Herrmannsen, 1846 (a nomen nudum), placed on the cea Index ei Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 302.. . ae Antalis Adams (H.) & Adams (A.), [1854] (Class Scaphopoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 883, with Dentalium entalis Linnaeus, 1758, as type species a ie a ae me ihe ah gender of name Antirhynchonella Quenstedt, 1871, ruled to be a nomen nudum. . placed on the Official Index ol ee and Invalid Generic Names in Boulos with Name No. 313 .. Antirhynchonella accepted as from Oehlert, 1887 (Class Brachiopoda) and placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 898, with iio linguifera Sowerby (J. de C.), 1839, as type species .. gender of name ARCHAEOCIDARIDAE McCoy, 1849 (Class Echinoidea), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Res with Name No. 83, with Archaeocidaris eeu 1844, as type genus Archaeocidaris McCoy, 1844 (Class Echinoidea), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Bee). with Name No. 893, with Cidaris urii Plene 1828, as type species aos , gender of name armata Milne Edwards (A.), 1881, as published in the combination Acanthephyra armata (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), Ecce on the ese List af Batis Names in Zoology with Name No. 499. Astrobunus Thorell, 1876 (Class Arachnida), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 878, with pene dagemee Koch, 1869, as type species gender of name atrox Baird & Girard, 1853, as published in the combination Crotalus atrox (Class Reptilia), Saga on the Official List eh pee Names in daa with Name No. 505 461 Page 185 185 185 403 163 163 163 371 371 371 amit 434 303 303 14] 50 50 PAN § 462 Opinions and Declarations Austroicetes Uvarov, 1925 (Class Insecta, Order Orthoptera), ruled to be a Valid Original Spelling and not subject to emendation gender of name placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 880, with Epacromia pusilla Walker, 1870, as type species Autodax Boulenger, 1887 (a junior objective synonyn of Aneides Baird, [1849), placed on the Official Index tof Reteched and cs Generic Names in Gone with Name No. 319.. Barrandella Hall & Clarke, 1894 (a junior objective synonym of Antirhynchonella Oehlert, 1887), placed on the Olpeial D Index of Beccied and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 314.. Calataria SjOstedt, 1921 (a junior objective synonym of Chortoicetes Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1893), placed on the Official Index of nocaee and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 297 Chortoicetes Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1893 (Class Insecta, Order Oper ruled to be a Valid Original Spelling and not subject to emendation gender of name all previous type selections for, set aside tinder the Plenary Powers, and mae terminifera Walker, 1870, designated to be the type species placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 879 cinereous Le Conte, 1852, as published in the combination Crotalus cinereous (Class Reptilia, Order Squamata), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy placed on the Official Index es Rope and Invalid ee Names in oo with Name No. 129 .. corrigiolata Linnaeus, 1767, as published in the combination Musca corrigiolata (Class Insecta, Order Diptera), ee on the einen! List oe Spee Names in Zoology with Name No. 513... oe Cummingella Reed, 1942 (Class Trilobita), all previous designations or selections of type species for, set aside under the Plenary Powers, and Phillipsia jonesii Portlock, 1843, as defined by the ewe selected by Se ae designated as type species gender of name . : es wi nts placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 873 cumingianus Bourguignat, May 1853, as published in the combination Ancylus (Ancylastrum) cumingianus (Class Gastropoda ), placed on the bs List Ps Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 504 ab Page 115 115 116 404 371 116 115 115 115 115 217 217 267 27 27 Peg) 205 +e ee Volume 11 Dentale da Costa, 1778 (Class Scaphopoda), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the ad of the Law of proney but not for those of the Law of Homonymy : f Be Ne : Pe placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoolosy with Name No. 301_ .. s: dentatus Sowerby (J.), 1821, Ammonites (Class Cephalopoda, Order Ammonoidea), designated, under the Plenary Powers, as type species of Hoplites Neumayr, 1875 placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 489 derbyensis Martin, 1809, as published in the combination Entomolithus Onicites derbyensis (a name published in a work rejected for nomenclatorial purposes), placed on the Official Index of ee and Invalid pees Names in Aes with Name No. 125 ae derbyensis (emend. of derbiensis) Phillips, 1836, as published in the combination Entomolithus derbiensis (Class ay a placed on the Cie List of pele Names in Zoology with Name No. 485. Dreisena Clessin, 1880 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling of Dreissena (emend. of Driessena) van Beneden, 1835), placed on the Official Index ap sa and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 271 Dreissena emendation to, of Driessena van Beneden, 1835, Ann. Sci. nat., Bruxelles (Class Pelecypoda), acceptance of Ee i a : ee gender of name placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 872, with Myrtulus [ex err. pro Mytilus] polymorphus Pallas, 1771, as type species Dreissena Dumortier, 1835, a junior homonym of Dreissena van Beneden, 1835 (emend. of Driessena van Beneden, 1835), placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 270.. iv DREISSENADAE Gray (J.E.), 1840 (an Invalid Original Spelling for DREISSENIDAE), placed on the Official Index of Bee and Invalid Par Grou Names in Zoology with Name No. 62 x Dreissencia Gillett, 1922 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling of Dreissena (emend. of Driessena) van "Beneden, 1835), placed on the Official Index oF Relcoee and Invalid Generic Names in "Zoology with Name No. 272 en Dreissenia Bronn, 1848 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling of Dreissena (emend. of Driessena) van Beneden, 1835), placed on the Official Index of Ren and Invalid Generic Names in "Zoology with Name No. 273 x: DREISSENIDAE (correction of DREISSENADAE) Gray (J.E.), 1840 (Class Pelecypoda), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in ns with Name No. 76, with Dreissena van Beneden, 1835, as type genus #3 Dreissensa Moquin-Tandon, 1856 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling of Dreissena (emend. of Driessena) van Beneden, 1835), placed on the Official Index sh Bieeteen and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 274.. . 463 Page 163 163 49 51 28 27 435 433 464 Opinions and Declarations Dreissensia Bronn, 1862 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling of Dreissena (emend. of Driessena) van Beneden, 1835), placed on the Official Index a Rees and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 275 ees DREISSENSIINAE Fischer (P.), 1887 (a junior objective synonym of DREISSENIDAE (correction of DREISSENADAE) Gray (J.E.), 1840, placed on the ee Index ei Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology with Name No. 63. Dreissina Sowerby (G.B.), 1839 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling of Dreissena (emend. of Driessena) van Beneden, 1835), placed on the ae Index ol ee” and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 276 . Dreistena Boué, 1840 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling of Dreissena (emend. of Driessena) van Beneden, 1835), placed on the Official Index a Relecag and Invalid Generic Names in ‘Zoology, with Name No. 277 ah Dresseina Conrad, 1874 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling of Dreissena (emend. of Driessena) van Beneden, 1835), placed on the Official Index oF Roe and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 278 Dressena Germain, 1931 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling of Dreissena (emend. of Driessena) van Beneden, 1835), placed on the Official Index ay Rejeaea and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 279 Bk Dreysseina Munier-Chalmas, 1864 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling of Dreissena (emend. of Driessena) van Beneden, 1835), placed on the Off cial Index df Bede and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 280 . Dreyssena Philippi, 1853 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling of Dreissena (emend. of Driessena) van Beneden, 1835), placed on the Official Index e we and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 281 Dreyssensia Hébert & Munier-Chalmas, 1877 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling of Dreissena (emend. of Driessena) van Beneden, 1835), placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name 282.. ae oH Dreyssentia Bernard, 1895 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling of Dreissena (emend. of Driessena) van Beneden, 1835), placed on the Official Index a RO and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 283 a Driessena van Beneden, 1835 (Class Pelecypoda), acceptance of emendation of, to Dreissena, by van Beneden, 1835, Ann. Sci. nat., Bruxelles .. 58 oe placed on the Official Index os Reese and Invalid Generic Names in Foley with Name No. 268 .. Driessenia van Beneden, 1835 (an Invalid Original Spelling of Dreissena (emend. of Driessena) van Beneden, 1835), placed on the Official Index oh Re and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 269 at Driessensia Dewalque, 1863 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling of Dreissena (emend. of Driessena) van Beneden, 1835), placed on the aa Index oF Ree and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 284 : Page 435 Volume 11 echidna Guérin-Méneville, 1840, as dublished in the combination Hispa echidna (Class Insecta, Order Coleoptera), placed? on the Ciel List of nue Names in Zoology with Name No. 523. Echinocrinus Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1841 (Class Echinoidea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the ~ Law of Homonymy : te ee ot ae vs é2 a ae placed on the Official Index a Roe and Invalid Generic Names in eee with Name No. 309 .. edulis Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the combination Ostrea Seulis (Class ee placed on the Cie! List as Apeories Names in peeeey with Name (0) Enema Hope, 1837 (Class Insecta, Order Coleoptera), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 877, with Scarabaeus enema Fabricius, 1787, as type species. . ie uA a as ae a gender of name enema Fabricius, 1787, as published in the combination Scarabaeus enema (Class Insecta, Or der Coleoptera), placed on the once List “a See Names in Zoology with Name No. 491... entalis Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the combination Dentalium entalis (Class Scaphopoda), placed on the ca List pol en Names in Begs with Name INS SWI Me Ephyra Roux (P.), 1831 (a junior homonym of Ephyra Péron & Lesueur, 1810), placed on the Official Index oh eee and Invalid Generic Names in n Zoology with Name No. 300 : Eriechinus Pomel, 1883 (Class Echinoidea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy ay at 55 56 aR ave ae ae on placed on the Official Index ah ROeeee and Invalid Generic Names in Beoaey with Name No. 311 .. : fasciata Poiret, 1789, as published in the combination Laplysia [recte Aplysia] fasciata (Class Gastropoda) pee on the AEE List oF SEE Names in Zoology with Name No. 493... fluviatilis Miller (O.F.), 1774, Ancylus (Class Gastropoda), designated, under the Plenary Powers, to be the type species of Ancylus Miller (O.F.), 1774 .. : placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 502 formosa Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1855, as published in the combination Heterandria formosa (Class Osteichthyes), placed on the pial! List of Spee Names in aug with Name No. 520 a ab 465 Page 593 303 303 108 50 50 51 163 141 341 341 81 185 186 381 466 Opinions and Declarations Gambusia Poey, 1854 (Class Osteichthyes), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 900, with Gambusia sigs er 1854, as type species : gender of name GAMBUSIINAE Gill, 1893 (Class Osteichthyes), placed on the Official List of Family- Group Names in ra tee with Name No. 86, with Gambusia @ Eeey: 1854, as ple genus a Geoffroy (E.L.), 1767, Traité sommaire des Coquilles, tant fluviatiles que terrestres, qui se trouvent aux Environs de Paris, rejection of, for nomenclatorial purposes, and addition of title of, to the Official Index of Rejected « and Invalid Works in Zoological Nomenclature as Title No. 30 A GRYPHAEINAE Vialov, 1937 (Class Pelecypoda), placed on the Official List of ans Group Names in Zoology with Name No. 12, with ee Lamarck, 1801, type genus helleri Ausserer, 1867, as published in the combination Acantholophus helleri (Class Arachnida), placed on the ee List an as Names in 5 eo with Name No. 492... Heterandria Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1853 (Class Osteichthyes), all previous type selections for, set aside under the ee Powers, and Heterandria formosa Agasst (J.L.R. ) 1855, designated as type species. gender of name placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 899 HETERANDRINI Hubbs, 1924 (Class Osteichthyes), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology with Name No. 85, with Heterandria Agee (J.L.R.), 1853, as type genus - ; i Hoplites Dejean, 1833, suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the eae both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy. . : my placed on the Official Index el Rec cea and Invalid Generic Names in nce with Name No. 285 Hoplites Dejean, 1836, suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the ee both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy.. : ae placed on the Official Index 2 page and Invalid Generic Names in eee with Name No. 286 .. F Hoplites Dejean, 1837, suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the ae both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy . : 2 oy placed on the Official Index a Reeeiea and Invalid Generic Names in eee with Name No. 287 .. Hoplites Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1846 (an Invalid Emendation of Hoplitis Hubner, [1819)), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for purposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy oe ie a - ; placed on the Official Index oe Ree and Invalid epee Names in Sil with Name No. 289 .. Page 381 381 434 175 105 31 381 381 381 434 49 50 49 50 49 50 49 50 Volume \1 Hoplites Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1846 (an Invalid Emendation of Aplites Rafinesque, 1820), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy ae Me, ae digs We placed on the Official Index of Rpeed and Invalid Generic Names in Fegiey with Name No. 290 .. ae ae ie : Hoplites Philippi, 1857, suppression of, under the Plenary Powers for the parposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy.. placed on the Official Index a) pee and Invalid Generic Names in EZOe ee? with Name No. 291 .. Hoplites Theobald, 1864, suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy.. placed on the Official Index of pee and Invalid Generic Names in ee with Name No. 292 .. Hoplites Koch, 1869, suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy.. : ty mS placed on the Official Index ay Me and Invalid Generic Names in oe. with Name No. 293 .. Hoplites, any uses of, in the Order Coleoptera (Class Insecta), prior to the publication of Hoplites Neumayr, 1875 (Class Cephalopoda, Order Ammonoidea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy.. ; : bss ae au ae He a placed on the Official Index of Laue and Invalid Generic Names in PeOnes with Name No. 288 .. Hoplites Neumayr, 1875 (Class Cea Order paeone dca) validation of, under the Plenary Powers ne all previous type selections for, set aside under the Plenary Powers and Ammonites dentatus Sowerby (J.), 1821, designated as type species .. ‘ ae Be gender of name As oe Me Bs p placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 876 Hoplites Eggers, 1923 (a junior homonym of Hoplites Neumayr, 1875), placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 294 Hoplites Kinel, 1930 (a junior homonym of Hoplites Neumayr, 1875), placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 295 HOPLITIDAE (correction of HOPLITIDES) Douvillé, 1890 (Class Cephalopoda, Order Ammonoidea), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Fun with Name No. 10, with Hoplites Neumayr, 1875, as type genus .. HOPLITIDES Douvillé, 1890 (an Invalid Original Spelling for HOPLITIDAE), placed on the Official Index of Feat and Invalid fener eue Names in gla tot: with Name No. 46 a 467 Page 49 50 49 50 49 59 49 50 49 50 49 49 50 50 50 50 51 51 468 Opinions and Declarations irregularis Meek & Worthen, 1869, as published in the combination Lepidocentrus irregularis (Class Echinoidea), placed « on the cae List Nek uns Names in Zoology with Name No. 515 .. : Jakowleffia Puton, 1875 (Class Insecta, Order Hemiptera), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 889, with Anomaloptera setulosa Jakovlev, 1874, as type species. . Y a ae a ae of 4 gender of name jonesii Portlock, 1843, as published in the combination Phillipsia jonesii (Class Trilobita), as interpreted by the lectotype selected by Stubblefield (1952), designa- tion of, under the Plenary Powers, to be the type species of Cummingella Reed, 1942 placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 486 kaluzinensis Fredericks, 1925, as published in the combination Yakovlevia kaluzinen- sis (Class Brachiopoda), placed « on the ee List a epee Names in faces! with Name No. 511 ; kellii (an Invalid Original Spelling for kellyi) Portlock, 1843, as published in the combination Phillipsia kellii, plzced on the Official Index of Rojec and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 487 kellyi (correction of kellii) Portlock, 1843, as published in the combination Phillipsia kellii (Class Trilobita), as interpreted by the lectotype selected by Stubblefield (1952), placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 487 knorri Defrance, 1821, as published in the combination Ostrea knorri (Class Pele- cypoda), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy F ee a placed on the Official Index ot eee and Invalid SPOR Names in mene with Name No. 128 .. knorrii Voltz, 1828, as published in the combination Ostrea knorrii (Class Pelecypoda), validation of, under the Plenary Powers Ae ne wh placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 500 lacustris Linnaeus, 1758, a spublished in the combination Patella lacustris (Class Gastropoda), placed on the ee List Eek Specie! Names in Bee with Name No. 503... latreillei. Audouin, [1826], as published in the combination Tylc. Jatreillei (Class Crustacea, Order Isopoda), placed on the a List of SPE Names in Zoology with Name No. 512 ; ligustri Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the combination Sphinx ligustri (Class Insecta, aes Lepidoptera), placed on the ete List a See Names in 1 Cee with ame No. 526 . Page 323 257 257 Dail 28 257 28 28 153 153 153 153 186 267 423 Volume 11 linguifera Sowerby (J. de C.), 1839, as published in the combination Atrypa linguifera a Becieepod2); Bee on the Ce List Bok spent Names in ut ApOIOEY with ame No. 5 a Lobacantha Kirby (W.), 1837 (Class Insecta, Order Coleoptera), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy ae Me : placed on the Official Index oF ey and Invalid Generic Names in ees with Name No. 315 .. Lovenechinus Jackson, 1912 (Class Echinoidea), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 895, with eae missouriensis Jackson, 1896, as type species an ne ae ; Sea =f ms se gender of name lugubris Hallowell, 1849, as published in the combination Salamandra lugubris (Class Amphibia), placed on the pos List ee ppeone Names in Fee with Name No. 524 .. Micropeza Meigen, 1803 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 892, with Musca corrigiolata Linnaeus, 1767, as type species ae at Ae ae ae er gender of name MICROPEZIDAE Loew, 1862 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in ouley with Name No. 82, with ee ee 1803, as type genus F Miersia Kingsley, 1879 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the De of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy . P Aes aye xe placed on the cal Index se Ree ted ¢ and Invalid Generic Names in eeeaieey, with Name No. 299. missouriensis Jackson, 1896, as published in the combination Oligoporus missouriensis (Class Echinoidea), placed on the fe Ocia! List a ae Names in Zoolog ey with: Name No. 516... Mortonella Pomel, 1883 (Class Echinoidea), all previous type selections for, set aside under the Plenary Powers, and Scutella ea Say, 1825, designated to be the type species of aS 4p ; : a : As gender of name placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 881 Mortonia Desor, 1858 (a junior homonym of Mortonia Gray (J.E.), [1852]), placed on the Official Index a feieee and Invalid Generic Names in i Aaoley with Name No. 298 3 469 Page 371 393 393 403 267 267 434 141 141 341 470 Opinions and Declarations mucronata McCoy, 1844, as published in the combination Phillipsia mucronata (Class Trilobita), placed « on the ee List 15 eee Names in Ee with Name No..488 .. multimaculata Jan, 1863, as published in the combination Crotalus lugubris var. multimaculata (Class Reptilia, Order Squamata), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy as ae ce Re At oS re ps placed on the Official Index ay aldara and Invalid SPEC Names in FOOREY with Name No. 130 .. nicholsoni Reed, 1896, as published in the combination Cyphaspis (Térnquistia) nicholsoni (Class Trilobita), place on the e Oficial List por SpeGRe Names in Zoey with Name No. 508 : Odonthoplites Breistroffer, 1947 (a junior objective synonym of Hoplites Neumayr, 1875), placed on the Official Index ae FO Ee and Invalid Generic Names in me with Name No. 296 oe Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology, names placed on: ANCYLEA Menke (C.T.), 1830 .. ANCYLIDIA Rafinesque (C.S.), 1815 DREISSENADAE Gray (J.E.), 1840 DREISSENSIINAE Fischer (P.), 1887 HOPLITIDES Douvillé, 1890 ae OSTRACEA Blainville, 1825 OSTREACIA Rafinesque, 1815 OSTREADAE Fleming (J.), 1828 .. PHILLIPSIDAE Oehlert (D.), 1886 PONTONINAE Kingsley, 1878 SPHINGES Scopoli, 1777 .. SPHINGIADAE Harris, 1839 SPHINGIDA Haeckel, 1896 SPHINGIDES Latreille, [1802—1 803] SPHINGITES Newman, [1836] : SPHINGOIDAE Wallengren, 1865 SPHINGOIDES Burmeister, 1829 .. TYLIDAE Czerny, 1930 Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology, names placed on: Anaides Baird (S.F.), [1849] .. Ancylus Geoffroy (E.L.), 1767 .... Antalis Herrmannsen, 1846 Ms Antirhynchonella Quenstedt, 1871 Autodax Boulenger, 1887 Barrandella Hall & Clarke, 1894 Calataria Sj6stedt, 1921 eh Dentale da Costa, 1778 Dreisena Clessin, 1880 .. Dreissena Dumortier, 1835 Page 28 239 233 247 50 Volume 11 Dreissencia Gillett, 1922.. Dreissenia Bronn, 1848 ys Dreissensa Moquin- Tandon, 1856 Dreissensia Bronn, 1862 Dreissina Sowerby (G.B.), 1839 Dreistena Boué, 1840... Dresseina Conrad, 1874 Dressena Germain, 1931 Dreysseina Munier-Chalmas, 1864 Dreyssena Philippi, 1853 Dreyssensia Hébert & Munier- Chalmas, 1877. Dreyssentia Bernard, 1895 ne : Driessena van Beneden, 1835 Driessenia van Beneden, 1835 Driessensia Dewalque, 1863 a Echinocrinus Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1841 Ephyra Roux (P.), 1831 .. ie Eriechinus Pomel, 1883 .. Hoplites Dejean, 1833 Hoplites Dejean, 1836 Hoplites Dejean, 1837 .. Hoplites Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1846 (emend. of Hoplites Hiibner ‘[1819]) Hoplites Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1846 pene. of aes Dae hae ne ee Hoplites Philippi, 1857 .. Heoplites Theobald, 1864 Hoplites Koch, 1869 a Hoplites, any uses of in the Order t Coleoptera (Class Insecta), prior to 1875 Hoplites Eggers, 1923 Hoplites Kinel, 1930 : Leobacantha Kirby (W.), 1837 Miersia Kingsley, 1879 .. Mortonia Desor, 1858 .. Odonthoplites Breistroffer, 1947 Paeckelmannia Licharew (B. K.), 1934 Protoechinus Austin (T.), 1860 Pseudancylus Walker, 1921 Tylos Meigen, 1800 Tylos Heyden, 1826 a Typhlechinus Neumayr, 1889 Yakovlevia Vologdin, 1931 Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology, names placed on : cinereous Le Conte, 1852, Crotalus a derbyensis Martin, 1809, Entomolithus Onicites kellii Portlock, 1843, Phillipsia . 5 ae knorri Defrance, 1821, Ostrea .. multimaculata Jan, 1863, Crotalus lugubris var. rosea Rathke, 1799, Aplysia xe tereticauda Eschscholtz, 1833, Triton .. Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Works in Zoological Nomenclature, titles of works placed on : Geoffroy (E.L.), 1767, Traité sommaire des COUIES | tant HONOURS que terrestres, qui se trouvent aux Environs de Paris.. F a Se ee 471 a a3 AWWAHRAHRHAHLALHLAAAHANO 175 472 Opinions and Declarations Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology, names placed on : ACROLOXINAE Thiele (J.), 1931 . AMPHIPSYLLINA Ioff, 1936 ANCYLINAE (correction of ANCYLIDIA) Rafinesque (C. S. i 1815 ARCHAEOCIDARIDAE McCoy, 1849 : DREISSENIDAE (correction of DREISSENADAE) Gray (J. =. N 1840 GAMBUSIINAE Gill, 1893 : As ws GRYPHAEINAE Vialov, 1937 HETERANDRIINI Hubbs, 1924 HOPLITIDAE (correction of HOPLITIDES) Douvillé, 1890 MICROPEZIDAE Loew, 1862 OSTREID AE (correction of OSTREACIA) Rafinesque, 1815 PHILLIPSIDAE (correction of PHILLIPSIDAE) Oehlert (D.), 1886 POECILIOPSINAE Hubbs, 1924 he PONTONIINAE (correction of PONTONINAE) Kingsley, 1S7Sea SPHINGIDAE (correction of SPHINGIDES) Latreille, [1802—1803} TOERNQUISTIIDAE Hupé (P.), 1953 He is fe TYLINAE Dana (J.D.), 1852 Official List of Generic Names in Zoology, names placed on : Acanthephyra Milne Edwards Oe ), 1881 Acroloxus Beck, 1837 .. Amphipsylla Wagner, 1909 Ancylastrum Bourguignat, February 1853 Ancylus Miller (O.F.), 1774 Aneides Baird (S.F.), [1849] Antalis Adams (H.), & eam (A.), [1854 Antirhynchonella Oehlert, 1887 Archaeocidaris McCoy, 1844 Astrobunus Yhorell, 1876 Austroicetes Uvarov, 1925 Chortoicetes Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1893 Cummingella Reed, 1942 ; Dreissena (emend. of Driessena) van Beneden, » [1835] Enema Hope, 1837 Ri j ; Gaimbusia Poey, 1854... Heterandria Agassiz (J.L.R. So 1853 Hoplites Neumayr, 1875. we Jakowleffia Puton, 1875 Lovenechinus Jackson, 1912 Micropeza Meigen, 1803 Mortonella Pomel, 1883 Palaeopsylla Wagner, 1903 Phillipsia Portlock, 1843. Pholidocidaris Meek & Worthen, 1869 Platypria Guérin-Méneville, 1840 Poeciliopsis Regan, 1913 Pontonia Latreille, 1829 . Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758 .. Toernquistia (published as Térnquistia) ‘Reed, 1896 Tornquistia Paeckelmann, 1930 Tylos (Latreille MS.) Audouin, (1826) Weberides Reed, 1942 .. Yakovlevia Fredericks, 1925 Volume 11 473 Page Official List of Specific Names in Zoology, names placed on : armata Milne Edwards (A.), 1881, a Shs Ae Pa we fs 141 atrox Baird & Girard, 1853, Crotalus tT f ate ne Ws sh bien 9. oeLhy/ corrigiolata Linnaeus, 1767, Musca .. ws ae sf 267 cumingianus Bourguignat, May 1853, Ancylus (Ancylastrum) 3 Ae Bo AUS dentatus Sowerby (J.), 1821, Ammonites ats fs ns 51 derbyensis (emend. of derbiensis) Phillips, 1836, Entomolithus a te ae Dill echidna Guérin-Méneville, 1840, fone a af Bi oes. edulis Linnaeus, 1758, Ostrea ee : 5% ae ae es eo re 106 enema Fabricius, 1787, Scarabaeus .. A Ls a ae ae a 51 entalis Linnaeus, 1758, Dentalium 3 Poe a i oe a 163 fasciata Poiret, 1789, Laplysia [recte Aplysia]. . re BS a ae ae 81 fluviatilis Miller (O. FE. ), 1774, Ancylus se ae af ae a ie 186 formosa Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1855, Heterandria .. ae ae oy mt re 381 helleri Ausserer, 1867, Acantholophus ae ae Be 2% ft 51 irregularis Meek & Worthen, 1869, Lepidocentrus ah ay 2, an A 323 jonesii Portlock, 1843, Phillipsia aie we ne fe ah 5p 28 kaluzinensis Fredericks, 1925, Yakovlevia : es Aa BE Se eee kellyi (correction of kellii) Portlock, 1843, Phillipsia.. es a ne a5 28 knorrii Voltz, 1828, Ostrea af 3 5 se Bt, ae 153 lacustris Linnaeus, 1758, Patella ae He sh oe Be aD te 186 latreillei Audouin, [1826], Tylos a8 a a a x bs 55 AST ligustri Linnaeus, 1758, Sphinx ar ae oe #, sie Be) 423 linguifera Sowerby (J. de C. ), 1839, Atrypa as a = ae as a 371 lugubris Hallowell, 1849, Salamandra ' 4 fs ah ae aie OS missouriensis Jackson, 1896, Oligoporus a ni ae = ate Ae 341 mucronata MCCoy, 1844, Phillipsia fe: au is a at ERs 28 nicholsoni Reed, 1896, C ‘yphaspis (Térnquistia) He oe ae ee Soe Lyi pan Fabricius, 1775, Scarabaeus ; op as sy ae ig 51 pinnophylax Otto, 1821, Palaemon ae aa eer at et ae 354 gAh3 polita McCoy, 1852, Leptaena (Chonetes) ae ig a a8 een 7 | polymorphus Pallas, 1771, Mytulus (ex err. pee M. yailus) Sh be Hes es 4 polysticta Cope, 1865, Caudisona : ; at ie iste a 233 presidionis Jordan & Culver, 1895, Poecilia .. Mie A ae aie ae 382 punctata Cuvier, 1803, Laplysia [recte aa es es = ae ae 93 punctata Poey, 1854, Gambusia es te ae on Bie shee pusilla Walker, 1870, Epacromia i a 4A a Oe St Bs 116 quinquefaria Say, 1825, Scutella Me we ae a bs 5 ds 131 schelkovnikovi Wagner, 1909, Amphipsylla ee as Ba ae Be OL setulosa Jakovlev, 1874, Anomaloptera a Be Be he its ah OT similis Dampf, 1910, Palaeopsylla ee ue 2h 2 ae Be Sel terminifera Walker, 1870, Epacromia .. Se if aye a a Le 116 triseriatus Wagler, 1830, Uropsophus ae BY He su ay Me S88 urii Fleming, 1828, Cidaris ae ee se a a ie ss ays 303 OSTRACEA Blainville, 1825 (an invalidly-formed junior synonym of OSTREIDAE (cor- rection of OSTREACIA) Rafinesque, 1815), placed on the Official Index of ig and Invalid HOE ete Names in Zoology with Name No. 30 .. a 106 Ostrea Linnaeus, 1758 (Class Pelecypoda), insertion of gender of name in entry relating to, on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology. . ati ate ae 106 474 Opinions and Declarations OSTREACIA Rafinesque, 1815 (an Invalid Original Spelling for OSTREIDAE), placed on the Official Index of ea and Invalid ee Cee Names in eee with Name No. 29 OSTREADAE Fleming (J.), 1828 (an invalidly-formed junior synonym of OSTREIDAE (correction of OSTREACIA) Rafinesque, 1815), placed on the Official Index o Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology with Name No. i. OSTREIDAE (correction of OSTREACIA) Rafinesque, 1815 (Class Pelecypoda), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in 000 with Name No. 11, with Ostrea Linnaeus, 1758, as type genus .. ; Paeckelmannia Licharew (B.K.), 1934 (a junior objective synonym of Tornquistia Paeckelmann, 1930), placed on the Ces Index 2 anes and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with name No. 305 . Palaeopsylla Wagner, 1903 (Class Insecta, Order Siphonaptera), all previous type selections for, set aside under the Plenary Powers, and de similis Dae 1910, designated as type species we ae : : : gender of name placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 897 pan Fabricius, 1775, as published in the combination Scarabaeus pan (Class Insecta, Order Coleoptera), pe on the Coa List ee Bnei | Names in "ee with Name No. 490 .. Phillipsia Portlock, 1843 (Class Trilobita), placed onthe Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 874, with Phillipsia kellyi (correction of kellii) Portlock, 1843, as defined by the lectotype selected by Stubblefield (1952), as type species . gender of name PHILLIPSIDAE Oehlert (D.), 1886 (an Invalid Original Spelling for PHILLIPSHDAE), placed on the Official Index of ROC ae and Invalid TOE eke Names in ety with Name No. 64 A PHILLIPSHDAE (correction Of PHILLIPSIDAE) Oehlert (D.), 1886 (Class Trilobita), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in eee) with Name No. 77, with Phillipsia Portlock, 1843, as type genus : Pholidocidaris Meek & Worthen, 1869 (Class Echinoidea), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 894, with Lepisoton irre- gularis Meek & Worthen, 1869, as type species Sue gender of name pinnophylax Otto, 1821, Palaemon (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), ee under the Plenary Powers, to be the type species of Pontonia Latreille, 1829 a placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 525 Page 105 106 105 247 361 361 361 BL Pail 27 435 433 323 323 413 413 Se Volume 11 Platypria Guérin-Méneville, 1840 (Class Insecta, Order Coleoptera), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 902, with a echidna Guerin-Meéneville, 1840, as type species gender of name POECILIOPSINAE Hubbs, 1924 (Class Osteichthyes), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Aggioey with Name No. 87, with Be neeE NUP ty ees 1913, as type genus ; Poeciliopsis Regan, 1913 (Class Osteichthyes), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 901, with Poecilia presidionis Jordan & Culver, 1895, as type species nie gender of name polita McCoy, 1852, as published in the combination Leptaena (Chonetes) polita (Class Brachiopoda), placed on the ae List a puceihe Names in pF oeey with Name No. 509 polymorphus Pallas, 1771, as published in the combination Mytulus [ex err. pro Mytilus| polymorphus (Class Pelecypoda), ced on the ica List ah RCE Names in Zoology with Name No. 484 polysticta Cope, 1865, as published in the combination Caudisona polysticta (Class Reptilia, Order Squamata), placed on the ce Cincial List ace Specie Names in ees with Name No. 506 se Pontonia Latreille, 1829 (Class Crustacea, Order gpccwneds) ruled to be based peat a misidentified type species “all previous type selections for set aside under the Plenary Powers and Palaemon pinnophylax Otto, 1821, designated as type species. . : ee zt e gender of name placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 904 PONTONIINAE (correction of PONTONINAE) Kingsley, 1878) (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda) placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology with Name No. 88, with Pontonia Latreille, 1829, as type genus. PONTONINAE Kingsley, 1878 (an Invalid Original Spelling for PONTONIINAE), placed on the Official Index of feces and Invalid pan iueaen tees Names in Tp with Name No. 68 d presidionis Jordan & Culver, 1895, as published in the combination Poecilia presi- dionis (Class Osteichthyes), placed on the Aa ed List oe BE Names in Zoology with Name No. 522 .. Protoechinus Austin (T.), 1860 (Class Echinoidea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy ne ay ne bi xt eM oe ae sé placed on the Official Index ie pa ee and Invalid Generic Names in ey ts with Name No. 310 .. 475 Page 393 393 434 381 381 247 434 435 382 323 323 476 Opinions and Declarations Pseudancylus Walker, 1921 (a junior objective synonym of Ancylus Muller (O. F.), 1774), placed on the Official Index oy gre and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 304 punctata Cuvier, 1803, as published in the combination Laplysia |recte Avian punctata (Class Gastropoda), validation of, under the Plenary Powers placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 494 Punctata Poey, 1854, as published in the combination Gambusia punctata (Class Osteichthyes), placed on the kon List H ee Names in ee with Name No. 521... pusilla Walker, 1870, as published in the combination Epacromia pusilla (Class Insecta, Order Orthoptera), Dee on the OMe List oh Speciie Names in Zooey with Name No. 497 3 quinquefaria Say, 1825, Scutella (Class Echinoidea), designated, under the haps Powers, to be the type species of Mortonella Pomel, 1883 .. placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 498 rosea Rathke, 1799, as published in the combination Aplysia rosea (Class Gastropoda), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy .. : ae Ba! an - placed on the Official Index of, Beas and Invalid oReone Names in Fogleey with Name No. 127 .. schelkovnikovi Wagner, 1909, as published in the combination Amphipsylla schelkov- nikovi (Class Insecta, Order Sipponap ie pee on the Onan List a Spbetiie Names in Zoology with Name No. 517. setulosa Jakovlev, 1874, as published in the combination Anomaloptera setulosa (Class Insecta, Order Hemiptera), placed on the rea List Ae Species Names in Zoology with Name No. SLO eye similis Dampf, 1910, Palaeopsylla (Class Insecta, Order Siphonaptera), designated, under the Plenary Powers, to be the type species of Palaeopsylla Wagner, 1903.. placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 518 SPHINGES Scopoli, 1777, placed on the Official Index of nae and Invalid fee Group Names in Zoology with Name No. 69.. SPHINGIADAE Harris, 1839 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling for SPHINGIDAE (correction of SPHINGIDES) Latreille, [1802—1803), placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology with Name No. 73 SPHINGIDA Haeckel, 1896 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling for SPHINGIDAE (cor- rection of SPHINGIDES) Latreille, [1802—1803}, placed on the Oneal Index a Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology with Name No. 75. Page 186 93 93 382 116 131 131 93 93 361 257 361 361 436 436 436 Volume 11 SPHINGIDAE (correction of SPHINGIDES) Latreille, [1802—1803] (Class Insecta, Order Lepidoptera), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in " Zoology with Name No. 89, with Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758, as type genus : SPHINGIDES Latreille, [1802—1803] (an Invalid Original Spelling for SPHINGIDAE), placed on the Official Index of Sac and Invalid Hh aan ata Names in Zoology with Name No. 70... SPHINGITES Newman, [1836] (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling for SPHINGIDAE (correction of SPHINGIDES) Latreille, [1802—1803], placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology with Name No. 72 SPHINGOIDAE Wallengren, 1865 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling for SPHINGIDAE (correction of SPHINGIDES) Latreille, [1802—1803], placed on the Cat Index a Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology with Name No. 74 . SPHINGOIDES Burmeister, 1829 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling for SPHINGIDAE (correction of SPHINGIDES) Latreille, [1802—1803], placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology with Name No. 71 Sphinx Linnaeus, 1758 (Class Insecta, Order Lepidoptera), all previous type selec- tions for, set aside under the Plenary Powers, and Betas feast Linnaeus, 1758, designated as type species oN : “ ie ae Le gender of name placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 905 tereticauda Eschscholtz, 1833, as published in the combination Triton tereticauda (Class Amphibia), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy.. : a placed on the Official Index ay paced and Invalid Cases Names in eee with Name No. 131 .. terminifera Walker, 1870 Epacromia (Class Insecta, Order Orthoptera), designated, under the Plenary Powers, to be the type ase of Chortoicetes Brunner von Wattenwyl, 1893 : : : : ty: ae he By placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 496 Toernquistia (published as Tornquistia) Reed, 1896 (Class Trilobita), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 887, with Crs (Toernquistia) nicholsoni Reed, 1896, as type species .. gender of name TOERNQUISTHDAE Hupé (P.), 1953 (Class Trilobita), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Aad with Name No. 80, with eee NS Reed, 1896, as type genus Tornquistia Paeckelmann, 1930 (Class Brachiopoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 888, with pee S Oe oe McCoy, 1852, as type species : gender of name 477 Page 434 436 436 436 436 423 423 423 403 403 115 116 246 247 434 246 247 478 Opinions and Declarations triseriatus Wagler, 1830, as published in the combination Uropsophus triseriatus (Class Reptilia, Order Squamata), viaeed on the nia: List ee mise Names in Zoology with Name No. 507 TYLIDAE Czerny, 1930 (a junior objective synonym of MICROPEZIDAE Loew, 1862), placed on the Official Index of Reece and Invalid FO aie Names in Zoology with Name No. 67 .. TYLINAE Dana (J.D.), 1852 (Class Crustacea, Order Isopoda), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zooey. with Name No. 81, with TSS Audouin, [1826], as type genus Tylos Meigen, 1800 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the pur poses both of the Law of ney and of the Law of Homonymy : : placed on the Official Index a Belecicd and Invalid Generic Names in ee? with Name No. 307 .. Tylos (Latreille MS.) Audouin, [1826] (Class Crustacea, Order Isopoda), placed on the Official List of Generic "Names in Zoology with ‘Name No. 891, with Tylos latreillei Audouin [1826], as type species AC ate gender of name Tylos Heyden, 1826 (Class Arachnida), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy . placed on the Official Index os pos and Invalid Generic Names in Ga with Name No. 308 .. Typhlechinus Neumayr, 1889 (Class Echinoidea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy ae “ae a placed on the Official Index us Rejcoce and Invalid Generic Names in Fontes with Name No. 312 .. urii Fleming, 1828, as published in the combination Cidaris urii (Class Echinoidea), placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 514 Weberides Reed, 1942 (Class Trilobita), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 875, with Secee mucronata De 1844, as one species gender of name Yakovlevia Fredericks, 1925 (Class Brachiopoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 890, with Yakovlevia kaluzinensis Fredericks, 1925, as type species gender of name Yakovlevia Vologdin, 1931 (a junior homonym of Yakovlevia Fredericks, 1925), placed on the Official Index of ease and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 306 cA ; : “ : Page 233 435 434 267 268 267 267 267 268 341 341 303 27 27 257 257 258 Volume \1 479 PARTICULARS OF DATES OF PUBLICATION OF THE SEVERAL PARTS IN WHICH THE PRESENT VOLUME WAS PUBLISHED Part No. Page Nos. Contents of Part Date of Publication 1 1—24 Opinion 351 14th July 1955 2 25—46 Opinion 352 14th July 1955 3 47—78 Opinion 353 Sth August 1955 4 79—90 Opinion 354 12th August 1955 5 91—102 Opinion 355 12th August 1955 6 103—112 Opinion 356 12th August 1955 fl 113—128 Opinion 357 12th August 1955 8 129—138 Opinion 358 12th August 1955 9 139—150 Opinion 359 12th August 1955 10 151—160 Opinion 360 4th November 1955 11 161—172 Opinion 361 4th November 1955 ye 173—182 Opinion 362 4th November 1955 13 183—202 Opinion 363 4th November 1955 14 203—214 Opinion 364 4th November 1955 iS 215—230 Opinion 365 16th November 1955 16 231—244 Opinion 366 16th November 1955 9) 245—254 Opinion 367 16th November 1955 18 255—264 Opinion 368 16th November 1955 19 265-—300 Opinion 369 2nd December 1955 20 301—320 Opinion 370 2nd December 1955 21 321—338 Opinion 371 2nd December 1955 2D 339—358 Opinion 372 2nd December 1955 23 359—368 Opinion 373 2nd December 1955 24 369—378 Opinion 374 2nd December 1955 25 379—390 Opinion 375 2nd December 1955 26 391—400 Opinion 376 2nd December 1955 27 401—410 Opinion 377 24th January 1956 28 411—420 Opinion 378 24th January 1956 29 -421—430 Opinion 379 24th January 1956 30 431—452 Direction 41 a} Corrigenda and 4 31 430—480 | Indexes | > Foreword, > 3rd July 1956 | Table of | ie —xVvill) Contents J 480 Opinions and Declarations INSTRUCTIONS TO BINDERS The present volume should be bound up as follows :—T.P.—XVIIL, 1—480, coloured wrapper (cover) to Part 31. Note: The wrappers (covers) to the Parts of which this volume is composed form, with the exception of the coloured wrapper (cover) issued with Part 31, an integral part of those Parts, being included for purposes of pagination. These wrappers should therefore be bound up in the position in which they were issued. The brown wrapper (cover) to Part 31 should be bound in at the end of the volume. Printed in England by Mrrcatre & Cooper LimitTep, 10-24 Scrutton St., London E C 2 a. 9.7.08 : ne se i iv \ ‘he : Oh Ms M Huh WA rh fl het " ean ny et Win mY i At Wa im _ et LNA Mi uit te i 2 j fi . if Hh, ot ae SVs Aste Nk /\ 7 —s Dinh