tena a . uy ‘ Bo f; nie AV ; i wat Mae ue Fitba Niet vet Ae wat i . i Wit, } ist 4 i Met i Nae NI a TUT ANA Iriya SUG ate \ i AN ' 4 / ie were int a igh ren i) ' it 4 H | ; tatty Tadoraps th ' ‘ $51 . i ‘ ( ‘fii ni - barn an ho y Vereen atte ; He i te a vd i ; ii * patie tt Raith sii AAPL iassfoad Pc oat fe lees 8 Saapt te Moi Riera Me, fishy He , retin an ‘ bith Oth Sh ‘; i vie" id ) tt 1 15 Vitis 1h) MA Hi i Vv ages a Ba DM i aay a Po i ibis ‘ith HT Hany) MAN y ty ‘i on) AES itt if i oe en 4 } ‘ | 4 f yh iia 9 Velen, el RS HI wih i nea tty , HN ay AEN eee Sy an Via ; at gut ae rma Hee Rt ' Ads sitet snby i th yi! We B iY ‘ 6 ' sil ta ah itetiann ¥ H j 1 F 4 H Polis Caliah ‘ iy'} U4 ‘ i Has gery \ ‘ i Hot : : : ‘ . oe? fy . ' i . ‘ pan By ‘ asf ‘ : ; : ; ' A NV eee 4 4) ee) , ‘ et Lilie ight ; 114 ah ear PT PO } ' ) H ‘ , a : ‘ ata ‘ hea ate i. D aN ; i ay Benet th * Hail 4! ’ dee - Tt ‘ ' ‘ t 4 Haitee ra raat per fn nee PISS ME See Dt Me ROLE WY. See ERT it Aa eae wt \ THY OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE VOLUME 19 Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, c.M.G., C.B.E. 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 1958-1959 (All rights reserved) ‘|| INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON =< ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE ¥ COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE OPINIONS, DECLARATIONS 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 electionor 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) Dr. Benning a (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) (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 (University of Tulane, Department of Geology, New Orleans Louisiana, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (MezGgazdasagi 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. HortuHuis (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) eves 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 Naturale ‘‘ G. Doria’’, Genova, Italy) (16th December 1954) FOREWORD The present volume—the nineteenth in the present Series— contains the tenth instalment of Opinions, Declarations and Directions adopted by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature since the close of the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953. The present volume contains eighteen Opinions (Opinions 516-533), three Declarations (Declarations 39, 40 and 41) and one Direction (Direction 96). 2. The immediately preceding volume (Volume 18) contained decisions on a substantial instalment of applications originally published in Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature. The present volume contains sixteen Opinions based upon applica- tions originally published in the foregoing volume of the Bulletin. In addition, the present volume contains two Opinions embodying decisions on cases originally published in earlier volumes of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature. Of these, the first was Opinion 516 which was concerned with the determination of the relative precedence to be accorded to a number of works on a single group of insects all of which had been published in the same year (1775). The problem so involved was first brought forward at the Session of the Commission held in Paris in 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 459), when decisions were taken on the question of procedure to be followed. Some years later this case formed the subject of a more extended notice designed specially to attract the attention of interested specialists and to elicit comments as to the most appropriate solution to be adopted (1952, loc. cit. 7 : 204-206). The second of the Opinions con- cerned (Opinion 518) is based on an application published in 1954 (Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 367-369), the consideration of which it had been found necessary to postpone until a decision had been taken by the Commission on the general question of the gender attributable to generic names having the termination “*-rhynchus ’’, a matter on which a decision was promulgated in Declaration 39, one of the three Declarations included in the present volume. VI 3. Of the three Declarations included in the present volume one (Declaration 41) is concerned with a novel point arising in connection with Article 3 of the Régles, while the others (Declara- tions 39 and 40) both contain determinations of the gender attributable to generic names having certain specified termina- tions. 4. The single Direction (Direction 96) included in the present volume contains Rulings relative to the placing on Official Lists of certain names, the status of which under the Law of Priority in relation to names for the same taxa published in other works in the same year (1775) had long been a matter of doubt. The Rulings on the general question involved given by the Commission in Opinion 516 published in the present volume cleared the ground for the action taken in the above Direction. 5. The present volume contains 500 pages (T.P.—XII, i—xxxviii, 1-436 (i)-(xiv)). This volume is somewhat larger than its imme- diate predecessor. 6. Of the eighteen Opinions included in the present volume, two deal simultaneously with names belonging to two different Classes in the Animal Kingdom, thus bringing the total number of cases up to twenty. Five of the applications relating to these cases were submitted by more than one author and when account is taken of this fact, the total number of applicants is seen to be twenty-five. 7. Seventeen of the applications dealt with in the Opinions included in the present volume were concerned with individual names and three were concerned exclusively with the status of zoological works. Of the seventeen dealing with individual names, eleven (65 per cent.) involved the use by the Commission of its Plenary Powers. Those Powers were also used in one of the cases concerned with the status of zoological works. 8. The seventeen applications relating to individual names dealt with in the present group of Opinions, when arranged by Vil reference to the Classes of the Animal Kingdom to which the genera or species concerned belong, are distributed as follows :— Rotifera, 1 ; Crustacea, 6 ; Insecta, 3 ; Arachnida, 2 ; Crinoidea, 1; Amphibia, 1; Reptilia, 2; Mammalia, 1. Of these, the eleven which involved the use of the Plenary Powers are :— Crustacea, 4 ; Insecta, 2 ; Arachnida 2 ; Crinoidea, | ; Amphibia, 1 ; Mammalia, 1. 9. When the twenty-five applicants are arranged by reference to the countries in which they are resident, applications are seen to have been received from the following countries (in alphabetical order) :—Australia, 1 ; Denmark, 1 ; Germany, 2 ; Hawaii, 2 ; Netherlands, 3 ; Panama, 1 ; Singapore, | ; United Kingdom, 7 ; United States of America, 7. 10. By the Rulings given in the Opinions comprised in the present volume, together with the Ruling given in the Direction referred to in paragraph 4 above, a total of 248 names were added to the Official Lists and corresponding Official Indexes relating to specific names, generic names and family-group names, and the titles of seven zoological works were added to the Official List and Official Index of zoological works. The dis- tribution of these entries is seen to be as follows :— Additions to the ‘‘ Official Lists’’ and ‘‘ Official Indexes ”’ respectively Category Official Lists Official Indexes Specific Names | eds 39 Generic Names 53 56 Family-Group Names 17 10 Titles of Works 5 2 Totals Vill 11. The seventeen cases dealing with individual names pub- lished in the present volume contain 84 comments from interested specialists. In some instances these comments were joint com- ments from two or more specialists and one comment related to two Classes of the Animal Kingdom. When account is taken of these facts, a total number of 89 specialists contributed comments on cases relating to individual names dealt with in the present volume. No specialists commented on the applications relating to the status of zoological works. 12. 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 :—Rotifera, 1 ; Crustacea, 25 ; Insecta, 6 ; Arachnida, 39 ; Crinoidea, 2 ; Amphibia, 7 ; Reptilia, 4. 13. When the authors of the comments contained 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 :—Angola, 1; Austria, 1; Belgium, 1; Denmark, 2 ; Finland, 1 ; France, 5; French West Africa, 1 ; Germany, 15 ; India, 1 ; Italy, 2 ; Netherlands, 2 ; New Zealand, 1 ; Norway, | ; Rhodesia, 1 ; Spain, 2; Sweden, 1 ; Switzerland, 1 ; Union of South Africa, 1 ; United Kingdom, 23 ; United States of America, 26. 14. As in the case of preceding volumes in this series, the Commission is indebted to Miss Mary Cosh, M.A., for the preparation of the indexes of the present volume. In style and scope these indexes follow exactly the models laid down for earlier volumes. FRANCIS HEMMING Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomen- clature during the period covered by the publication of the present volume ? 28 Park Village East, Regent’s Park, LONDON, N.W.1. 2nd January 1959 — TABLE OF CONTENTS Declarations DECLARATION 39 Review under Copenhagen Decision 85 of the Rules relating to the gender to be attributed to certain classes of generic name prescribed in the provisional Rules numbered as Rule (7)(b)(i) and Rule (7)(c)@) respectively in Decision 84 of the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copen- hagen, 1953 DECLARATION 40 Determination of the gender to be attributed to generic names having the termination ‘ides’, “‘-ites”’ or ““-oides”’ DECLARATION 41 Clarification of the status of terms used as zoological names in works written in the Latin language Opinions OPINION 516 Determination under the Plenary Powers of the relative precedence to be assigned to certain works on the Order Lepidoptera (Class Insecta) pub- lished in 1775 by Pieter Cramer, Michael Denis & Ignaz Schiffermuller, Johann Christian Fabricius, Johann Casper aa and S. A. von Rottemburg respectively iy : ae a OPINION 517 Rejection of the proposal for the valida- tion under the Plenary Powers of the emendation to Theridium of the generic name Theridion Walchenaer, 1805 ; use of the above Powers (i) to validate the specific name picta Walckenaer, 1802, as published in the combination Aranea picta, (ii) to designate the species so named to be the type species of Theridion Walckenaer, 1805, and (iii) to suppress the generic name Phyllonethis Thorell, 1869 (Class Arachnida) .. IX Page X1X 45 x OPINION 518 Addition to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology of the generic name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878] (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda) .. OPINION 519 Addition to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology of the names of twenty-three genera of Macrura Reptantia (Class Crustacea) and use of the Plenary Powers in regard to three matters con- nected therewith .. OPINION 520 Suppression under the Plenary Powers of the specific name tibiatrix Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combination Hyla tibiatrix, and of the generic name Acrodytes Fitzinger, 1843, and interpretation under the same Powers of the nominal species Rana venulosa Laurenti, 1768 (Class Amphibia) ~ .. OPINION 521 Addition to the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Works in Zoological Nomenclature of the title of the paper by Otto Fabricius issued in Copen- hagen in 1823 as Fortegnelse over Cee a Fabriciusses efterladte Naturalier OPINION 522 Suppression under the Plenary Powers (i) of certain names published by C. S. Rafinesque for genera and species of the Orders Decapoda and Stomatopoda (Class Crustacea) in the period 1814- 1818 and (ii) of certain specific names currently regarded as senior subjective synonyms of the names of the type species of Homola Leach, 1815, and Lissa Leach, 1815, respectively, both being genera ere to the first of the foregoing Orders “ OPINION 523 Validation under the Plenary Powers of the emendation to Palaeophonus of the generic name Palaeophoneus Lindstrom & Thorell, 1884 (Class Arachnida) bas om) iN ¥e Page 111 133 169 201 209 249 OPINION 524 Interpretation of the nominal species Coluber ahaetulla Linnaeus, 1758, and addition to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology of the generic name Ahaetulla Link, 1807, with Ahaetulla mycterizans Link, 1807, as type species (Class Reptilia) OPINION 525 Determination of the relative precedence to be accorded to the names Coluber pictus Gmelin (J.F.), [1789], and Coluber on Ea ae 1789 oy Reptilia) OPINION 526 Direction that Lestodiplosis be treated as the Valid Original Spelling for the generic name published by Kieffer in 1894 both with the above spelling and with the 2 ee en Insecta, Order Diptera) . OPINION 527 Interpretation under the Plenary Powers of the nominal species Actinocrinus gilbertsoni Phillips, 1836 (Class Crinoidea) .. OPINION 528 Addition of the generic name Limnocythere Brady, 1868 (Class Crustacea, Order Ostracoda), to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology. . OPINION 529 Rejection for nomenclatorial purposes of the work by Walch (J.E.I.) published at Niirnberg in the period 1768-1774 under the title Die Naturges- chichte der Versteinerungen zur Erlduterung der Knorrischen Sammlung von Merkwiirdigkeiten der Natur OPINION 530 Validation under the Plenary Powers of the generic names Elaphella Bezzi, 1913 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) and Lophiotherium Gervais, 1850 (Class Mammalia) a ae i a OPINION 531 Validation under the Plenary Powers of the generic name Campsicnemus Haliday, 1851 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) .. XI Page 261 Gh 291 301 SMS) 325 31313) 349 Xil OPINION 532 Validation under the Plenary Powers of the specific name verrucosa Sars, 1901, as published in the combination Alona verrucosa (Class Crustacea, Order Cladocera). . OPINION 533 Designation under the Plenary Powers of a type species for the genus Candona Baird, [1846], in harmony with accustomed usage and validation under the same Powers of the emendation to Herpetocypris of the generic name Erpetocypris Brady & Normann, 1889 (Class Crustacea, Order Ostracoda) Directions DIRECTION 96 Determination of the relative priority to be accorded to certain specific names published in 1775 for taxa ai a to the Order heper ae (Class Insecta) Corrigenda Index to Authors of applications dealt with in the present volume and of comments on those applications Subject Index . Particulars of dates of publication of the several Parts in which the present volume was published Instructions to Binders © 1959. THE INTERNATIONAL TRUST FOR ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Page 361 S77, (i) 397 399 403 435 436 Printed in England by METCALFE & 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 19. Part 4. Pp. i—xviii DECLARATION 39 Review under Copenhagen Decision 85 of the Rules relating to the gender to be attributed to certain classes of generic name prescribed in the provisional Rules numbered as Rule (7)(b)(i) and Rule (7)(c)(i) respectively in Decision 84 of the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 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 1958 Price Twelve Shillings (All rights reserved) Issued 30th May, 1958 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN DIRECTION 39 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) Dr. Tur oy ne (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 (University of Tulane, Department of Geology, New Orleans, Louisiana, 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. Hoitsuts (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 (Nérodni Museum V Praze, Prague, Czechoslovakia) (30th October 1954) Professor Dr. Wilhelm KUHNELT (Zoologisches Institut der Universitat, Vienna, Austria) (6th November 1954) Professor F. S. BODENHEIMER (The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel) (11th November 195 ) 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) DECLARATION 39 REVIEW UNDER COPENHAGEN DECISION 85 OF THE RULES RELATING TO THE GENDER TO BE ATTRI- BUTED TO CERTAIN CLASSES OF GENERIC NAMES PRESCRIBED IN THE PROVISIONAL RULES NUM- BERED AS RULE (7)(b)(i) AND RULE (7)(c)(i) RESPECTIVELY IN DECISION 84 OF THE FOUR- TEENTH INTERNATIONAL CONGRESS OF ZOOLOGY, COPENHAGEN, 1953 DECLARATION :—In accordance with the provisions of Decision 85 taken by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953 (1953, Copen- hagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 5+) it is hereby directed as follows :— (1) The provisional Rules numbered respectively as Rule (7)(b)G@) and Rule (7)(c)G) in Decision 84 of the foregoing Congress are hereby deleted. (2) The provisional Rule bearing the number (7)(a) (containing examples of generic names to which the masculine gender is to be attributed) is hereby divided into two portions and the revised number (7)(a)G) is hereby allotted to the Rule recorded as Rule (7)(a) in the Copenhagen Decision referred to above. (3) The following new Rule giving further examples of generic names to which the masculine gender is to be attributed is hereby inserted as Rule (7)(a)(i1) :-— (1i) any name consisting of a compound word, the final part of which is a Greek noun fully Latinised with a suffix of the masculine gender, notwithstanding the fact that, prior SMITHSONIaw 1V OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS to Latinisation, the final part of the compound word in question was a Greek word of some other gender. Examples: ** -cheilus ” (and “ -chilus’’) ; “ -gnathus”’ ; ** -rhamphus” ; “*-rhynchus” and “ -stathus’’. ° (4) The following new Rule giving examples of generic names to which the feminine gender is to be attributed is hereby inserted as Rule (7)(b)(i) in place of the Rule bearing that number deleted under (1) above :-— (i) any name consisting of a compound word, the final part of which is a Greek noun fully Latinised with a suffix of the feminine gender, notwithstanding the fact that, prior to Latinisation, the final part of the com- pound word in question was a Greek word of some other gender. Examples : “ -cera”’ ; “* -metopa’’. (5) The Rule which at present bears the Number (7)(c)(ii) (relating to the attribution of the neuter gender to “ -soma”’ and similar names) is in future to be known as Rule (7)(c). I. THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THE PRESENT ** DECLARATION ” The present Declaration contains the second part of the review of the Rules for determining the gender to be attributed to generic names of various classes provisionally laid down by the Four- teenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, in its Decision 84 (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 49 —51) carried out by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in accordance with the duty imposed upon it by Decision 85 (: 51) of the above Congress. The issues involved DECLARATION 39 Vv were presented in the following paper dated 30th October 1957 which was submitted to the Commission by the Secretary on 6th November 1957 :— Proposed adoption of a ‘‘ Declaration ’’ reviewing, under Decision 85 of the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953, the provisions relating to the gender to be attributed to generic names consisting of compound words having certain terminations provisionally laid down as Rules (7)(b)(i) and (7)(c)(i) by Decision 84 of the above Congress By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. (Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature) The present paper is concerned with the second item to be considered by the Commission in the review which, by Decision 85 of the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953 (1953, Copen- hagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 51) it was directed to undertake, of the Rules for the determination of the gender to be attributed to generic names provisionally adopted by the Congress in its Decision 84 (1953, loc. cit. : 49—51). The first item of this review was concerned with the gender to be attributed to a generic name consisting of a compound word, the final part of which is a Latinised version of the Greek words “ -ops”’ or “‘ -opsis’’ on which in March of this year it took a vote on Voting Paper V.P.(57)25. The decision so taken, which led to a partial reversal of the Rule provisionally adopted by the Copenhagen Congress in regard to the gender to be attributed to generic names having the termination “‘ -ops ’’, has since been embodied in Declaration 36. This Declaration, which is now in the press, will be published at an early date. 2. The immediate cause which led to the investigations described in the present paper was the need for determining the gender to be attributed to ten names having the terminations “‘-rhynchus”’ or “* -gnathus ’? which were placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology in the period up to the end of 1936. As will be understood, the decision taken last summer that the Official List, as so far compiled, is to be published in book-form before the opening of the Fifteenth International Congress of Zoology next year greatly added to the urgency for obtaining a decision as to the gender to be attributed to these names. When the investigation of the gender to be attributed to names having the above terminations was undertaken, it was found 1 This Declaration was published on 24th January 1958 (Ops. Decls. int. Comm. zool. Nomencl. 18 : i—xii). Vi OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS that it would be impracticable—or at least, extremely undesirable—to deal with these names in isolation and that what was required was a comprehensive study of all the names included in the Copenhagen gender Rules concerned, that is, the Rule (Rule (7)(b)(@)) in which the gender of “‘-gnathus’’ names is dealt with and also the Rule (Rule (7){c)(@)) in which the gender of “‘-rhynchus’’ names is dealt with. Hence it is that the present paper contains a review of all the names included in those Rules and proposals for the substitution therefor of revised Rules based on the advice now obtained from Professor L. W. Grensted, Consulting Classical Adviser to the Commission. 3. Under the Rules provisionally adopted by the Copenhagen Congress referred to above (i) the gender to be attributed to a generic name consisting of a compound word, the final part of which consists of a Latinised version of the Greek noun “ gnathos”’, i.e. any such generic name having the termination “ -gnathus’’, is the feminine gender (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 51, Decision 84(7)(b)G)) and (a1) the gender to be attributed to a similarly composed generic name having the termination “ -rhynchus ” is the neuter gender (1953, loc. cit. : 51, Decision 84(7)(c)Q@)). 4. The consultations referred to above quickly showed that, whether the Rules provisionally laid down in regard to the gender to be attributed to generic names having the above terminations by Copenhagen Decision 84 were correct or were in need of amendment under the review prescribed in Decision 85, those Rules were totally out of harm- ony with the accepted practice of specialists in the groups concerned. Professor Ernst Mayr, for example, pointed out that there were many generic names in the Class Aves having the termination “‘ -rhynchus”’, all of which were treated by ornithologists as being masculine in gender. Similarly, Dr. L. B. Holthuis drew attention to the fact that the termination “‘-gnathus’’ was one commonly used for the names of genera belonging to the Order Decapoda (Class Crustacea) and that all such names were treated by carcinologists as being masculine in gender. 5. Upon the receipt of the foregoing and other representations of a similar kind it was decided to deal with this matter simultaneously at two levels : First, it was decided to submit a paper to the International Commission explaining the position, as it was found to exist, in the matter of current practice, and to recommend that under its Plenary Powers the Commission should give a direction that, in the case of the names already placed on the Official List to which reference has been made in paragraph 2 above, the gender to be attributed in the relevant entries on the Official List be the masculine gender : Second, it was decided to push on as rapidly as circumstances might permit with the DECLARATION 39 Vil global review of the gender Rules provisionally laid down by Copen- hagen Decision 84, which by Decision 85 the Commission had been directed to undertake. It was not at that time anticipated that that review would call in question the Rules provisionally laid down by the Copenhagen Congress for generic names having the terminations “ -rhynchus’’ or “‘ -gnathus’’, but there was always the possibility that this might be so. The view then taken was that having regard to the urgency of obtaining a decision in the case of the names already placed on the Official List, the Commission should be asked to take a decision in regard to those particular names without waiting for a decision on the results of the review of Copenhagen Decision 84 if that review had not been completed by the time of the expiry of the Six-Month Waiting Period following the publication in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature of the limited proposal directly concerned with the names referred to above and the consequent issue of Public Notice regarding the possible use by the Commission of its Plenary Powers for the purpose of assigning to the generic names in question a gender in harmony with the settled practice of specialists in the groups concerned. 6. The proposals dealing with the question of the possible use by the Commission of its Plenary Powers for securing the attribution to each of the generic names concerned of a gender in harmony with the practice of specialists in the groups affected were published on 7th July 1955. This matter was discussed in two successive papers in which alternative methods of procedure for obtaining decisions of this kind were submitted for consideration. Under the first of these plans (Hemming, 1955, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 11 : 256—259) it was suggested that the Commission should consider the possibility of rendering a Declaration under its Plenary Powers under which it would be relieved of the obligation of employing the full Plenary Powers procedure on every occasion on which it was called upon to determine the gender of a generic name where the established practice of specialists and the Copenhagen Rules were, or appeared to be, in conflict with one another. Under the procedure then suggested the Commission would be empowered in such cases to issue a direction under its normal procedure, that is, by a simple majority vote taken on the expiry of a period of six months following the publication of the proposal concerned in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature. The case of the individual names in question was dealt with in the immediately following paper (Hemming, 1955, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 11 : 260—262). 7. The publication of the foregoing papers elicited comments from two quarters, namely :—(1) comments from specialists directly con- cerned by reason of one or more of the names in question being the names of genera in their own speciality ; (2) comments from specialists who were concerned not so much with the gender to be attributed to the Vill OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS particular names specified in the second of the applications referred to above as with the general question whether it was desirable or not that exceptions should be made to the gender Rules prescribed by the Copenhagen Congress and, if such exceptions were to be made, the nature of the procedure to be adopted. 8. Ten (10) specialists immediately concerned with one or other of the “* -rhynchus’’ names immediately in question submitted comments on the proposal submitted. Without exception the specialists concerned favoured the use of the Plenary Powers for the purpose of assigning to generic names having the above termination the masculine gender in place of the feminine gender prescribed in the provisional Rules laid down by Copenhagen Decision 84. Of these specialists, eight (8) commented expressly on the question of the gender to be attributed to “‘-rhynchus”’ names, while two (2) recommended more broadly that the masculine gender should be attributed to all generic names having the termination “‘-us”’. In the case of names having the termination “‘ -gnathus’’ comments were received from fourteen (14) specialists, of whom ten (10) advocated that the gender to be attributed to generic names having the above termination should be the masculine gender and not the neuter gender specified in the provisional Rules set out in Copenhagen Decision 84, while the remaining four (4) expressed the opinion that the gender to be attributed to such names should be the classically correct gender as laid down in the Copenhagen Rules. In addition, comments were received from sixteen specialists on the proposal that the Commission should be authorised to adopt a simpler procedure than at present when dealing with applications relating to the gender to be attributed to generic names (i.e. the first of the proposals described in paragraph 6 above). Of these, four (4) gave express support to the proposal that the Commission’s procedure should be simplified in the manner suggested. The comments received from the remaining ten (10) specialists were not in all cases easy to interpret, many being directed rather to the question whether any exceptions to the Copenhagen Rules should be permitted. It was clear however that, with possibly one exception, these specialists were opposed to the adoption of the simplified procedure which had been suggested and that most of them would have voted against the proposals relating to the individual “‘ -rhynchus”’ and “‘ -gnathus”’ names then before the Commission if the names concerned had been the names of genera in their own specialities and if in their comments they had dealt expressly with the proposals submitted in regard to those names. 9. The comments received from specialists which have been briefly summarised in the immediately preceding paragraph would have been of the greatest importance and value if, as had been contemplated at the DECLARATION 39 1% time of the submission of the application concerned, the issue had been one on which the Commission would be called upon to decide whether in the interests of nomenclatorial stability in the groups concerned it should use its Plenary Powers to direct that in the case of the names in question the gender to be attributed thereto should be the masculine gender (i.e. the gender currently adopted by specialists in the groups in question) or whether the Rules provisionally adopted by the Copen- hagen Congress should be followed, the feminine gender being attributed to the names having the termination “‘-rhynchus”’ and the neuter gender to the names having the termination “‘-gnathus’’. At this stage however a development occurred which threw an entirely new light on the problems here at issue. 10. It is necessary now to refer once more to the gender Rules provisionally adopted by the Copenhagen Congress in its Decision 84 which by its Decision 85 that Congress directed the Commission to review (paragraph 1 above). It was originally contemplated that the best course would be for the material to be submitted in connection with the required review to take the form of a single document setting out (a) any conclusions which the Commission’s Consulting Classical Adviser might have reached on the general structure of the several portions of the Copenhagen Rules and (b) enumerating comments submitted by the Adviser on the gender attributed to particular classes of name dealt with in those Rules. Such a procedure would have been in many ways the most convenient, but the present proved to be one of those cases where the need for obtaining an immediate decision on some particular aspect of a complex subject is such that it is better to obtain an interim Report onthe aspect so involved rather than to incur the disadvantages inevitably incurred by waiting—possibly for a considerable period—auntil it should be found possible to obtain a comprehensive Report dealing with every one of the independent problems involved in the general subject. It was because of these considerations that it was decided to ask the Consulting Classical Adviser to furnish an Interim Report on the question of the gender to be attributed to generic names having the terminations “ -ops” and “ -opsis’’, thereby making it possible for the Commission to take decisions simultaneously (a) on the general question of the gender properly attributable to generic names having the foregoing terminations and (b) on the individual case of the generic name Triops Schrank, 1803, a name occupying a central position in the proposals which had been submitted to the Commission for the settlement of the important and long-outstanding problem presented by the widespread use of the generic name Apus both in the Class Aves and in the Class Crustacea. For reasons similar to those outlined above, it was decided to invite the Commission’s Consulting Classical Adviser to submit an Interim Report dealing separately with the question of the gender attributable to generic names having the termination ‘‘-rhynchus”’ or “-gnathus”’. x OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 11. The Interim Report which on 23rd October 1957 Professor L. W. Grensted, the Commission’s Consulting Classical Adviser, furnished in response to the foregoing request is as follows :— 39 Names with ‘‘ -rhynchus ’’ and ‘‘ -gnathus ’’ and similar terminations I am quite sure that generic names having the terminations ** -rhynchus’”’ and “‘ -gnathus’’ respectively ought to be treated as being masculine in gender, together with names having the termina- tions ‘‘ -rhamphus”’ and “‘ -stathus”’ and other terminations of this class, for these names consist of truly Latinised words and therefore take the gender (as they would do in Latin) of their nominative suffix. It will be remembered that in the case of another class of name belonging to this group, names having the termination “* -cheilus”’ or ‘“‘ -chilus”’ | have already reported (on 15th April 1955) that, contrary to Copenhagen Decision 84(7)(c)(@i), the gender correctly attributable is the masculine gender.’ I realise that ‘‘-gnathus’’ names were ruled to be feminine in gender by Copenhagen Decision 84(7)(b) and that names having the other terminations mentioned above were by Decision 84(7)(c) ruled to be neuter. But I have not the slightest doubt that there is an overwhelming tradition for treating names of this kind as masculine in gender. Similarly, the feminine gender is the correct gender for generic names consisting of Latinised words where the nominative suffix is a word of that gender. The adoption of the principle here put forward would not only conform with the natural usage of Classical Latin but would also greatly simplify the work of non-classical zoologists, for whom words having terminations such as “ -rhynchus’”’ would appear to be masculine and who are, in fact, perfectly right in so thinking. Pliny would have thought the same. - 12. The foregoing Report from the Classical Adviser is of particular importance in that it provides the material needed to enable the Commission both to take decisions on an important question of prin- ciple remitted to it by the Copenhagen Congress (by its Decision 85) and also on the question, now extremely urgent, as to the gender to be attributed to certain generic names already placed on the Official List. In accordance with a General Directive issued to the Commission by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, 2 See paragraph 12 in Opinion 431 (1956, Ops. Decls. int. Comm. zool. Nomencl. 14 : 365—366). DECLARATION 39 x1 Paris, 1948, questions of principle affecting the interpretation of the Régles are not to be dealt with in Opinions, the latter being reserved for decisions on individual nomenclatorial problems, while decisions of interest to all zoologists are to be published in the ‘* Declarations” Series. Accordingly, it will be necessary for the Commission’s decision on the question of the gender to be attributed to generic names having certain specified classes of termination, including names having the terminations “ -gnathus ”’ and “* -rhynchus ”’ respectively, to be embodied in a Declaration while its Ruling on the gender to be attributed to certain names having the terminations specified above already placed on the Official List—the question which gave rise to the present investigation—will need to be dealt with separately either in an Opinion or in a Direction. In the circumstances it is proposed to follow the procedure adopted recently in the parallel case where the Commission found it necessary both to adopt a Declaration® on the subject of the gender to be attributed to generic names having the termination ““-ops”’ and also to give a Ruling as to the gender to be attributed to a particular name having this termination (the generic name Triops Schrank, 1803+). Accordingly, two Voting Papers are now being submitted to the Commission in the present case. The first of these Voting Papers—V.P.(57)61, with which the present paper is alone directly concerned—deals with a proposal for the adoption of a Declaration dealing with the general question of the gender to be attributed to generic names having the terminations “-gnathus ” and ‘‘ -rhynchus’’ and allied terminations ; the second, Voting Paper V.P.(57)62, dealing with a proposal for the determination, in the light of the decision to be taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)61, of the gender to be attributed in the Official List to certain generic names having one or other of the above terminations. 13. It is necessary at this stage to consider the scope of the Declaration now to be given as part of the review of the gender Rules provisionally adopted by the Copenhagen Congress by its Decision 84, in accordance with the duty imposed upon the Commission by its Decision 85. As has already been noted (paragraph 2 above) two of these Rules are involved, namely, Rule (7)(b)(i) and Rule (7)(c)(@). It will be convenient first to consider the second of these Rules, since it is in that Rule that is specified the group of names having the termination “*-rhynchus”’ and the names of immediately associated type. 8 The Declaration here referred to is Declaration 36. See Footnote 1. 4 The Triops Schrank case came before the Commission in connection with an important application designed to bring to a close the disharmony arising from the use of the generic name Apus not only for a genus of birds but also for a genus of Crustacea. The decision taken by the Commission in this case has been embodied in Opinion 502 (1958, Ops. Decls. int. Comm. zool. Nomencl. 18 : 65—120). Xi OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 14. Rule (7)(c)G) provisionally prescribed in Copenhagen Decision 84 lays it down that the following names are to be treated as neuter in gender :—“‘ (1) names of which the final term is obviously derived from Greek words of neuter gender by reason of [those Greek words] having the termination “-os’’. (Examples: “-cheilus”, ‘* -rhamphus”’ ** -rhynchus’”’ and “ -stathus’’)’. As will be seen by reference to the Classical Adviser’s Report quoted in paragraph 11 above, generic names having any of the four terminations specified in the above Rule are properly to be treated as being masculine in gender, each such name consisting, as it does, of a compound word, the final part of which is a Greek noun fully Latinised with a suffix of the masculine gender (e.g. -us). It will be seen therefore that in its present form Rule (7)(c)(i) is misconceived and that what is needed is a revised Rule making it clear that names of the above type are to be treated as being masculinein gender. The form of the revised Rule required is discussed in paragraph 17 below in relation to the revised Rule which (as will be seen) requires to be substituted for the existing Rule (7)(b)(). 15. Rule (7)(b)(G), provisionally prescribed in Copenhagen Decision 84, lays it down that the following names are to be treated as feminine in gender :—“‘(i) names obviously derived from Greek words which are given in the standard Greek lexicon as being feminine in gender, such as those ending in ‘ -gaster’, ‘ -gnathus’ and ‘ -ligia’’’. Of the terminations cited in this Rule, the second—the termination “‘ -gnathus”’ —is misplaced, for as Professor Grensted has shown (in the Report quoted in paragraph 11 above), a generic name having the above termination belongs to the same class as generic names having the termination ‘‘ -rhynchus”’ and similar terminations and should there- fore be treated as being masculine in gender. It remains to consider the nature of the Rule which should be adopted in the case of generic names having the two other terminations cited in this Rule. In the case of each of these examples difficulties have been brought to light in Supplementary Reports submitted by the Commission’s Consulting Classical Adviser. The substance of these Reports may be summarised as follows :— (a) ‘*-gaster ’’ names : The word “‘ gaster”’ both in its original Greek form and its (later) transliterated Latin form is feminine in gender. Accord- ingly, the gender of a generic name consisting of a compound word, the final portion of which is a Latinised version of the above Greek word is determinable under the express provisions in Rule (3) in Copenhagen Decision 84. Under that Rule the gender attributable to such a generic name is the feminine gender. We see therefore that, although the gender attributed DECLARATION 39 Xili to “‘ -gaster’’ names by Rule (7)(b)(@) in Copenhagen Decision 84 is the correct gender, the inclusion in that Rule of names having the above termination is entirely out of place, having regard to the fact that the gender of such names has already been expressly provided for in Rule (3) of the foregoing Decision. It will be obvious therefore that “* -gaster’’ names should be omitted from the Revised Rule by which the existing provisional Rule (7)(b)() will need to be replaced. (Supplementary Report dated 23rd October 1957). (b) “‘-ligia °’ names : The origin of the concluding portion of generic names consisting of compound words, of which the final portion is the word “ligia”’, is obscure. Such a termination may be connected with the Greek “ Atyern’’, the feminine of the Greek adjective of which the masculine nominative singular is “* A¢yus ’’, meaning “clear ’’, ‘* whistling ’’, “‘ shrill’. If this were to be the correct derivation, generic names having this termination would be feminine in gender. On the other hand, the “Jigia”’ portion of such names may be derived from the Greek “‘ Aiyus”’ meaning “a Ligurian’. In view of the foregoing doubts as to the origin of the “‘Jigia’’ portion of generic names of the above type, it would clearly be inappropriate to cite the termination “ -ligia”’ in a Rule having as its purpose the provision of examples of terminations of nouns consisting of compound words of un- doubted feminine gender. Thus, “ -/igia’’ names, like “‘ -gaster ”’ names should be omitted, though for a different reason, from the list of examples given in the revised Rule which will need to be adopted in place of the existing Rule (7)(b)(i)._ (Supplementary Report dated 27th October 1957). 16. From the evidence brought forward in the preceding paragraph it will be seen that of the three types of name cited in Copenhagen Rule (7)(b)@) as being names which should be treated as being feminine in gender, none is satisfactory. For the first (‘‘ -gaster ’’) is misplaced (being a name governed by Rule (3)), the second (“‘-gnathus’’) is incorrect (the gender of such names being masculine not feminine), while the third (“-ligia”’) is derived from a word of doubtful origin and gender. There are, however, names consisting of compound words, of which the final portion is a Greek noun of masculine or feminine gender which is fully Latinised with a suffix of the feminine gender and it is desirable that one or two such names should be cited in the revised Rule by which the provisional Rule (7)(b)(i) will be replaced. Two very suitable examples have been suggested for this X1V OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS purpose by the Commission’s Consulting Classical Adviser. The first of these is exemplified by a generic name such as Trichocera. The final portion of the compound word of which this and similar names are composed is derived from the Greek noun “xépas ’? which is neuter in gender ; but, as that portion of the name is fully Latinised with a feminine suffix, the name TJrichocera and other generic names having the termination “-cera’”’ take the feminine gender. The second example suggested by Professor Grensted is provided by such generic names as Dermometopa and Leptometopa. ‘The final portion of the compound words of which these names are composed is the Greek word “‘ wétwzov’’, which is neuter in gender, but, as the final portion of these names is fully Latinised with a feminine nominative suffix, these generic names take the feminine gender. 17. Having now examined in turn both of the Copenhagen gender Rules involved and having concluded that in its present form each of these Rules is incorrect and misleading, we have to consider the form of the Rule or Rules by which they can best be replaced. Clearly the first thing that must be done is to sweep away the defective pro- visional Rules which at present appear as Rules (7)(b)(G) and (7)(c)(@). Second, it will be necessary to find appropriate places for the revised Rules attributing the masculine gender to names of the “ -gnathus ” type and the feminine gender to names of the “‘-cera”’ type. The first of these Rules will need to be inserted in Rule (7)(a) as Rule (7)(a)(1), the number (7)(a)(1) being at the same time allotted to the existing Rule (7)(a) (relating to the gender to be attributed to “ -cola”’ names). The revised Rule attributing the feminine gender to names of of the “‘-cera”’ type would naturally become Rule (7)(b)(@) in place of the Rule bearing that number now to be deleted. So far as existing information shows, there is no need for a new Rule attributing the neuter gender to particular classes of name, and accordingly there is no need to introduce a Rule in replacement of Rule (7)(c)() now to be deleted. Accordingly, the Rule which at present appears as Rule (7)(c)Gi) will become the only provision included in Rule (7)(c) and should in future bear that number, the sub-number “(ii)” being no longer required. 18. In the light of the Reports submitted by the Commission’s Consulting Classical Adviser and of the other considerations set out in the present paper I recommend that in discharge of the duty imposed by Decision 85 of the Copenhagen Congress the Commission should now render a Declaration reviewing and amending in the manner set out in the formula shown in the Annexe to the present paper the gender Rules provisionally adopted as Rules (7)(b)(i) and (7)(c)(@) in Decision 84 of the above Congress. DECLARATION 39 XV ANNEXE TO SECRETARY’S REPORT OF 6th NOVEMBER 1957 Review under Copenhagen Decision 85 of the Rules relating to the gender to be attributed to certain classes of generic name prescribed in the provisional Rules numbered as Rule (7)(b)(i) and Rule (7)(c)(i) respectively in Decision 84 of the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953 Text of proposed ‘‘ Declaration ’’ In accordance with the provisions of Decision 85 taken by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953 (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 51) it is hereby directed as follows :— . (1) The provisional Rules numbered respectively as Rule (7)(b)(i) and Rule (7)(c)G) in Decision 84 of the foregoing Congress are hereby deleted. (2) The provisional Rule bearing the number (7)(a) (containing examples of generic names to which the masculine gender is to be attributed) is hereby divided into two portions and the revised number (7)(a)(i) is hereby allotted to the Rule recorded as Rule (7)(a) in the Copenhagen Decision referred to above. (3) The following new Rule giving further examples of generic names to which the masculine gender is to be attributed is hereby inserted as Rule (7)(a)(ii) :— (ii) any name consisting of a compound word, the final part of which is a Greek noun fully Latinised with a suffix of the masculine gender, notwithstanding the fact that, prior to Latinisation, the word of which the suffix is composed was a Greek word of some other gender. Example: ** -cheilus’’ (and “‘ -chilus’’) ; “‘ -gnathus”’ ; “* -rhamphus”? ; “*-rhynchus”’ and “ -stathus”’. (4) The following new Rule giving examples of generic names to which the feminine gender is to be attributed is hereby inserted as Rule (7)(b)(i) in place of the Rule bearing that number deleted under (1) above :— (i) any name consisting of a compound word, the final part of which is a Greek noun fully Latinised with a suffix of the XV1 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS feminine gender, notwithstanding the fact that, prior to Latinisation, the word of which the suffix is composed was a Greek word of some other gender. Example : ““-cera”’; “‘-metopa’’. (5) The Rule which at present bears the Number (7)(c)(i1) (relating to the attribution of the neuter gender to “‘-soma” and similar names) is in future to be known as Rule (7)(c). 2. Registration of the present application : In the initial stages the questions involved in connection with the review under Copenhagen Decision 85 of the provisional Gender Rules for generic names laid down in that Congress’s Decision 84 were con- sidered on the Commission’s Registered File Z.N.(S.) 966. When later it was decided to submit an Interim Report on the gender attributable to the classes of name dealt with in the present Declaration, this aspect of the general question was allotted the separate Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 1277. Il. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 3. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(57)61 : On 6th November 1957 a Voting Paper (V.P.(57)61) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “ the proposed adoption of a Declaration reviewing under Copenhagen Decision 85 the Gender Rules (7)(b)(i) and (7)(c)G) provisionally adopted by Copenhagen Decision 84, as recommended in para- graph 18 of the paper bearing the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 1277 [i.e. in the paragraph numbered as above in the paper reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Declaration] submitted by the Secretary simultaneously with the present Voting Paper. 4. The Prescribed Voting Period : As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 6th February 1958. DECLARATION 39. XVil 5. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)61 ; At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)61 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following twenty-two (22) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Boschma; Holthuis; Lemche; Mayr; Mertens; Dymond ; Vokes ; Esaki ; Bradley (J.C.) ; Riley ; Prantl ; Bonnet ; do Amaral ; Jaczewski ; Miller ; Bodenheimer ; Hanko ; Hemming ; Stoll ; Key ; Kiihnelt ; Tortonese ; (b) Negative Votes, two (2): Hering ; Sylvester-Bradley ; (c) Voting Papers not returned, one (1) : Cabrera. 6. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 7th February 1958, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)61, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in para- graph 5 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. 4 7. Preparation of the present ‘* Declaration ’’ : On 7th February 1958, Mr. Hemming prepared the present Declaration and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Declaration were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(57)61. XVill OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 9. Compliance with Prescribed Procedures : The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Com- mission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Commission by the under-signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission on Zoo- logical Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers con- ferred upon him in that behalf. 10. ‘* Declaration ’’ Number : The present Declaration shall be known as Declaration Thirty-Nine (39) of the International Com- mission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Seventh day of February, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Eight. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING © 1958. THE INTERNATIONAL TRUST FOR ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Printed in England by METCALFE & CooPER LIMITED, 10-24 Scrutton St., London E C2 NOTICE TO ALL SUBSCRIBERS In accordance with the wishes expressed at the recent International Congress of Zoology, the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature is considering as a matter of urgency how substantial economies can best be effected in its publica- a tions. Opinions and Declarations, Vol. 19, however, had been th OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, c.M.G., C.B.E. VOLUME 19. Part 14. Pp. xix—xxviii DECLARATION 40 Determination of the gender to be attributed to generic names having the termination ‘‘-ides”, ‘ites’? or **-oides ”’ 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 Publi x 41, Queen’s Gate, London, S.W/ Ant 30 ZN 1958 ( \ A 4G5HQ Price Six Shillings and Sixp eed AN 28 1999 } \ aon Uf All rights reserve X. LIBRARY 4 ( & d) SReeaiec ieees bee Issued 15th October, 1958 SMITHSONIA INSTITUTION NOV 5 = 1958 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN DECLARATION 40 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. BoscHMaA (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) Dr. See (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th uly 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) (145th 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. Vokes (University of Tulane, Department of Geology, New Orleans, Louisiana, 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 Netherlands) cn ust 1953) Dr. H. L. Key (Commonwealth Scientific ane Industrial Research Organisation, Chee A.C.T., Australia) (45th 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) Rrofessor 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) ee DECLARATION 40 DETERMINATION OF THE GENDER TO BE ATTRIBUTED TO GENERIC NAMES HAVING THE TERMINATION ‘IDES ”, ‘-ITES ”? OR °*-OIDES ” DECLARATION :— Generic names having the termination ‘‘-ides”’, “‘-ites”, or ‘“-oides” are to be treated as being masculine in gender. I. THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 16th April 1957 Mr. Hemming as Secretary submitted the following proposal for the adoption of a Declaration containing a determination of the gender to be attributed to generic names 99 66 having the termination “‘-ides’”’, “‘-ites”’, or “‘-oides”’ :— Proposed adoption of a ‘‘ Declaration ’’ prescribing the gender to be attributed to generic names having the termina- tion ‘‘-ides °’, -ites °’ or ‘* oides ”’ 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 Internationa Commission to render a Declaration prescribing the gender to be attributed to generic names having the termination “‘-ides”’, ‘“‘-ites” or “‘-oides”’, XXli OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 2. There is a very large number of generic names having one or other of these terminations and the question on the gender to be attributed to them is one that has already arisen on a number of occasions and is likely to continue to do so until the International Commission gives a definite Ruling on the subject. 3. Recently attention was drawn to this matter by Mr. Arthur N. Dusenbury, Jr. (Creole Petroleum Corporation, Jusepin, Monagas, Venezuela) in which he pointed out that in all the reports prepared by the palaentologists of the Creole Petroleum Corporation generic names having the above terminations had been treated as being of the masculine gender. Mr. Dusenbury explained that in this matter he had been guided by the view expressed by Macfadyen (W.A.) and Kenny (E. J. André) in a paper entitled “‘ On the Correct Writing in Form and Gender of the Names of the Foraminifera ” (1934, J. Roy. micr. Soc. 54: 177). The passage in question reads as follows :— *“ Unless there be some reason to the contrary, the gender is deter- mined by the ending of the generic name as follows :— Masculine : -ides, as Cibicides. -ites, aS Orbitolites, Lenticolites. -oides, as Haplophragmoides ”’. 4. In the same letter, however, Mr. Dusenbury pointed out that his attention had recently been drawn to a statement by Miss Ruth Todd in a footnote in a paper entitled “‘ Recent Foraminifera of the Marshall Islands ”’ written jointly by Cushman (J.A.), Todd, Todd R., and Post R. (1954, U.S. geol. Sury., Prof. Paper 260—H : 368). The footnote in question reads as follows :— “‘ Regarding gender of Globigerinoides, I prefer to follow the recom- mendation of Roland W. Brown that a generic name ending in -oides, an adjectival suffix meaning like, takes its gender from the gender of the generic name on which it is based. Thus Globigerinoides, like Globigerina, is feminine ; Ammodiscoides, like Ammodiscus, is mascu- line ; and Haplophragmoides, like Haplophragmium, is neuter’. 5. The passage in Dr. Brown’s work (Composition of Scientific Words : 53) referred to in the footnote by Miss Todd quoted above reads as follows :— ““In compound words, according to ancient and modern usage, the final component, if a noun, determines the gender. If the first com- ponent is a noun and the final component an adjective, the compound DECLARATION 40 XXiil is an adjective but may be intended for use as a noun. In such instances the gender of the compound is that of the governing noun. Here, for example, belong the many substantives having -oides and -opsis as adjectival terminations ”’. 6. On receipt of Mr. Dusenbury’s letter I consulted Professor L. W. Grensted, the Commission’s Consulting Classical Adviser, who has provided the following report :— ““ The original view, taken by Macfadyen and Kenny (as cited in Mr. Dusenbury’s letter) is certainly right. Names in ‘-ides’, ‘-ites’, and ‘-oides ’ are perfectly normal Greek formations. They would always be assumed to be masculine for all practical purposes. In principle they are adjectival formations and like all adjectives used as nouns are treated as masculine. The noun on which they are based is quite irrelevant. Thus the noun épnuirns is masculine, though based on epnuta (desert) which is feminine. In Latin it becomes eremita, a hermit—still masculine. ““ These forms could not in any case ever be neuter. They always refer to somebody rather than something, and somebody like something neuter is not thereby neuter himself—a man may be ‘son of a gun’ or ‘a chip of the old block’ but is not thereby neuter because ‘ gun’ and ‘ block’ are neuter. And these phrases are strictly equivalent to the Greek and Latin patronymics. “The termination ‘-ites’ is in principle different from ‘-ides’ and ‘-oides ’, but it is definitely a personal masculine termination, where it is the full termination. In some cases it is not. I suspect that the termination in Orbitolites is really -lites (with A’@os —lithos—a stone behind it). But ending as it does, in its Greek form, in -7s, it is still masculine. It could not be made neuter. ““ The statement by Roland W. Brown to which Miss Todd refers is so loosely written as, at the least, to be misleading. For if the phrase “ governing noun’ means the first part of the compound it is not ordinary classical usage, or, in general, modern usage either, that it determines the gender of that compound. Thus hydrophoros is an adjective, and the Greek ddwp (hydr-, water) is neuter. But as a noun (the Hydrophoroi) it is either masculine or feminine. And though hippos, a horse, is normally masculine Hippolyta is feminine enough, and we can hardly suppose that the Amazons only rode mares. Further (and this is the point which concerns us here) the common and important generic names in ‘-oides’ and ‘-opsis’ are not examples of the compounds he is discussing, for ‘-oides ’ is not an adjective but a termination making the whole compound into an adjective, naturally masculine when used as a noun. And ‘-opsis’ XX1V OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS is not an adjective but a feminine noun, determining the gender of the compound concerned as feminine with whatever noun it is combined. ‘“‘In other words the practice hitherto followed by Mr. Dusenbury and his friends is right ”’. 7. In view of the unequivocal character of Professor Grensted’s report, I recommend that further discussion on this subject should be brought to a close by the adoption of a Declaration directing that 99 GG generic names having the termination “‘-ides’’, ‘‘-ites’’, or “‘-oides” are to be treated as being masculine in gender. Il. THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : At the time when the question of the gender to be attributed to generic names having the termination “‘-ides”, ‘‘-ites”’ or “‘-oides”’ was first raised informally by Mr. Arthur Dusenbury, Jr., the problem so involved was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.)951. 3. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 18th April 1957 and was published on 28th June of that year in Part 7 of Volume 13 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Hemming, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 ; 203—205). 4. Issue of Public Notices: Public notice of the possible adoption of a Declaration in the sense recommended was given in like manner as though the application involved the possible use by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature of its Plenary Powers on 28th June 1957 (a) in Part 7 of Volume 13 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Mr. Hemming’s application was published) and (b) to the other pres- cribed serial publications. In addition such Notice was given to four general zoological serial publications, DECLARATION 40 XXV 5. Support Received : The proposal submitted in the present case was supported by four specialists. In the case of two of these—-Arthur N. Dusenbury, Jr. (Creole Petroleum Corporation, Jusepin, Venezuela) and L. W. Grensted (Cirencester, Gloucester- shire, England)—the communications received were embodied in the application submitted to the Commission (paragraph | above). The communications received from the two other specialists are reproduced in the immediately following paragraphs. 6. Support received from W. A. Macfadyen (London) : On 8th July 1957 Mr. W. A. Macfadyen (London) addressed the following letter to the Office of the Commission in support of the present case (Macfadyen, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 321—322) :— I see in Nature of 22 June 1957, pp. 1279—1280 that comments are invited on the gender to be attributed to generic names with the terminations “‘-ides”’, ‘“‘-ites’’ and ‘‘-oides’”’. May I record it as my opinion that the gender should be masculine in all three cases. I refer to W. A. Macfadyen and E. J. A. Kenny: “On the correct writing in form and gender, of the names of the Foraminifera”, 1934, J. Roy. Microscopical Soc., 54 : 177—181 (in particular p. 178). In the opinion of the classical scholars then consulted, the structure of words with these terminations was held to indicate definitely that they were of masculine gender. 7. Support received from Myra Keen (Stanford University, Stanford, California, U.S.A.) : On 19th August 1957 Miss Myra Keen (Stanford University, Stanford, California, U.S.A.) addressed the following note of support to the Office of the Commission (Keen, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 322) :— With reference to the adoption of a Declaration prescribing gender for generic names ending in “‘-ides”’, ‘“‘-ites”’, and “‘-oides”’’, I believe that a ruling that all such names should be regarded as of masculine gender would be desirable and in the interests of nomenclatural stability. XXVI OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 8. No Objection Received : No objection to the action proposed was received from any source. Ill. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 9. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(57)73 : On 30th December 1957 a Voting Paper (V.P.(57)73) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “‘ the proposal relating to the proposed adoption of a Declaration prescribing the gender to be attributed for generic names having the termination “-ides’”’, “‘-ites”’ or “‘-oides”’, as set out in para- graph 7 on page 205 of Volume 13 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature” [i.e. in the paragraph numbered as above in the paper reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Declaration]. 10. The Prescribed Voting Period : As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 30th March 1958. 11. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)73 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)73 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) : Holthuis ; Mayr ; Boschma ; Hering ; Mertens ; Prantl ; Jaczewski; Vokes; Lemche; do Amaral; Dymond ; Hanko ; Key ; Bodenheimer ; Bradley (J.C.) ; Hemming ; Sylvester-Bradley ; Stoll ; Tortonese ; Kiihnelt ; Riley ; DECLARATION 40 XXVil (b) Negative Votes, one (1): Bonnet ; (c) On Leave of Absence, one (1): Miller ; (d) Voting Papers not returned, one (1) : Cabrera. 12. Declaration of Result of Vote : On 31st March 1958, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)73, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 11 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. 13. Preparation of the present ‘‘ Declaration ’’ : On 21st April 1958 Mr. Hemming prepared the present Declaration and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Declaration were in complete accord with those of the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(57)73. 14. Compliance with Prescribed Procedures : The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Com- mission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Declaration is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Commission by the under- signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the International Com- mission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. XXVIII OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 15. ‘* Declaration ’? Number : The present Declaration shall be known as Declaration Forty (40) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twenty-First day of April, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Eight. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING Supplementary Note on action in connection with ‘‘ Declaration ’? 40 taken at, and in comnection with, the Fifteenth International Congress of Zoology, London, July 1958 By R. V. MELVILLE (Secretary to the Colloquium on Zoological Nomenclature, London, 1958) Declaration 40 was reported to the Congress by me as Assistant Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (1958, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 15 : 1136, 1142, 1144). The Colloquium referred all questions relating to the formation of names to a Sub-committee, without reaching detailed conclusions, submitted comprehensive recommendations for the incorporation into the Code of the mandatory provisions of “‘Article 28 ” of Professor J. Chester Bradley’s revised English text of the Code, and for the regula- tion of grammatical and philological matter to Appendixes. The present Declaration will be incorporated into an Appendix dealing with matters of this sort when the revised Code is edited. 119 Parkway, Gloucester Gate, London, N.W.1. 22nd July 1958 © 1958. THE INTERNATIONAL TRUST FOR ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Printed in England by METCALFE & COOPER LIMITED, 10-24 Scrutton St., London E C 2 NOTICE TO ALL SUBSCRIBERS In accordance with the wishes expressed at the recent iternational Congress of Zoology, the International Trust for oological Nomenclature is considering as a matter of urgency ow substantial economies can best be effected in its publica- ons. Opinions and Declarations, Vol. 19, however, had been assed for final printing before the Congress and parts 11-17 re now being issued. OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. VOLUME 19. Part 15. Pp. xxix—xxxviii DECLARATION 41 Clarification of the status of terms used as zoological names in works written in the Latin language 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 1958 Price Six Shillings and Sixpence————_ THSON Pips (All rights ta gs WM IN Issued 15th October, 1958 \ ey } INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE -RULING GIVEN IN DECLARATION 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) i Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (La Plata, Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) Dr. Gee (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th uly 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) (A5th 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 (University of Tulane, Department of Geology, New Orleans, Louisiana, 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 Netherlands) (12th August 1953) 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) Ans S. BODENHEIMER (The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel) (11th November 4 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) Dr. DECLARATION 41 CLARIFICATION OF THE STATUS OF TERMS USED AS ZOOLOGICAL NAMES IN WORKS WRITTEN IN THE LATIN LANGUAGE DECLARATION :—Where in a work written in the Latin language a Latin word is used in such a way as to be capable of bearing the interpretation that it is there employed as a generic, specific or subspecific name duly formed in accordance with the provisions of the Régles, the word in question is to be so interpreted, save where such an interpretation is clearly excluded by the context. I. THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 12th May 1957 Mr. Hemming submitted the following request for a Declaration clarifying the conditions in which words published or apparently published as zoological names in works written in the Latin language are to be accepted as such :— Proposed adoption of a ‘‘ Declaration ’’ clarifying certain problems arising in connection with names published in works written in Latin 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 on Zoological Nomenclature to adopt a Declaration clarifying certain problems arising in connection with names published in works written in Latin. The problem here in question arises from the fact that, whereas in the case of works written in any language other than Latin, the requirement that zoological names shall consist of Latin or Latinised words or words treated as such makes it possible in almost every case readily to identify as zoological names Latin words occurring in the work concerned. This, however, is not always So easy in the case of works written in Latin, XXX OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 2. Generic names published in works written in Latin are fairly numerous in the older literature and such names have always been accepted, many now being in common use. Generic names so pub- lished are generally recognisable without much difficulty owing to the fact that in accordance with the provisions of Article 8 of the Régles they are usually printed with an initial capital letter. Moreover, in an ordinary Latin sentence a noun occurring otherwise than as the first word of that sentence is not printed in this way and accordingly the use of a capital initial letter in such cases provides a useful indication that the word in question was being used as a generic name. In most cases also a clear indication is provided by the fact that, except on the hypothesis that the word in question was being employed as a generic name, it would be impossible to translate the sentence from the Latin in a way that would make sense. The acceptance of a word as a generic name when published in a work written in Latin is depend- ent upon its being published in the nominative singular, as has been made clear by the Commission by the Ruling given in Opinion 183, the substance of which was written into the Régles by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 139—140). The position as regards specific names pub- lished in works written in Latin is broadly similar to that of generic names, except that in their case (except in the case of proper nouns in some early works) they are not printed with capital initial letters. On the other hand, identification as specific names in such cases is com- monly assisted by the fact that a new specific name normally makes its appearance in immediate juxtaposition with a generic name. 3. A similar problem arises in connection with subspecific names when published in works written in Latin. In the case of such names when consisting of noun substantives the indication that the word was intended by its original author to be a zoological name differs in no respects from that discussed above in connection with specific names. ‘The position is, however, not always so clear when instead of a noun an adjective is employed, Even in these cases there is, how- ever, often no ground for doubt. As a comparatively recent example we may cite the Catalog der Lepidopteren des Palaerctishen Faunen- gebietes by Otto Staudinger and Hans Rebel published in 1901, the whole of the descriptive indications in which are written in Latin and which abounds with new “ varietal” (i.e. subspecific) names. The following are examples taken at random from the above work : Erebia afer vat. hyrcana (: 51); Cigaritis acamas var. transcaspica (: 76) ; Agrotis trux var. amasina (: 152). In these cases it is perfectly obvious that the Latin adjectives concerned were published as subspecific names, this being demonstrated both by the schematic lay-out adopted in the Catalog and by the fact that after each name the author (Staudinger) added an abbreviated version of his name (“‘ Stgr.’’). 4, There are cases, however, where the reader is not assisted either by the insertion of the author’s name or by the use of so rigid a lay-out. DECLARATION 41 XXXIll Numerous examples of this kind may be found for example, in the Gmelin (13th) Edition of the Systema Naturae of Linnaeus. We may cite here, as an example, a case in the Class Aves which has already been dealt with (though in other respects imperfectly) by the Com- mission in one of its older Opinions (Opinion 67) when it placed the generic name Trichoglossus Stephens, 1826, on the Official List. In this case the Commission cited as a subjective synonym of the name of the type species the name Psittacus novae Hollandiae [sic] Gmelin Giiss-.in Linnaeus, Syst. Nat. (ed. 13) 101): 316). Reference to Gmelin’s work shows that this name (in the defective spelling novae Hollandia) was introduced as the name of a “ varietas”’ of what he called Psittacus haematotus and that at the same time he introduced another name, moluccanus, for what he regarded as another “‘ varietas ”’ of the above nominal species. The taxon concerned was for long known by the name novaehollandiae (correction of novae Hollandia) Gmelin, 1788, and the only reason why it is not now so known is that it has been found that by a First Reviser selection made by Jardine & Selby ({1831]) it is necessary to give precedence to the other name (moluccanus) published by Gmelin (as shown above) on the same occasion in the same work. 5. There is no doubt that the general practice of zoologists has been to accept as validly published names words employed as such works written in Latin, though here and there in the literature a few such names will be found which have been either overlooked or rejected for one reason or another. Such cases represent, however, at most no more than a very small minority. It would certainly cause a most serious disturbance in current nomenclatorial practice if names pub- lished in the foregoing manner were now to be rejected. It seems desirable that the situation should be clarified by the adoption by the Commission of a Declaration making it clear that names of the kind discussed above are to be accepted as satisfying the requirements of the Régles. 6. In this as in other similar cases it seems desirable that the proposed Declaration should be so drafted as to have a strictly objective nomen- clatorial basis, thus avoiding the difficulties which are always liable to arise in provisions involving subjective judgment. It is accordingly suggested that the proposed Declaration should be on the following lines :— Draft of suggested ‘* Declaration ”’ Where in any work written in the Latin language :— (1) a noun (or a word treated as a noun) is employed as a generic name, it is to be accepted as having been validly published as such, provided that it was published in the nominative singular ; XXXIV OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (2) a noun or adjective is associated binominally with a word accepted under (1) above as having been employed as a generic name, the noun or adjective concerned is to be accepted as having been validly published as a specific name ; (3) a noun or adjective is associated trinominally (either directly by or by being linked to a binomen by an expression such as be) 66 *““ssp.”, ““ var.”, etc.) with a word accepted under (2) above as having been employed as a specific name, the noun or adjective concerned is to be treated as having been published as a subspecific name. Il. THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt of Mr. Hemming’s application the question of the adoption of a Declaration clarifying the conditions in which words published in works written in Latin are to be accepted as zoological names was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.)1223. 3. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 7th June 1957 and was published on 28th June of that year in Part 7 of Volume 13 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Hemming, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 230—232). 4, Issue of Public Notices: Public Notice of the possible adoption of a Declaration in the sense recommended was given in like manner as though the application involved the possible use by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature of its Plenary Powers on 28th June 1957 (a) in Part 7 of Volume 13 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Mr. Hemming’s application was published) and (b) to the other prescribed serial publications. In addition such Notice was given to four general zoological serial publications. 5. Support by J. Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) : In 22nd November 1957 Professor J. Chester Bradley (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) intimated his DECLARATION 41 XXXV support for the action recommended in the present case but added the following suggestion :—* It has occurred to me that in connection with the three paragraphs it would be well to have a saving clause * provided other requirements of publication and availability are met.’ Otherwise it could be interpreted in too sweeping a manner’. In replying on 26th November 1957 the Secretary agreed that it was necessary to secure that the proposed provision should apply only in cases where the other relevant provisions in the Régles had been complied with, but added that, in his view, ““ means should be found for avoiding the necessity for notes of this sort when this or similar provisions are actually incorporated in the Régles, as otherwise a great deal of unneces- sary repetition would be inevitable.” It was arranged that attention to this matter should be drawn when the Voting Paper came to be prepared in the present, and effect was later given to this decision by the addition of a note on this subject as Note 4 to the Voting Paper issued in this case (paragraph 7 below). 6. No Objection Received : No objection to the action proposed in the present application was received from any source. Ill. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 7. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(57)74 : On 30th December 1957 a Voting Paper (V.P.(57)74) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “the proposal relating to the proposed adoption of a Declaration clarifying certain problems arising in connection with names published in works written in Latin as set out in Points (1) to (3) in paragraph 6 on page 232 of Volume 13 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature [i.e. in the paragraph numbered as above in the paper reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Declaration] subject to the drafting point specified in Note 4 overleaf ’’ [as to which see paragraph 5 above]. XXXVI OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 8. The Prescribed Voting Period : As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 30th March 1958. 9, Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)74 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)74 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following twenty-two (22) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Holthuis ; Mayr ; Boschma ; Hering ; Mertens ; Prantl ; Jaczewski; Vokes; Lemche; do Amaral; Bonnet ; Dymond ; Hanko ; Bodenheimer ; Key ; Bradley (J.C.) ; Hemming ; Sylvester-Bradley ; Stoll ; Tortonese ; Ktshnelt ; Riley ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) On Leave of Absence, one (1): Miller ; (d) Voting Papers not returned, one (\): Cabrera. DECLARATION 41 XXXVI 10. Declaration of Result of Vote : On 3lst March 1958, Mc. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)74, 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. A Drafting Suggestion made by Commissioner K. H. L. Key : In returning his completed copy of Voting Paper V.P.(57)74, Commissioner K. H. L. Key (Canberra, Australia) pointed out that the draft formula suggested did not deal with the issue actually involved in the application. There was no need for a Ruling that ““a noun . . . employed as a generic name . . . is to be accepted as having been validly published as such ”’, for this was already adequately dealt with in the Régles. The difficulty in the case of works written in the Latin language was to determine whether a given word had in fact been employed as a zoological name within the meaning of the Régles. Dr. Key concluded by suggesting that the formula to be adopted would be improved as well as shortened if it were recast on the following lines :—“ Where, in a work written in the Latin language, words are used in such a way as to be capable of inter- pretation as names (of genera, species, or subspecies) formed in accordance with these Rules, then they are to bear that inter- pretation unless the context clearly excludes it.” 12. Review by the Secretary of the form of words required to give effect to the proposal submitted : On 14th April 1958 Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, executed a Minute in which, after reviewing the suggestion made by Dr. Key (paragraph 11 above), he gave directions (a) that the formula to be employed be shortened and clarified on the lines suggested by Dr. Key, (b) that in the portion referring to the question of the publication as names of the words involved, there should, as recommended by Professor Chester Bradley, be inserted a qualification limiting the suggested acceptance of these words as names to cases where in all other respects the provisions in the Régles had been duly complied with. XXXVI OPINIONS AND D®CLARATIONS 13. Preparation of the present ‘‘ Declaration ’’ : On 2ist April 1958 Mr. Hemming prepared the present Declaration and at the same time signed a Certificate that the terms of that Declaration were in complete accord with the proposal approved by the International Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(57)74. 14. Compliance with Prescribed Procedures : The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Com- mission on Zoological Nomenclature in dealing with the present case, and the present Declaration is accordingly hereby rendered in the name of the said International Commission by the under- signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the International Com- mission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 15. ‘* Declaration ’’ Number : The present Declaration shall be known as Declaration Forty-One (41) of the International Com- mission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twenty-First day of April, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Eight. Secretary to the International Commission - on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING Supplementary Note on action in connection with ‘‘ Declaration ’”’ 41 taken at, and in connection with, the Fifteenth International Congress of Zoology, London, July 1958 By R. V. MELVILLE (Secretary to the Colloquium on Zoological Nomenclature, London, 1958) Declaration 41 was reported to the Congress by me as Assistant Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomen- clature (1958, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 15 : 1136—1137, 1142—1143). The Colloquium agreed that Declaration 41 should be incorporated into “‘Article 6, Section 1” of Professor J. Chester Bradley’s draft English text of the revised Code. 119 Parkway, Gloucester Gate, London, N.W.1. 22nd July 1958 © 1958. THE INTERNATIONAL TRUST FOR ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Printed in England by METCALFE & 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..G., C.B.E. Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 19. Part 1. Pp. eae a Cos\\ MSC a S\N OPINION 516 Loran A SRS ee Determination under the Plenary Powers of the relative precedence to be assigned to certain works on the Order Lepidoptera (Class Insecta) published in 1775 by Pieter Cramer, Michael Denis & Ignaz Schiffermiiller, Johann Christian Fabricius, Johann Casper Fuessley, and S. A. -von Rottemburg respectively 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 1958 Price One Pound Fight Shillings (All rights reserved) ee ————————— Tssued 16th May, 1958 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 516 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. BoscHMaA (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 LemMcHE (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 (5. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice-President) Professor J. R. DymMonD (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 1953) Peer J. cae BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N. Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) resident Professor Harold E. Voxes (University of Tulane, Department of Geology, New Orleans, Louisiana, 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. 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) (AS5th 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) es 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) OPINION 516 DETERMINATION UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS OF THE RELATIVE PRECEDENCE TO BE ASSIGNED TO CERTAIN WORKS ON THE ORDER LEPIDOPTERA (CLASS INSECTA) PUBLISHED IN 1775, BY PIETER CRAMER, MICHAEL DENIS & IGNAZ SCHIFFER- MULLER, JOHANN CHRISTIAN FABRICIUS, JOHANN CASPAR FUESSLY, AND S. A. VON ROTTEMBURG RESPECTIVELY RULING :—(1) The following action is hereby taken under the Plenary Powers :— (a) It is hereby directed that the paper by Rottemburg (S.A.von) entitled “Anmerkungen zu den Huf- nagelischen Tabellen ’’ published in 1775 partly in Volume 6 (: 1—34) of the serial publication Der Naturforscher and partly in Volume 7 (: 105—112) of the same serial be treated as having priority over the under-mentioned works published in the same year :— (i) Fuessly (J.C.), Verzeichniss der ihm bekannten schweizerischen Insekten ; (ii) [Denis (M.) & Schiffermiiller (I.)], An- _ kiindung [sic] eines systematisches Werkes von den Schmetterlinge der Wiener Gegend. SMITHSONIAN 4 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (b) It is hereby directed that the work by Fuessly (J.C.) entitled Verzeichniss der ihm bekannten schweizer- ischen Insekten published in 1775 be treated as having priority over the anonymous work by Denis (M.) & Schiffermiiller (I.), entitled An- ktindung [sic] eines systematisches Werkes von den Schmetterlinge der Wiener Gegend published in the same year. (2) The date of publication of the work by Fabricius (J.C.) entitled Systema Entomologiae is hereby determined as having been Easter Monday, 17th April 1775. (3) It is hereby directed that the under-mentioned works or parts of works be treated for the purposes of the Law of Priority as having the relative precedence © specified below :— (a) Fabricius (J.C.), [17th April] 1775, Systema Ento- mologiae ; (b) Rottemburg (S.A.von), 1775, paper entitled ““An- merkungen zu den Hufnagelischen Tabellen ” published in the serial publication Der Natur- forscher, partly in Volume 6 (: 1—34) and partly in Volume 7 (: 105—112) (a work published in 1775 on an unknown date which under the Plenary Powers in (1)(a) above has been accorded precedence over the works by Fuessly (J.C.) and | Denis (M.) & Schiffermiiller (1.) specified res- pectively in (c) and (d) below, the latter of which was published in the above year on some unknown date prior to 8th December 1775, on which date a review of it was published) ; (c) Fuessly (J.C.), 1775, Verzeichniss der ihm bekannten schweizerischen Insekten (a work published in OPINION 516 5 1775 on an unknown date which under the Plenary Powers in (1)(a) and (1)(b) above has been accorded precedence after the paper by Rottemburg (S.A. von) entitled “* Anmerkungen zu den Hufnagelischen Tabellen ’’ published in 1775 in the serial publication Der Naturforscher but above the work by Denis (M.) & Schiffer- miiller (1.) entitled Ankiindung [sic] eines sys- tematisches Werkes von den Schmetterlinge der Wiener Gegend published in that year on some unknown date prior to 8th December 1775) ; (d) [Denis (M.) & Schiffermiiller (1.)], [pre- 8th December] 1775, Ankiindung [sic] eines system- atisches Werkes von den Schmetterlinge der Wiener Gegend (a work which under the Plenary Powers in (1)(a) and (1)(b) above ranks for precedence after each of the under-mentioned works which, having been published on unknown dates in 1775 would otherwise have ranked for priority only as from 3lst December and there- fore after the present work by Denis & Schiffer- miller which ranks from 8th December 1775 :— (i) Rottemburg (S.A.von), paper published in the serial publication Der Naturforscher under the ~ title “Anmerkungen zu den MHufnagelischen Tabellen”’ ; (ii) Fuessly (J.C.), Verzeichniss der ihm bekannten schweizerischen Insekten) ; (e) Cramer (P.), [1775], Uitlandsche Kapellen, vol. 1, pp. 1—132, pls. 1—84 (published on unknown dates in 1775 and accordingly ranking for priority as from 31st December of that year and therefore after the works by Fabricius, Rottemburg, Fuessly and Denis & Schiffermiiller specified in (a) to (d) above respectively). (4) The titles of the works by Fabricius, Rottemburg, Fuessly and Denis & Schiffermiiller severally specified in 6 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (a), (b), (c) and (d) in (3) above are hereby placed on the Official List of Works Approved as Available for Zoological Nomenclature with the Title Numbers 34 to 37 respectively, the entry so be made in respect of each of the above works to be endorsed, so far as applicable, as specified in (1), (2), and (3) above. (5) The title of the under-mentioned work and of the. supplement thereto is hereby placed on the Official List of Works Approved as Available for Zoological Nomen- clature with the Title Number 38, the dates to be assigned for the purposes of the Law of Priority to the several portions thereof to be those specified below and the entry relating to the portion published in 1775 to be endorsed as shown below :— Cramer (P.), De Uitlandsche Kapellen voorkomende in de drie Waereld-Deelen Asia, Africa en America (a) Written by Pieter Cramer and published during his lifetime Volume Pages Plates Date to be assigned for the purposes of the Law of Priority I 1—132 1—84 [1775] Endorsement :—The above portion to be treated as having been published on 31st December 1775 and therefore as ranking for the purposes of the Law of Priority below the work by Denis (M.) & Schiffer- muller (I.) entitled An- kiindung [sic] eines system- atisches Werkes von den Schmetterlinge der Wiener Gegend published in the same year on some. date prior to 8th December. OPINION 516 I Volume Pages Plates Date to be assigned for the purposes of the Law of Priority 1 133—156 85—96 [1776] 2 1—152 97—192 TA 3 1—104 193—252 [1779] (b) Written by Cramer and published after his death by Caspar Stoll Beem 511796). 253-288 [1780] 128 289304 [1780] aw (c) Continuation by Caspar Stoll 29—90 305—336 [1780] + 91—164 337—372 [1781] 4 165—252 373—400 [1782] 1—29* [*Note : This concluding item contains an essay by Stoll entitled “‘ Proeve van eene Rangschikkinge der Donsvleugelige Insecten Lepidopterae. Welker Afbe- eldingen in de vier Deelen von dit Werk zyn te vinden. Door Caspar Stoll.| Stoll (C.), Aanhangsel van het Werk, de Uitlandsche Kapellen voorkomende in de drie Weereld-Deelen Asia, Africa en America, door den Heere Pieter Cramer i. 1—8 [1787] 43—184 9—42 [1790] 8 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS I. THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE Origin of the present investigation : The investigation dealt with in the present Opinion is concerned with the determination of the relative precedence to be accorded to five works or parts of works dealing with the Order Lepidoptera (Class Insecta) published in 1775. Ina number of cases each of two of these works contains a new name for the same species and the lack of evidence as to which of these works should be treated as having precedence over the other has for long been a cause of instability and con- fusion in the nomenclature of the group concerned. This problem was one of a number involved in an application regarding a somewhat similar issue which had come to light in connection with the relative priority of certain pairs of names published in 1807 for identical species by Fabricius and Illiger respectively. This had been submitted to the Commission in 1946 by Mr. Francis Hemming (London) (1947, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 1 : 261—269). One of the generic names involved in that case (Castnia Fabricius) had as its type species a nominal species, the name of which was published in 1775 in one of the works concerned in the present Opinion and was a homonym of a name for a different species published inthe same year in another of the works here involved. At the time of the submission of the foregoing application the question of the availability of the above specific name, though one which required attention by the Commission, did not enter directly into that case, for the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology had not as yet been established by the International Congresses of Zoology and in consequence there was then no need for action to be taken by the Commission in regard to that specific name in that particular connection. When, however, the question of the Illiger and Fabricius names came to be con- sidered by the International Commission at its Session held in Paris in 1948, the foregoing Official List had already during the same Session been brought into existence and the Commission was in consequence faced directly with the question whether the specific name (icarus Cramer, [1775], Papilio) of the type species of the genus Castnia Fabricius was an available name and should therefore be placed on the above Official List or whether it should be rejected as a junior homonym of the other specific name (icarus Rottemburg, 1775, Papilio) published in the same year. The following is an extract from the Official OPINION 516 9 Record of the Proceedings of the Commission at the Fourteenth Meeting of its Paris Session held on Monday, 26th July 1948 at which this matter was brought to its attention (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 455—456) :— The Acting President [Mr. Francis Hemming] added that, while he had obtained the support of Mr. N. D. Riley and Mr. W. H. T. Tams (British Museum (Natural History)) for the proposed addition to the Official List of Generic Names of the two names of genera of the Sub-Order Heterocera (Castnia, Urania), he had not at that time considered the question of the oldest available names for the type species of those genera, there having been no need to do so, the Official List of Specific Trivial Names not then having been in existence. In the case of the type species of the first of these genera, there was, he knew, a difficult underlying problem of the relative precedence to be accorded to certain books published on unknown dates in the same year (1775), on which a decision would first have to be taken by the Commission as a question of principle. The books concerned were: (1) volume 1 of Cramer’s Uitlandsche Kapellen (in which Papilio icarus, the name of the type species of the genus Castnia Fabricius, was first published); (2) a paper entitled Anmerkungen zu den Hufnagelischen Tabellen der Schmetter- linge by von Rottemburg published in volume 6 of the journal Naturforscher ; (3) the anonymous work Ankiindung eines system- atisches Werkes von den Schmetterlingen der Wiener Gegend (the so-called Wiener Verzeichniss) by Schiffermiiller & Denis ; (4) the Systema Entomoligiae of Fabricius. In the circumstances, he pro- posed that the Commission should agree to place on the Official List whatever might ultimately be found to be the oldest available trivial names for the type species of these genera. 2. Procedural decisions taken in Paris in 1948: At the con- clusion of the discussion recorded in the immediately preceding paragraph the Commission used its Plenary Powers to suppress the long-overlooked generic names published by Illiger in 1807 and placed those names on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology. Waving done so, the Com- mission then placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology all those of the equivalent generic names published by Fabricius in the same year that had not already been placed on that List, with the exception of one name (Thymele Fabricius, 1807) which was invalid as a junior objective synonym of an older name (Erynnis Schrank, 1801) and which was thereupon placed on the Official Index. At the same time the Commission 10 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS placed the specific names of the type species of the foregoing genera on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology (then styled the “Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology’), with the exception of the specific name of the type species of the genus Castnia Fabricius, 1807, as regards which (as already explained) there arose the question of the relative priority to be accorded to the various works published in 1775 with which the present Opinion is concerned. The decisions so taken were later embodied in Opinion 232 (1954, Ops. Decls. int. Comm. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 249—274). Having thus disposed of all matters arising in connection with the foregoing application, except that of the possible addition to the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology of the specific name of the type species of the genus Castnia Fabricius, 1807, the Commission gave directions that an investigation of the question of the relative priority to be accorded to the works dealing with the Order Lepidoptera published on unknown dates in 1775, with which the question of the addition to the Official List of the above specific name was bound up, should be undertaken by the Secretary in consultation with other specialists in the Order Lepidoptera. The following is an extract from the Official Record of the Proceedings of the Commission of the decision so taken (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 459) :— THE COMMISSION agreed :— Ce ey (8) to invite the Secretary to the Commission, in consultation with other specialists in the Order Lepidoptera to submit proposals for the determination by the Commission, under the procedure agreed upon at the meeting noted in the margin of the relative priority to be assigned to different names for the same species and to the same name for different species published in 1775 (a) by Cramer in volume 1 of his Uitlandsche Kapellen, (b) by von Rottemburg in a paper entitled Anmerkungen zu den Hufnagelischen Tabellen der Schmetterlinge published in volume 6 of the journal Naturforscher (c) by Schiffermtller & Denis in the anony- mous work Ankitindung eines systematisches Werkes von den Schmetterlingen der Wiener Gegend, and (d) by Fabricius in his Systema Entomologiae ; (9) to place on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology whichever might, in the light of the decision on OPINION 516 i (8) above, be found to be the oldest available trivial name for the type species of the genus Castnia Fabricius, 1807. (10) to place on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology whichever, after consultation with specialists, was found to be the oldest available trivial name for the type species of the genus Urania Fabricius, 1807 ; (11) to render Opinions recording the decisions specified in (1) to (6)1, and, when completed, in (9) and (10) above. 3. Submission by Mr. Hemming in 1957 of a Report with recommendations : The investigation with which Mr. Hemming was charged at the Session of the Commission held in Paris in 1948 (paragraph 2 above) proved laborious and intricate and it was not until November 1957 that he found it possible to submit to the Commission a Report on the investigations which he had carried out in consultation with interested specialists, with recommendations as to the solution which it appeared would most conduce to the maintenance of established nomenclatorial practice in the group concerned. In view of the detailed character and consequent length of Mr. Hemming’s Report, it has been judged more convenient to attach it as an Annexe rather than actually to incorporate it in the main text of the present Opinion. Il. THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 4. Registration of the present case : Upon the publication in 1950 of the Official Record of the Proceedings at the Session 1 The decisions taken under the Numbers (1) to (6), which were concerned with certain generic and specific names in the Order Lepidoptera were later duly embodied in Opinion 232 (1954, Ops. Decls. int. Comm. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 249—274). 12 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS held by the Commission in Paris in 1948, containing the terms of reference of the investigation with which the present Opinion is concerned, the problem so involved was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 448. 5. Publication of the present case : The terms of reference of the enquiry entrusted to the Secretary in the present case were published on 9th June 1950 (Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4: 459). A fuller statement of the issues involved, together with an appeal to specialists for advice, was published on 15th April 1952 (Hemming, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 7 : 204—206). 6. 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 of the 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 the summary of the present case and the appeal to specialists for advice were published) and (b) to the other prescribed serial publications. In addition, such Notice was given to four general zoological publications and to eight entomological serials in various parts of the world. 7. Comments received : Comments on the issues involved in the present case were received from five specialists (Italy, one ; Netherlands, one ; United Kingdom, two ; U.S.A., two). The communications so received, which showed a high degree of general agreement with one another on the majority of the issues involved, have been reproduced in Appendix 2 to the Report submitted to the Commission by the Secretary on 20th November 1957, the text of which is reproduced in the Annexe to the present Opinion. 2 The text of the paper here referred to will be found in Appendix 1 to the Report by the Secretary, which is reproduced in the Annexe to the present Opinion. OPINION 516 13 8. No objection received : No objection was received from any source to the use of the Plenary Powers for the purpose of securing a final settlement of the problem involved in the present case. Il. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 9. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(57)25 : On 26th November 1957 a Voting Paper (V.P.(O.M.)(57)25) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “‘the proposal relating to the relative precedence to be accorded to five works on the Order Lepidoptera published in 1775, as set out in Points (1) to (4) in paragraph 20 of the paper bearing the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 448 [i.e. in the para- graph numbered as above in the paper reproduced in the Annexe - to the present Opinion] submitted by the Secretary simultaneously with the present Voting Paper. 10. The Prescribed Voting Period : As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the One-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 26th December 1957. 11. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(57)25 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(57)25 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following twenty-two . (22) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Holthuis ; Bonnet ; Lemche ; Hering; Riley ; Prantl; Stoll ; Mayr ; Boschma ; Tortonese ; Mertens ; Vokes ; do Amaral ; Miller ; Hemming ; Bodenheimer ; Cabrera ; 14 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Dymond ; Bradley (J.C.) ; Kiihnelt ; Jaczewski ; Sylvester- Bradley ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) On Leave of Absence, one (1): Key ; (d) Voting Papers not returned, two (2): Hanko ; Esaki?. 12. Declaration of Result of Vote : On 27th December 1957, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(57)25, 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 aforesaid. ail 3. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 12th January 1958, Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given 3 Shortly after the close of the Prescribed Voting Period information was received that Professor Esaki had died during that period on 14th December 1957. OPINION 516 5) 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.)(57)25. 14. References : The references for the works, the titles of which were placed on the Official List of Works Approved as Ayailable for Zoological Nomenclature with the Title Numbers 34 and 37 respectively by the Ruling given in the present Opinion are as set out in Section (3) of the said Ruling. Similarly, the reference for the work, the title of which was placed on the above List as Title Number 38 by the Ruling given in the present Opinion is as set out in Section (5) of the said Ruling. 15. At the time of the Session held by the Commission in 1948, extracts from which are quoted in paragraphs 1 and 2 above, 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. 16. Compliance with Prescribed Procedures : The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Com- mission 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 Com- mission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 16 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 17. ‘*‘ Opinion ’’ Number : The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Five Hundred and Sixteen (516) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twelfth day of January, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Eight. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING ANNEXE TO OPINION 516 OPINION 516 19 Report on the question of the relative precedence to be accorded to five works or portions of works dealing with the Order Lepidoptera (Class Insecta) published on unknown dates in the year 1775 By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. (Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature) The present is a Report on the question of the relative precedence to be accorded to five works or portions of works dealing with the Order Lepidoptera (Class Insecta) which has been prepared in response to a request addressed to me by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature at its Session held concurrently with the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology in Paris in 1948. The lack of a definite Ruling on this subject has long been a cause of uncertainty and confusion by reason of the fact that in a considerable number of cases a previously unnamed species was named independently in two or more of the works in question and there exists no means for determining which name should be accorded precedence over the other. From the point of view of lepidopterists—especially those concerned with the Palaearctic fauna—the present is a subject of great importance and one on which a final settlement is urgently required. This question is of direct concern also to the International Commission, for in one case, that of the specific name for the type species of the genus Polyom- matus Latreille, 1804, the lack of a Ruling on the above subject has so far made it impossible to insert on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology an entry corresponding to that relating to the above generic name already made on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology. 2. The general problem underlying the present issue was considered by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology at Paris in 1948 which decided to insert in the Régles a provision that “‘ where two books, each containing a different name for the same taxonomic unit are published on the same day or, under the decisions already taken by the present [i.e. the Paris] Congress [(1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 223—225)] are to be treated as having been so published by reason of the exact date of publication of the books concerned being unknown, the question as to which of the two names is to be given priority over the other is to be referred to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature for decision’ (1950, ibid. 4 : 257). Later during the same Congress the International Commission had under consideration the special case of the entomological works published in 1775 here under consideration and agreed that the relative precedence to be accorded to these works should be determined under the procedure 20 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS referred to above and it was then that, as Secretary, I was invited, after consultation with specialists, to submit proposals to this end (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 459). 3. Following the publication in 1950 of the Official Record of Pro- ceedings of the Paris Congress consultations were initiated on this and other cases on which that Congress had asked that Reports should be furnished. At first these consultations proceeded somewhat slowly and in 1951 it was decided to seek a wider approach by publishing in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature brief particulars in regard to each of these cases, together with an appeal to interested specialists for statements of their views. The list so prepared was published on 15th April 1952 (Hemming, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 7 : 191—229). The note on the problem dealt with in the present Report, which appeared as Case No. 13 (ibid. 7 : 204—206), is reproduced in Appendix 1 to the present Report. At the time of the publication of the foregoing list Public Notice of the possible use of the Plenary Powers in the cases comprised in the above list was given in the prescribed manner, thereby placing the Commission in a position to deal with each of the problems at issue in whatever manner might appear to it to be the best. 4. The titles of the works which it is now necessary to consider are, in alphabetical order, the following :— (1) Cramer (P.), Uitlandsche Kapellen, vol. 1, Parts 1—7 (: 1—32) (2) [Denis & Schiffermiiller], Ankiindung [sic] eines systematisches Werkes von den Schmetterlinge der Wiener Gegund Note on the title of the above work : The first word of the title of this work is commonly cited in the literature as being *““Ankiindigung ’’, though sometimes it appears in the shorter form “Ankiindung”’. The longer (‘‘-ig’’) spelling was, for example, used by Hagen (1863, Bibl. ent. 2 : 122) and more recently by Horn & Schenkling (1929, Index Litt. ent. (4) : 1065). Inspection of the copy of this work in the library of the Linnean Society of London shows however that the spelling used in its title is the archaic shortened form “Ankiindung’’ and not the longer form “Ankiindi- gung ”’ which would be employed today. (3) Fabricius (J.C.), Systema Entomologiae (4) Fuessly (J.C.), Verzeichniss der ihm bekannten schweizerischen Insekten (5) Rottemburg (S.A.von), ““Anmerkungen zu den Hufnagelischen Tabellen der Schmetterlinge ”, Der Naturforscher 6 : 1\—34 ; 7: 105—112 OPINION 516 a 5. The specialists who furnished comments in the present case were, in date order, the following :— Roger Verity (Florence, Italy) (Appendix 2, Part 1) N. D. Riley (British Museum (Natural History), London) RARE Te Pains (Appendix 2, Part 2) John G. Franclemont (then of U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agri- cultural Research Administration, Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine, Washington, D.C., and now of Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (Appendix 2, Part 3) B. J. Lempke (Amsterdam, The Netherlands) (Appendix 2, Part 4) Cyril F. dos Passos (Mendham, New Jersey, U.S.A.) (Appendix 2, Part 5) 6. Although, as was only to be expected, the advice received from the foregoing specialists was not unanimous, it nevertheless displayed a high degree of general agreement. In particular, all the specialists agreed that the relative precedence to be accorded to the works concerned should be such as would both pay due regard to established nomenclatorial practice and to any available indications as to the part of 1775 in which any of the works in question had been published. 7. In the investigations undertaken in the present enquiry a detailed search has been made of all sources likely to throw information as to the actual dates on which the various works concerned were actually published. Particulars of the information so collected are given in the following paragraphs, together with information regarding the prece- dence customarily given by entomologists to the various works in question and the nature of the advice received from specialists. (a) Fabricius, ‘‘ Systema Entomologiae ”’ 8. The title page of the Systema Entomologiae is dated ‘“‘ 1775” but the Dedication on the following page, which forms a half-title, bears the notation ““ Havniae d. xxi Nov. 1774”. This inscription suggests that the whole work was completed by the end of November 1774. It creates a presumption also that publication took place fairly early in 1775, though, unless supported by other evidence, this presumption would not be a very strong one owing to the great length of this book (832 pp.) and the fact that consequently printing, even if expeditiously carried out, must have occupied a considerable period. Fortunately, however, there is conclusive evidence on this subject from the hand of Fabricius himself, for in F. W. Hope’s English version of Fabricius’s autobiography ([1847—1849], Trans. ent. Soc. Lond. 4 : |—xvi) Fabricius is recorded as having stated :—‘*In 1775, at Easter, during the great fair at Leipsig, my ‘ Systema Entomologiae ’ appeared ’’. This is a most valuable piece of evidence, for it may be taken as proving that this work was published on Easter Monday in 1775. Thus, once we have established the date on which Easter fell 22 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS in that year, we shall know the exact date on which the Systema Entomologiae of Fabricius was published. On this subject I appealed for assistance to my learned friend Professor the Rev. L. W. Grensted, who has very kindly informed me (in Jitt. 18th November 1957) that in 1775 Easter was late, Easter Sunday falling on 16th April. We may therefore regard it as being definitely established that Fabricius’s Systema was published on Easter Monday, 17th April 1775. 9. In the case of the other works dealt with in the present Report there is no evidence at all as to the date on which in 1775 two of them (Fuessly’s Verzeichniss and Cramer’s Uitlandsche Kapellen) were published, while as regards the other two (Rottemburg’s “‘Anmerk- ungen”’ and Denis & Schiffermiiller’s Ankiindung) such indications as are available relate to periods in 1775 subsequent to Easter Day. Accordingly, on grounds of priority the Systema Entomologiae should be assigned precedence over all the other works concerned. On grounds of usage also there are strong reasons in favour of this course, for the practice of entomologists has been to accord to the Systema precedence over all the other works published in the same year. In this connection, for example, Franclemont observes that “it would be a catastrophe for the Commission to take any action that would ~ upset synonymies that have been established for at least eighty years, and in some cases as much as one hundred and fifty years’’. Franclemont was presumably thinking mainly of the Heterocera, the group in which he is especially concerned, for his comment does not apply with equal force to the Rhopalocera. So much so indeed that initially I was inclined to favour the placing of the Systema Entomologiae much lower down the list on the ground that some of the other authors concerned gave much more precise localities for their new nominal species, than those provided by Fabricius—a matter of great importance at the subspecies level in the case of polytypic species. Tams also originally favoured the assignment to this work of a iow position, but this was for the special reason that if Fabricius were to be placed in front of Denis & Schiffermiiller (paragraph 15 below) the usage of certain well-known generic names would be affected. In so far however as the names in question were names originally used by Linnaeus to denote divisions of his genus Phalaena, the difficulties referred to above have now been met in a different way by the Ruling given by the Commission under its Plenary Powers in Opinion 450. Dos Passos expressed the view that, if an arbitrary arrangement were to be adopted, he would favour placing Cramer (paragraph 17 below) and Rottemburg (paragraph 11 below) in front of Fabricius, but he added that, if this question were to be settled on grounds of priority, he was in agreement with Francle- mont that first place should be given to the Systema Entomologiae. Lempke also supported the view expressed by Franclemont. 10. Now that the actual priority of the Systema Entomologiae of Fabricius over the other works published in 1775 has been fully established, that work must be accorded that position, unless the OPINION 516 23 Commission were to take the view that circumstances were such as would justify the use of the Plenary Powers to assign a lower place to this work in the table of precedence now to be established. In fact, however, no such special circumstances exist, Franclemont and others having shown that the established practice of specialists has been to treat the Fabrician names of 1775 as having priority in cases where any of the other authors of works published in that year introduced different names for the species concerned. (b) Rottemburg’s ‘‘Anmerkungen ”’ published in Volumes 6 and 7 of the serial publication ‘‘ Der Naturforscher ”’ 11. Rottemburg’s paper entitled ““Anmerkungen zu den Hufnagel- ischen Tabellen ’’ was published in 1775 in two instalments in the serial publication Der Naturforscher, the first instalment in Volume 6 (: 1—34), the second in Volume 7 (: 105—112). This paper is of importance to students of the European fauna, for it contains descriptions and figures of a number of new species. 12. Verity has pointed out that some indication of the probable date of publication of the first instalment of the ““Anmerkungen’”’ is provided by the date “Jena 24 Marz 1775” which appears at the end of the “‘ Vorrede ’’ of the volume (Volume 6) of Der Naturforscher in which it was published. Unfortunately it is not known whether the volumes of this serial were published in parts or as complete units. Of these alternatives the former is the more probable, for it is unlikely that a serial publication would have been issued in such large instal- ments as those which would have been necessary if each volume had appeared as a single unit, Volume 6, for example, extending to 276 pages and Volume 7 to 278 pages. If in fact Volume 6 was published in parts, the first instalment of Rottemburg’s ““Anmerkungen ”’, which was the first of the papers included in the volume, must have been published some considerable time before 24th March 1775, the date given at the end of the foreword which, as it was published on the same sheet (Sheet Q) as was the Table of Contents (“‘ Inhalt ’’) of the volume, must have been included in the last portion of the volume to be published. In that event, this instalment would have been published before the Systema Entomologiae of Fabricius which (as noted in paragraph 8 above) was published on Easter Monday (17th April) in the same year. No light on the question when Volume 6 was completed is thrown by Volume 7, for, although it is dated “1775”, that volume contains no subsidiary dating to show either when it was started or when it was completed. On balance it is likely that the first instalment of Rottemburg’s ““Anmerkungen ”’ was published at the latest not long after the end of March 1775 and may have been published considerably earlier. As regards Volume 7 there is no evidence as to the date in 1775 on which it was published, except that publication must have taken place after 24th March of that year, the date attached to the “‘ Vorrede”’ of Volume 6. These indications are of interest as throwing some light 24 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS on the question as to the period in 1775 in which the two portions of Rottemburg’s paper were published, but they do not provide any evidence fixing publication as having taken place on some definite date in 1775. Accordingly under a provision adopted by the Paris Congress (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 223—225) both instalments of the ““Anmerkungen ’’ of von Rottemburg rank for the purposes of zoological nomenclature as from 31st December 1775, that being the earliest day on which either is definitely known to have been published. 13. The advice received from specialists shows a high degree of agreement on the question of the precedence to be accorded to von Rottemburg’s ““Anmerkungen ”’, all either advocating (or, in one case, acquiescing in) the assignment to this paper of a position imme- diately below that to be allotted to the Systema Entomologiae of Fabricius, the situation in this matter being summed up by Francle- mont in the following words :—“‘ It has been customary to give the names of Rottemburg priority over those of Denis & Schiffermiiller, but not over those of Fabricius”. Of the three works published in 1775 which remain to be considered, two (Fuessly’s Verzeichniss and the first volume of Cramer’s Uitlandsche Kapellen) are in the same position as von Rottemburg’s ““Anmerkungen”’ in the sense that nothing is known regarding the precise date on which they were published in the year 1775. Accordingly, the relative precedence to be accorded to these three works can be readily settled under the pro- cedure laid down by the Paris Congress to which reference has been made in paragraph 2 of the present Report. In these circumstances the evidence of usage referred to above clearly suggests that the ““Anmerkungen ”’ should be placed higher in the list of precedence than Cramer’s Uitlandsche Kapellen. It is probably not of great importance whether the ““Anmerkungen”’ should be placed on the list before or after Fuessly’s Verzeichniss, for the two works are not ~ in any material competition with one another. In view, however, of the likelihood that in fact at least the first instalment of the ‘“‘Anmer- kungen ”’ was published quite early in 1775 (paragraph 12 above), while nothing at all is known regarding the month in that year in which Fuessly’s Verzeichniss was published, it would be logical to assign a higher place in the list of precedence to the ‘““Anmerkungen ” than to the Verzeichniss. When, however, we come to consider the position of the Ankiindung of Denis & Schiffermiiiler, we shall find (paragraph 15) that there is definite evidence that that work was published by a known date in 1775 earlier than 3lst December and therefore that that work takes priority for the purposes of zoological nomenclature over both von Rottemburg’s ““Anmerkungen”’ and Fuessly’s Ver- zeichniss. It will, therefore, be necessary for the Commission to use its Plenary Powers if either of the above works is to be given a higher place in the proposed table of precedence than that to be allotted to the Ankiindung of Denis & Schiffermiiller. For the reasons explained above it is recommended that this action should be taken in the case of the ““Anmerkungen’”’. The parallel question in relation to Fuessly’s Verzeichniss is discussed in paragraph 14 below. : ; OPINION 516 a5 (c) Fuessly, ‘‘ Verzeichniss der ihm bekannten schweizerischen Insekten ”’ 14. The work now to be considered is Fuessly’s Verzeichniss der ihm bekannten schweizerischen Insekten, a work which has been introduced into the present case at Franclemont’s suggestion. This work does not contain many new names but, as pointed out by Franclemont and as is also known to myself, such new names as there are have customarily been treated as having priority over the corresponding names published by Denis & Schiffermiiller. On grounds of usage the grant of prefer- ence to the Verzeichniss over the Ankiindung is certainly necessary. Such a procedure would, moreover, be in full accord with the advice received from specialists. For the reasons explained in paragraph 13 above the use of the Plenary Powers will be needed if this end is to be secured. (d) [Denis & Schiffermiiller], Ankiindung [sic] eines systematisches Werkes von den Schmetterlinge der Wiener Gegend 15. The celebrated work commonly known in the last century as the Wiener Verzeichniss appeared in two issues, identical with one another except for the title page and for the fact that the earlier one bears the date ‘“‘ 1775’, whereas the later one is dated ‘“‘ 1776”. Of these editions it is the later one which is normally found in libraries, the earlier edition—the Ankiindung—being extremely scarce. There are, however, copies of this edition in the library of the British Museum and in that of the Linnean Society of London. This latter, it may be noted, is Linnaeus’s own copy and came to Burlington House with the remainder of his library. The Ankiindung of 1775 was reviewed in the issue of 8th December 1775 of the Jenaische Zeitung von Gelehrten Sachen (98) : 825—826), as was pointed out by Prout many years ago (1900, Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. (7) 6: 158—160). Certain authors (including dos Passos in connection with the present case) have advanced the view that the Ankiindung of 1775 should be rejected as not having been duly published, the new names in its being credited to the edition published in 1776 under the title Systematisches Ver- zeichniss der Schmetterlinge der Wienergegend. In this connection it may therefore be useful to recall that the procedure to be followed in determining the date to be accorded to any given book was the subject of consideration at Paris in 1948 by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology which then inserted in the Régles a provision that, ““ where a work bears a date purporting to specify or to indicate the date of publication, that date is to be deemed to be correct, unless and until evidence is published showing that that date is incorrect ’’, (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 223). In the present case no such evidence has been published, nor could such evidence be brought forward, having regard to the fact that (as noted above) a review of the Ankiindung was actually published in 1775, the year which appears on 26 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS the title page of that work. It must be concluded therefore not only that the Ankiindung was duly published in 1775 but also that publication took place in that year on some date prior to 8th December. 16. In the circumstances the Ankiindung ranks for priority for the purposes of zoological nomenclature as from 8th December 1775, that is, long after the Systema Entomologiae of Fabricius which ranks from 17th April 1775 (paragraph 8 above) but before the three other works covered by the present Report, all of which date from 31st December of that year. In the case of two of these works—the ““Anmerkungen ”’ of von Rottemburg and the Verzeichniss of Fuessly— it has already been explained that by long established practice the names published in them have been accorded priority over those in the Ankiindung of Denis & Schiffermiiller and it has been recommended that the Plenary Powers should be used to give valid force to that practice (paragraphs 13, 14 above). In the case of the third of the works concerned—Cramer’s Uitlandsche Kapellen—the practice has been in the opposite sense, that is, that, in the relatively small number of cases where names for the same species have been published in both these works preference has customarily been given to the names published in the Ankiindung over those published in the Ujitlandsche Kapellen. Thus in this case customary usage and strict priority are in accord with one another and in consequence all that is needed is that this should be recognised by assigning a higher place in the proposed table of precedence to the Ankiindung than that to be allotted to the Uitlandsche Kapellen. (e) Cramer, ‘‘ Uitlandsche Kapellen ”’ 17. The dates of publication of the various instalments in which the volumes—five in number, including the supplement (Aanhangsel)— were published are known from the magnificent copy in dated wrappers preserved at Tring in the Rothschild Library of the British Museum (Natural History). From the same source also is known the point in this great work reached at the time of Cramer’s death and therefore the point at which responsibility for the text becomes that of Caspar Stoll by whom this work was completed. From the information obtained from this source it is seen that the first seven Parts of Volume 1 of the Ujitlandsche Kapellen were published in 1775. These parts comprised Signatures A to U (pp. 1—132) and plates 1 to $4. It has occasionally been suggested that the information described above should be disregarded but no evidence of any kind has ever been advanced to show that the dates on the wrappers of the parts in which this work was published were incorrect. Accordingly, under the provision inserted in the Régles by the Paris Congress quoted in paragraph 15 of the present Report the portions of Volume 1 of the Uitlandsche Kapellen cited above rank for purposes of priority as from 1775. The correct dates as determined by the dates on the wrappers preserved in the Tring copy were given for all the new names concerned OPINION 516 a by Sherborn in his Index Animalium. They were published also (in 1903) in a summary form in the Catalogue of the Books ... in the British Museum (Natural History) (Volume 1 : 398). The full details, however, have never so far been made public. This information is now given in Appendix 3 to the present Report, it being necessary that it should be placed on record in this form in view of the fact that it will need to be cited when—as will now be necessary—the title of Cramer’s great work is placed on the Official List of Works Approved as Available for Zoological Nomenclature. 18. All the specialists who have advised on the present case are agreed that Cramer’s Uitlandsche Kapellen should be placed at, or near, the bottom of the table of precedence now to be established for this and the other works published in 1775. By some it was recommended that it should be placed immediately before Denis & Schiffermiiller and therefore last but one on the list but by others it was placed as the last of the works concerned. Thus, the only difference of opinion was as to the relative position of these two works. We have already seen however (paragraph 15 above) that the Ankiindung of Denis &. Schiffermiiller possesses a definite priority over the Ujitlandsche Kapellen. Subject to this necessary adjustment, the allocation to the Uitlandsche Kapellen of the last place in the list is in full accord with the advice received from the specialists consulted. Conclusions and Recommendations 19. Having concluded my account of the investigations in regard to the dates of publication of the five works or portions of works dealing with the Order Lepidoptera which were published in 1775 and having obtained the advice of specialists in that Order as to the relative precedence which it is desirable should be allotted to those works, I have now in discharge of the request made to me in Paris in .1948, to report that I am of the opinion that the adoption of the under-mentioned order of precedence for the works in question would secure the highest degree of consonance obtainable between the actual or probable priorities of those works in relation to one another and the priorities customarily accorded by lepidopterists to names published in those works :— (1) Fabricius (J.C.), 1775, Systema Entomologiae ; (2) Rottemburg (S.A.von), ““Anmerkungen zu den Hufnagelischen Tabellen ’’, published in the serial publication Der Natur-. forscher, Volume 6 (: 1—34) and Volume 7 (: 105—112) ; (3) Fuessly (J.C.), Verzeichniss der ihm bekannten schweizerischen Insekten ; (4) [Denis (M.) & Schiffermiiller (I.)], Ankiindung [sic] eines Systematisches Werkes von den Schmetterlinge der Wiener Gegend ; 28 OPINJONS AND DECLARATIONS (5) Cramer (P.), Uitlandsche Kapellen, Volume 1, Parts 1—7 (2 32). 20. I accordingly submit the following recommendations to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, namely, that it should :— (1) use its Plenary Powers to direct that for the purposes of zoological nomenclature :— (a) the paper by Rottemburg (S.A.von) entitled ““Anmerkungen zu den Hufnagelischen Tabellen’’ published in 1775 partly in Volume 6 (: 1—34) and partly in Volume 7 (: 105—112) in the serial publication Der Naturforscher, be treated as having priority over the under-mentioned works published in the same year :— (i) Fuessly, Verzeichniss der ihm bekannten schweizer- ischen Insekten ; (ii) [Denis & Schiffermiiller], Ankiindung [sic] eines systematisches Werkes von den Schmetterlinge der Wiener Gegend. (b) the work by Fuessly specified in (a)(i) above be treated as having priority over the anonymous work by Denis & Schiffermitiller specified in (a)(1i) above. (2) direct that the five works or parts of works enumerated in para- graph 19 of the present Report be treated as having for the purposes of relative priority the precedence shown in the list specified in the said paragraph ; (3) place on the Official List of Works Approved as Available for Zoological Nomenclature the titles of each of the five works referred to in (2) above, each entry so made to specify the precedence there assigned to the work concerned in relation to each of the four other works enumerated in paragraph 19 of the present Report ; (4) complete the entry relating to Parts 1—7 of Volume 1 of Pieter Cramer’s work entitled Uitlandsche Kapellen to be made on the Official List of Works Approved as Available for Zoological Nomenclature under (3) above by inserting on the said List information relating to the remaining portions of the above work with particulars of the contents and dates of publication of each of the parts in which this work was published as determined by the copy preserved in wrappers (covers) in the Library of the British Museum (Natural History), The Zoo- logical Museum, Tring, details of which are given in Appendix 3 to the present Report. 20th November 1957 4 f : OPINION 516 29 APPENDIX 1 TO THE SECRETARY’S REPORT Five works on the Order Lepidoptera published in 1775 : Appeal to specialists for advice on the question of relative priority issued in April 1952 (reprinted from Hemming, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 7 : 204—206) Case 13 : Relative priority to be accorded to names published for butterflies in 1775 in certain books and papers (a) by Pieter Cramer, (b) by J. N. C. M. Denis & Ignaz Schiffermiiller, (c) by Johann Christian Fabricius, and (d) by S. A. von Rottem- burg 28. At its Session held in Paris in 1948 the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature recommended, and the Thirteenth Inter- national Congress of Zoology agreed, that there should be added to the Régles a provision that, where, under the Articles then agreed to be so inserted for the purpose of determining the dates of publications of books containing new zoological names (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 223225), it was impossible to ascertain which of any two books or papers had been published, or was to be deemed to have been published, before the other, the question was to be referred to the International Commission for decision (1950, ibid. 4 : 257). Later during the same Session the Commission agreed to take such a decision after consultation with specialists for the purpose of settling the hitherto insoluble problem in the nomenclature of the Order Lepidoptera (Class Insecta) presented by four works, each containing new names of butterflies and moths, published in the year 1775. 29. The works in question are : (1) the eight Parts in which the first volume of Pieter Cramer’s Uitlandsche Kapellen was published ; (2) the celebrated work commonly known as the “ Wiener Verzeichniss ’’, published anonymously by J. N. C. M. Denis and Ignaz Schiffermiiller under the title Ankiindung eines systematisches Werkes von den Schmetter- lingen der Wienergegend ; (3) the well-known Systema Entomologiae of Johann Christian Fabricius ; (4) the important paper entitled Anmer- kungen zu den Hufnagelischen Tabellen der Schmetterlinge by S. A. von Rottemburg published in the serial publication Naturforscher (volume 30 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 6, pp. 1—34; vol. 7, pp. 105—112). The importance of reaching a decision on the foregoing matter is due partly to the fact that in the above works different names are published for the same species (thus raising the question of how to apply the Law of Priority) and the same names given to different species (thus raising the question of how to apply the Law of Homonymy). 30. The view of interested specialists as to the best way in which to settle the foregoing question, i.e. how to settle this question with the minimum of interference with current nomenclatorial practice, will be extremely welcome to the International Commission. Being myself an interested specialist in this particular matter, I should like tentatively to submit the following considerations :—(1) It will never be possible to establish with certainty the relative dates of publication of the foregoing works by Denis & Schiffermiiller and by Fabricius and of the various parts in which the first volume of Cramer’s Uitlandsche Kapellen and the first two instalments of Rottemburg’s Anmerkungen were published and, therefore, until a definite decision is taken by the International Commission under the powers specially conferred upon it by the International Congress of Zoology for settling cases of this kind, it will remain impossible to stabilise the nomenclature of those species for which new names were published in two or more of the foregoing works in those cases where it is necessary to reach a con- clusion as to the application of the Law of Priority or of the Law of Homonymy in relation to such names ; (2) For the foregoing reasons it is highly desirable that the long-standing confusion and instability which has resulted from the impossibility of determining the relative priority to be accorded to the competing names concerned should be brought to an end by a decision by the Commission as to the relative priority to be accorded to the four works with which we are concerned. (3) Since any such decision would have to be based upon considerations other than actual dates of publication (which, as already explained, it is impossible to ascertain), it would be possible, when settling the order of relative priority to be adopted, to pay regard to other criteria of value in the determination of the species concerned. The provision I have particularly in mind is the provision of an adequately defined and sufficiently restricted type locality, this being a matter of great importance at the subspecies level in the case of polytypic species, such as are most of those with which we are here concerned. From this point of view Denis & Schiffermiiller’s Ankiindung stands out pre- eminently by reason of the information (provided in the title) that the species described therein were all from the “‘ Wienergegend ”’ ; next comes Rottemburg’s Aumerkungen, which also contains good indica- tions in regard to type localities, accompanied in some case by plates which (judged by the standards of the time) must be considered quite good. Judged by the foregoing standards Cramer’s Uitlandsche Kapellen would come next, for, although the localities given refer normally to countries only and not to places, they are usually to be relied upon and are moreover supplemented by coloured plates. From ee OPINION 516 Sit every point of view the Systema of Fabricius is the least satisfactory of the books with which we are here concerned ; it has no plates ; the Latin descriptions are very brief ; the citation of bibliographical references to earlier works at times adds to the difficulties of identifica- tion (at least the subspecies level) ; the localities cited are lacking in precision. For the reasons summarised in (3) above, I would suggest for the consideration of my colleagues that the order of priority which would be calculated to give the most satisfactory results would be :— (a) Denis & Schiffermiiller; (6) von Rottemburg; (c) Cramer ; (d) Fabricius. While a settlement on the foregoing basis would, I believe, in general prove superior to any other, individual cases would, no doubt, arise where such an order of priority would give priority to the less important of some given pair of names, but this would be inevitable whatever order of priority was adopted. It is suggested, therefore, that, if this were to happen in any case where confusion would be likely to result, the situation should be remedied by invoking the use of the Commission’s Plenary Powers. 31. It is particularly hoped that, in order that a satisfactory settle- ment may be reached in regard to the long-outstanding difficulty dis- cussed above, lepidopterists will be good enough to furnish the Com- mission with their views as to the action which it is desirable should now be taken. It will be of great assistance if, in commenting on this problem, specialists will be so kind as to give particulars of any cases of which they may be aware (1) where the same species has been given two or more names in the books and papers here under consideration or (2) where a new name given to a species in any of the above works is a homonym of another name given to some other species in another of these works. 32 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS APPENDIX 2 TO THE SECRETARY’S REPORT Comments received from specialists on the question of the precedence to be accorded to five works on the Order Lepidoptera published in 1775 PART 1 OF APPENDIX 2 Comment by ROGER VERITY (Florence, Italy) (Extract from a letter dated 19th December 1949) I am most interested to hear that an effort is being made to settle the enormously important question regarding the priority of Rottem- burg’s and Schiffermiiller’s works and I shall be most grateful if you will let me know the results. All that I can say about this matter is that Rottemburg is dated 24th March 1775, whereas Schiffermiiller has no month and must be considered as of 31st December. PART 2 OF APPENDIX 2 Comment by N. D. RILEY and W. H. T. TAMS (British Museum (Natural History), London) (Letter from N. D. Riley, dated 21st April 1950) I had a long talk with Tams today about the four conflicting works published in 1775. He is apparently firmly convinced that the proper thing to do is to put the “‘ Wiener Verzeichniss ”’ first, followed by the Systema of Fabricius. The reason for this depends much more upon the validity of generic names than of trivial names, and in respect of the latter he quite agrees, as I do, that if any awkward points arise they should be dealt with under the special dispensation system. There is a slight difficulty in the GEOMETRIDAE in that Prout consistently gave priority to Fabricius, but as Tams assures me that this only affects about half a dozen names, there is perhaps not a serious difficulty even here. OPINION 516 33 With regard to Volume I of Cramer and von Rottemburg’s Tabellen, we both feel that the latter should be given priority for two principal reasons, firstly that von Rottemburg’s names seem on the whole to have been more used than Cramer’s where the two conflict, and secondly because Cramer’s names refer mainly to exotic butterflies, concerning which there is far less literature than is the case with Rottemburg’s names, which are mainly palaearctic and well-known species. Tams cannot recall offhand any important pairs of species in the Moths likely to be upset if we adopted this plan. Incidentally, he calls attention to a little bit of evidence in respect of the date of Fabricius’s Systema which may be unknown to you. It is on page xvili of the *“Accentuated List of British Lepidoptera’”’. You will find it stated there, and attributed to Fabricius, that his Systema was published at Easter in 1775. NOTE : On being informed today that it had now been definitely established that the Systema Entomologiae of Fabricius was published on 17th April 1775 (see paragraph 8 of covering Report), Mr. Riley said that he no longer felt it possible to argue in favour of giving precedence to Denis & Schiffermiiller over Fabricius, for in the circumstances now disclosed Fabricius’s Systema clearly had priority over the ““ Wiener Verzeichniss ”’. (intld. F.H. 21st November 1957) PART 3 OF APPENDIX 2 Comment by JOHN G. FRANCLEMONT (U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Administration, Bureau of Entomology and Plant Quarantine, Washington, D.C., U.S.A.) (Letter dated 11th June 1952) Five books on Lepidoptera published in 1775 The following notes and comments are prompted by your discussion in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 7 : 204—206, 1952, on the priority to be assigned to four works published in 1775 and dealing with the Order Lepidoptera. There is a fifth work which must also be considered ; it is “‘ Verzeichniss der ihm bekannten Schweitzerischen 34 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Inseckten ’’ by Joh. Casper Fuesslins (Fiiessly) published at Zurich (und Winterthur) in 1775. The preface is dated “‘ Zurich der 24 Febr. 1775 ”’, and the title page “1775 ”’. I would rank the five works for purposes of priority as follows :— 1. Fabricius, J. C. Systema Entomologiae. This is known to have been published around Easter in the year 1775. Fabricius in his auto- biography makes the statement that it appeared during the Easter Fair at Leipsig in 1775; Easter in 1775 was April 16. Thus it is absolutely safe to assign a date between April 16 and 30 of 1775 to this work. (See: Julius Schuster, Linné und Fabricius zu Ihrem Leben und Werk, p. 102, 1928 (Fascimile), also F. W. Hope, Trans. Ent. Soc. London, vol. 4, Appendix, ‘‘Auto-Biography of Fabricius ”’, pp. vili—ix, 1845—47. Every catalogue and every work I have con- sulted gives this work priority over everything else published in 1775.) 2. von Rottemburg, S. A. Anmerkungen zu den Hufnagelischen Tabellen der Schmetterlinge, in Der Naturforscher, Stuck 6, pp. 1—34, 1775 and Stuck 7, pp. 105—112, 1775. It has been customary to give the names of Rottemburg priority over those of Denis and Schiffer- miiller, but not over those of Fabricius. I think the nicest summary of the names in the European Lepidoptera is to be found in Werne- burg, Adolf, “‘ Beitrage zur Schmetterlingskunde ”’ published in 1864. 3. Fiiessly, J. C. ‘* Verzeichniss der ihm bekannten Schweitzerischen Inseckten”’. The few names in this work have always been given precedence over the names of Denis & Schiffermiiller. 4. Cramer, P. De Uitlandische Kapellen etc. (or Papillons Exotiques etc.), vol. 1, parts 1—7, pp. 1—132, pls. 1—84, 1775. Considerable discussion has been waged over how much of this work appeared in 1775, if any. Some individuals are not prone to put much stock in the dates on the covers of the first seven parts. Sulzer, 1776, March, mentions only three parts, but he is not listed as a subscriber, so it may be that he was late in obtaining his copies of the parts. It has always been customary to cite Cramer names in the synonymy of the Fabrician names wherever such action was called for. Kirby in his ““ Synonymic Catalogue of Diurnal Lepidoptera ’’, 1871, is consistent in applying this priority to the work of Fabricius. To my knowledge, no one has disputed this, and subsequent workers have reaffirmed it and insisted upon it. 5. [Denis (J.N.C.M.) & Schiffermiiller (I.).] Anktindung eines systematisches Werkes von der Schmetterlinges der Wiener Gegend. As you are well aware, most copies of this work are dated 1776 and appear under the title ‘“‘ Systematisches Verzeichniss der Schmetter- linger der Wienergegend”’, and there was even some doubt that it really appeared in 1775. However, the work was reviewed early in ie OPINION 516 35 December of 1775, in the Jenaische Zeitungen von Gelehrten Sachen (see : Prout (L.B.), Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. (ser. 7) vol. 6, p. 159, 1900), and thus we can safely say that some copies did appear sometime, probably late, in 1775. To my way of thinking this is a most un- satisfactory work ; many of the new names are nomina nuda, and must date from the first author to give some indication as to what they go with. May I cite one instance ? On pages 86 (bottom) and 87 (top), where part of the “‘ Sallows”’ of English Lepidopterists are first repre- sented by names, especially croceago, rutilago, flavago, luteago, aurago, sulphurago, cerago, and gilvago, nothing occurs but a common name - in German, certainly this is not enough to tie the names down, and it has never been construed as enough by serious workers ; these names are credited mostly to Fabricius or to Hiibner. Actually, in cases of doubt it is to Hiibner we have to turn to known what Schiffermiiller had before him ; it is a well-known fact that both Hiibner and Schiffer- miller worked together quite closely. The case I have cited is dupli- cated many times. Where one has a running key in the text, a case can be made for the species, but often you end up with two or more species differentiated only by common names. If it were not for the almost universal acceptance of some of the names from this work by leading European workers, I don’t think most Americans would give it any validity. It concerns us only insofar as the identity of a geno-. type species becomes a question. Nowhere can I find any author who has given the names of this work precedence over those of Fabricius. published in the same year. However unsatisfactory Fabricius’s Systema Entomologiae may be from the subspecies viewpoint, | think there is every evidence to indicate that it was the first to appear in 1775 and that it has universally been accorded precedence over all the other works published in the same year. I think it would be a catastrophe for the Commission to take any action that would upset synonymies that have been established for at least eighty years, and in some cases as much as one-hundred and fifty years or more. PART 4 OF APPENDIX 2 Comment by B. J. LEMPKE (Amsterdam, The Netherlands) (Letter dated 23rd June 1952) I had the intention to write to you about your proposal regarding: the succession of the publication of certain works in 1775 when 36 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Mr. Franclemont sent me a copy of the letter that he had directed to you. This makes the matter very easy for me, for I need only declare that I fully agree with him. In case the acceptance of Fabricius before Schiffermiiller should cause the abandonment of some well-known name, it would be easy to place Schiffermiiller’s name on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology. But this is likely to be necessary only in rare cases. I studied of late the nomenclature of the Dutch AGROTIDAE and GEO- METRIDAE and found only one case in which it was advisable to use this procedure. PART 5 OF APPENDIX 2 Comment by CYRIL F. DOS PASSOS (Mendham, New Jersey, U.S.A.) (Enclosure to a letter dated 20th October 1952) Concerning the relative priority to be assigned to five books dealing with Lepidoptera and claimed to have been published on unknown dates in 1775 Prior references to this subject will be found in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (1950, 4 : 223—225, 257, 459; 1952, 7: 204—206), where the situation is explained by the Secretary of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, who concludes “*, . that the order of priority which would be calculated to give the most satisfactory results would be :—(a) Denis & Schiffermiiller [1775, Ankiindung eines systematisches Werkes von den Schmetterlingen der Wienergegend herausgegeben von einigen Lehrern am k. k. Theresianum|] ; (b) von Rottemburg [1775, Anmerkungen zu den Huf- nagelischen Tabellen der Schmetterlinge| ; (c) Cramer [(1775—1776), De uitlandsche kapellen voorkomende in de drie waereld-deelen Asia, Africa en America] ; (d) Fabricius [1775, Systema entomologiae, sistens insectorum classes, ordines, genera, species, adiectis synonymis, locis, descriptionibus, observationibus], . . .”’ (1952, tom. cit. : 206). 2. In reaching the foregoing conclusion the Secretary has been influenced chiefly by the fact that he considers it impossible to ascertain a OPINION 516 Si, the exact dates of publication of these works ; that he believes the work of Denis & Schiffermiiller was published in 1775, and because that work fixes type localities rather precisely for the specimens described. However, the date 1775 is believed by the writer to be erroneous, and the locality mentioned in the title to the work will no longer be a matter of supreme importance once the designation of neotypes and the fixation of type localities by authors are recognized by the Régles. The work of Denis & Schiffermiiller is in German, and contains very few figures of adult Lepidoptera. The Secretary’s assertion that the work of Denis & Schiffermiiller was published in 1775 appears to be based upon the fact that a copy with such a “title page”’ is in the Library of the British Museum (Bloomsbury), and another copy is in the Library of the Linnean Society, London. These appear to be the only known copies with such a “title page’’. This so-called 1775 “title page’’, of which a photostat is in my personal library, is not, in my opinion, a title page at all. It is merely an announcement (“Ankiindung’’) of the work by the publisher. The only actual title page is that of 1776. Placing these two pages in juxtaposition makes this point abundantly clear :— Ankiindung Systematisches Verzeichniss eines der Systematischen Werkes Schmetterlinge von den der Schmetterlingen Wienergegend der Wienergegend herausgegeben herausgegeben von einigen Lehrern von einigen Lehrern am k. k. Theresianum am k. k. Theresianum. Wien Wien, verlegts Augustin Bernardi verlegts Augustin Bernardi Buchhandler, Buchhandler 1776 7/5) Consequently, the Denis & Schiffermiiller work cannot be considered as having been published in 1775, and is, therefore, eliminated from the consideration of works published during that year. In coming to the above conclusion I am not unmindful of a paper by Prout (1900) in which he states that the ““Ankiindung ”’ was reviewed in the Jenaische Zeitungen von Gelehrten Sachen (Stiick 98 : 825—826) on 8th December 1775. But there is no evidence, except the date, when this number of that periodical was actually published, and we know only too well from experience that few sei ‘als are issued on the date they bear. Furthermore, even if a copy of the Denis & Schiffermiiller work with the 1775 “title page ’’ was sent to an editor for review— a form of advance advertising—toward the end of 1775, that fact would not constitute publication within the meaning of the Régles (see generally Opinion 97, October 1926, and Ferris, 1928 : 157). All 38 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS other copies of this work that it has been possible to examine or learn about bear the regular 1776 title page. Prout (1900, tom. cit. : 160) concludes his paper by stating : I have at present quite an open mind as to whether the date 1775 should be accepted for this work or not ; but in the meanwhile I venture to make a practical suggestion that for “ priority ” rank it should be placed after the other 1775 literature (Fabricius, Syst. Ent. ; Naturforscher vi., vil., &c.), but before that of 1776 (Sulzer, Abgek. Geschichte ; Miller, Zool. Dan. Prodr. ; Natur- forscher viii. &c.). The so-called 1775 edition of Denis & Schiffermiiller was not in the Library of the British Museum (Natural History) when the original Catalogue of the Library (1903, 1 : 440) was published, and the 1775 “title? without any collation other than size is enclosed in square brackets. This entry is followed by a so-called “Another issue entitled :’ also in square brackets, followed by the title of the 1776 edition. The supplementary volumes of the Catalogue of the Library contains no further information on this subject, under either Denis (1922, 6 : 261) or Schiffermiiller (1940, 8 : 1150). As has been the usual practice among modern authors, I, myself, have used 1775 for the date of this work, but upon examining the matter more critically while preparing this paper, have concluded that I was in error. This leaves the works of von Rottemburg, Cramer, and Fabricius to be considered. 3. The Secretary’s second choice is the paper by von Rottemburg— actually a commentary on a paper by Hufnagel (1776—1768)—which was published in two volumes of a periodical. This work is in German also, and does contain some good indications of type localities and. some plates. 4. The third choice of the Secretary is the first volume of the work of Cramer. This was published in eight parts during 1775 and 1776 (Kirby, 1878 ; Brown, 1941 ; Comstock, 1942). Some of the parts must have appeared rather early in 1775, so as to conclude the publica- tion of seven parts of this rather sizable volume during that year. The early publication of some of the first seven parts in 1775 is evidenced further, perhaps by the fact(that the preface is dated ““ 2 Decembre 1774’. That this volume was not completed in 1775 is established by Kirby (Joc. cit. : 278), who claims to have examined a copy in the original covers and states that plates 85 to 96 were published in 1776. Nothing is said concerning the text (pp. 133—156) which refers to these plates, but Brown (loc. cit. : 128) states that they appeared in OPINION 516 39 1776. The text of this work is in parallel columns in Dutch and French, so that it may be assumed that more individuals are able to read it than if it were published in one language only. Type localities are given for all species, some rather indefinite it must be admitted, others fairly precise, and all generally reliable. Also, all described species are figured in colour, a very important consideration in dealing with the older descriptions. 5. Probably few will differ with the Secretary’s view that the work of Fabricius should be the last choice. It is unnecessary to repeat the reasons for this, as they have been set forth ably by the Secretary (1952, tom. cit. : 206). 6. After considering all the facts and the inferences that may be drawn from them, it is the writer’s opinion that it would be best to give priority to Cramer’s work, to be followed by von Rottemburg, and Fabricius, in that order. 7. Since drafting this paper, Dr. John G. Franclemont, formerly of the Department of Entomology, United States National Museum, Washington, D.C., now of the Department of Entomology, Cornell University, Ithaca, New York, has been kind enough to furnish me with a copy of a letter dated 11th June 1952 that he wrote to the Secretary on this subject. Examining the problem strictly from the point of view of priority of publication, he concludes that the works discussed by the Secretary, and one other that he places in the same category, should rank as follows : (1) Fabricius, (2) von Rottemburg, (3) Fuessly’s “‘ Verzeichniss der ihm bekannten Schweitzerischen Insekten ’’, (4) Cramer, and (5) Denis & Schiffermiiller. Of course, with the Secretary’s approach to the problem from the point of view of utility, different results were bound to follow. The first question to be decided then by the Commission is that of priority or utility. If the decision is in favor of the former, I agree fully with Dr. Francle- mont’s conclusions. Otherwise the solution proposed in paragraph 6 above is recommended. Bibliography _ BROWN, FREDERICK MARTIN 1941. “Some notes on four primary reference works for Lepi- doptera.”” Ann. ent. Soc. Amer. 34 : 127—138 COMSTOCK, WILLIAM PHILLIPS 1942. ‘Dating the Systema Entomologiae, by Fabricius and Papillons exotiques volume 1, by Cramer.” J. New York ent. Soc. 50 : 189—191 40 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS FERRIS, GORDON FLOYD 1928. ‘* The principles of systematic entomology.” Stanford Uniy. Publ., Univ. Ser., biol. Sci., 5 : 101—270, figs. 1—11 HUEFNAGEL, — 1766. ‘* Tabelle von den Tagvoegeln der Gegend um Berlin.” Berlin. Mag. 2 : 54—90 1766. ‘‘ Zweite Tabelle, worinnen die Abendvégel angereiht werden.” Ibid. 2 : 174—195 1766. ‘“‘ Dritte Tabelle von den Nachtvogeln.” Ibid. 2 : 391—437 1767. “‘ Vierte Tabelle.’’ Ibid. 3 : 202—215, 279—309, 393—426. 1768. ‘“‘ Fortsetzung der Tabelle von den Nachtvogeln.” Jbid. 4 : 504—527, 599—626 KIRBY, WILLIAM FORSELL 1878. ‘* The date of Cramer’s works.” Ent. mon. Mag. 14 : 278— 279 ProuT, LouIs BEETHOVEN 1900. ‘“‘ On the ‘Ankiindung eines systematisches Werkes von den Schmetterlingen der Wienergegend’ of Schiffermiiller and Denis.”” Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. (7) 6 : 158—160 OPINION 516 41 APPENDIX 3 TO THE SECRETARY’S REPORT Particulars of the contents and dates of publication of the Parts in which the several portions of the work by Pieter Cramer entitled ‘‘ Uitlandsche Kapellen ’’ were issued, as deter- mined by the copy preserved in wrappers (covers) in the library of the ‘* British Museum (Natural History), The Zoological Museum, Tring ”’ (a) Written by Pieter Cramer and published during his lifetime Volume 1 [1775—1776] Part Text Plates Date as shown No. on wrappers (covers) of the Signatures Pages Parts in which published 1 A—C 1—18 I—xII [1775] 2 D—F 19—38 XINI—XXIV [1775] 3 G—I 39—60 XXV—XXXVI [1775] 4 K—L 61—76 XXXVII—XLVIII [1775] 5 M—O T1—94 XLIX—LX [1775] 6 P—R 95—114 LXI—LXxII [1775] 7 S—V 115—132 LXXIJI—LXXXIV [1775] 8 X—Z 133—156 LXXXV—XCVI [1776] Volume 2 [1777] Part Text Plates Date as shown No. on wrappers (covers) of the Signatures Pages Parts in which published 9 A—C 1—18 XCVII—CVIII [1777] 10 D—F 19—36 CIX—CXX [1777] 11 G—I 37—56 CXXI—CXXxXII [1777] 12 K—M 57—76 CXXXII—CXLIV [1777] 13 N—P T1—94 CXLV—CLVI [1777] 14 Q—R 95—110 CLVII—CLXVIII [1777] 15 S—U 111—128 CLXIX—CLXXX [1777] JO ESE 129—146 ae aN + 16 \ Aa—Aa2 147—152 CLXXXI—CXCII f [1777] 42 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Volume 3 [1779—1780] eS ee ee Part Text Plates Date as shown No. - On wrappers (covers) of the Signatures Pages Parts in which | ; published 17 A—C 1—20 CXCII—CCIV [1779] 18 D—F 21—40 ; CCv—ccxvI- ~ =. [1779] 19 Ga 41—62 CCXVII—CCXXVII - [1779] 20 K—M 63—80 CCXXIX—CCXL [1779] 2), ah SAIN- SP 81—104 CCXLI—CCLI [1779] *(b) Written by Cramer and published after his death by Caspar Stoll 22 Q—S 105—128 CCLII—CCLXIV [1780] 23 T—X 129—152 CCLXV—CCLXXVI [1780] 24 7 ae oe i a : . CCLXXVII—CCLXxXVII t [1780] Volume 4 25 A—C 1—20 CCLXXXIX—CCC [1780] 26 D 21—28 CCCI—CCCIV [1780] (first portion) | * Cramer died in 1780, but the publication of the Ujitlandsche Kapellen was continued without interruption by his associate Caspar Stoll. At first Stoll did no more than see through the press the manuscripts left behind by Cramer, doing no more than add an occasional signed footnote. Later, however, Stoll assumed full responsibility for the text and new names published in this latter portion are accordingly attributable to Stoll and not to Cramer. The first part seen through the press by Stoll was Part 22 (containing pages 105—128 of Volume 3), on pages 107—108 and 115—116 of which there are footnotes signed by Stoll, the first which contains (: 107) a reference to the death of Cramer (here referred to as “‘ feu Mr. P. Cramer”). That the text of this Part was written by Cramer is shown by the numerous references in it to “‘ Mr. Stoll” (e.g. on pp. 109, 111, 115, etc.). Similar evidence shows that the text of Parts 23—25 (comprising the remainder (pp. 129—176) of Volume 3 and the first three Signatures (Signatures A—C), comprising pp. 1—20 of Volume 4. were written by Cramer. Part 26 contained three Signatures (Signatures D—F), the first of these comprising pp. 21—28)) contains a reference (: 28) to “‘ Heer C. Stoll’ and, as noted by Sherborn, was clearly written by Cramer. On the other hand, Signature E (: 29—36) and Signature F (: 37—44) are clearly the work of Stoll, as is shown by no less than five notes inserted in the text and signed by Stoll (: 33 ; 34; 36; 41 ; 43). From page 29 of volume 4 onwards new names should therefore be attributed to Stoll and not to Cramer. In one case only does the internal evidence on the question of authorship provided by the text affect the currently accepted dates of publication. This is in relation to Part 22, which is commonly treated as having been published in 1779, but which, owing to the reference in it on page 107 to the death of Cramer cannot have been published before 1780, the year in which Cramer died. Part No. 26 (second portion) 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 c OPINION 516 (c) Continuation by Caspar Stoll 43 Text Plates Date as shown on wrappers (covers) of the * This separately paged item, though published, as shown, in the last Part of the Uitlandsche Kapellen, is an entity written by Stoll. As in the case of the Uitlandsche Kapellen, the title of this unit is in both Dutch and French on the title page. The first of these titles—the Dutch title—reads as follows :— “PROEVE VAN EENE RANGSCHIKKINGE DER DONSVLEUGELIGE INSECTEN, LEPI- DOPTERAE. Welker Afbeeldingen in de vier Deelem van dit Werk zyn te vinden. DOOR CASPAR STOWE (by Caspar Stoll) Signatures A—E (pp. 1—42), plates 1—vm, published 1787 ” be) G—Z (pp. 43—163), plates Ix—xxvI Aa—Cc (pp. 163—184 [“‘ 384 ’]), plates xxxvi—xLI Signatures Pages Parts in which published E—F 29—44 CCCV—CCCXI [1780] G—K 45—72 CCCXU—CCCXXIV [1780] L—N 73—90 CCCXXV—CCCXXXVI [1780] O—Q 91—114 CCCXXXVII—CCCXLVIII [1781] R—T 115—138 CCCXLIX—CCCLX [1781] V—Z 139—164 CCCLXI—CCCLXxII [1781] Aa—Dd 165—192 CCCLXXlI—CCCLXXXIV [1782] Ee—Hh 193—224 CCCLXXXV—CCCXCVI [1782] Ti—Mm 225—252 A—G* 1—29 CCCXCVII—CCCC + [1782] TP (d.1782) Aanhangsel van het Werk, de Uitlandsche Kapellen \ published Jf 1790 © 1958. Printed in England b ‘THe INTE Mer Seah; RNATIONAL TRU ell ondon - 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 , a Vil fr Pa VOLUME 19. Part 3. Pp. pane | JUN 25 1959 \ wal f f mem aoe | f OPINION 517 Rejection of the proposal for the validation under the Plenary Powers of the emendation to Theridium of the generic name Theridion Walckenaer, 1805 ; use of the above Powers (i) to validate the specific name picta Walckenaer, 1802, as published in the combination Aranea picta, (11) to designate the species so named to be the type species of Theridion Walckenaer, 1805, and (iii) to suppress the generic name Phyllonethis Thorell, 1869 (Class Arachnida) 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 1958 Price Two Pounds and Four Shillings (All rights reserved) Issued 30th May, 1958 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 517 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. BoscHMaA (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) Dr. Fcamiig EEMGHe (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948) Professor Teiso Esaki (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) ee April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mr. Norman Denbigh RILEY (British Museum (Natural History), ele (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) (i2th 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. VoxeEs (University of Tulane, Department of Geology, New Orleans, Louisiana, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mez6gazdasdgi 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. HortHuis (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) Ce August 1953) Dr. H. L. Key (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Crit. 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) Professor F. S. BODENHEIMER (The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel) (11th November 954) 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) OPINION 517 REJECTION OF THE PROPOSAL FOR THE VALIDATION UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS OF THE EMENDA- TION TO “ THERIDIUM ”? OF THE GENERIC NAME ‘‘ THERIDION ” WALCKENAER, 1805 ; USE OF THE ABOVE POWERS (i) TO VALIDATE THE SPECIFIC NAME “ PICTA ? WALCKENAER, 1802, AS PUB- LISHED IN THE COMBINATION “ ARANEA PICTA ”’; (ii) TO DESIGNATE THE SPEC- IES SO NAMED TO BE THE TYPE SPECIES OF ‘‘THERIDION’? WALCKENAER, 1805, (iii) TO SUPPRESS THE GENERIC NAME ‘¢PHYLLONETHIS’? THORELL, 1869, (CLASS ARACHNIDA) RULING :—(1) The proposal that the spelling of the generic name Theridion Walckenaer, 1805 (Class Arachnida) be emended under the Plenary Powers to Theridium is hereby rejected. (2) The following action is hereby taken under the Plenary Powers :— (a) The specific name picta Razoumowsky, 1789, as published in the combination Aranea picta, is hereby suppressed for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy. (b) All selections of type species for the nominal genus Theridion Walckenaer, 1805, made prior to the present Ruling are hereby set aside and the nominal species Aranea picta Walckenaer, 1802 as validated under (a) above, is hereby designated to be the type species of the foregoing genus. (c) The generic name Phyllonethis Thorell, 1869, is hereby suppressed for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy. 48 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (3) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) Theridion Walckenaer, 1805 (gender : neuter) (type species, by designation under the Plenary Powers in (1)(b) above: Aranea picta Walckenaer, 1802) (Name No. 1272) ; (b) Enoplognatha Pavesi (P.), 1880 (gender : feminine) (type species by selection by Pavesi (P.), 1880 (in the paper published later in the same year specified in paragraph 75 of the present Opinion) : 16 an mandibulare Lucas, 1846) (Name No. 1273): (4) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) picta Walckenaer, 1802, as published in the com- bination Aranea picta (specific name of type species of Theridion Walckenaer, 1805) (Name No. 1520) ; (b) mandibulare Lucas, 1846, as published in the combination Theridion mandibulare (specific name of type species of Enoplognatha Pavesi (P.), 1880) (Name No. 1521). (c) ovatus Clerck, [1758], as published in the com- bination Araneus ovatus (Name No. 1522) ; (d) sisyphius Clerck, [1758], as published in the com- bination Araneus sisyphius (Name No. 1523). (5) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) Phyllonethis Thorell, 1869, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers in (1)(c) above (Name No. 1158) ; OPINION 517 49 (b) Theridium Leach (W.E.), 1824 (an Invalid Emenda- tion of Theridion Walckenaer, 1805) (Name No. 159): (c) Theridio Simon, 1864 (an Invalid Emendation of Theridion Walckenaer, 1805) (Name No. 1160). (6) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Number 527 :— picta Razoumowsky, 1789, as published in the combination Aranea picta, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers in (1)(a) above. (7) The under-mentioned family-group name is hereby placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology with the Name Number 234 :— THERIDIIDAE (correction of THERIDIIDES) Sundevall, 1833 (type genus: Theridion Walckenaer, 1805). (8) The under-mentioned family-group names are hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) THERIDIIDES Sundevall, 1833 (type genus: Theridion Walckenaer, 1805) (an Invalid Original Spelling for THERIDIIDAE) (Name No. 272) ; (b) THERIDIONIDAE Simon, 1881 (type genus : Theridion Walckenaer, 1805) (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling for THERIDIIDAE) (Name No. 273). 50 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS I. THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 13th September 1955 Dr. Herbert W. Levi (University of Wisconsin, Department of Zoology, Madison, Wisconsin, U.S.A.) addressed a preliminary enquiry to the Office of the Commission on the question of the possible use by the Commission of its Plenary Powers for the purpose of providing a valid basis for the continued employment of the generic name names Theridion Walckenaer, 1805, and Enoplognatha Pavesi, 1880 (Class Arachnida), in their accustomed sense. This led to the submission to the Commission by Dr. Levi of the following application on 21st October 1955 :— Proposed use of the Plenary Powers to preserve the accustomed usage of the generic names ‘‘ Theridion ’’ Walckenaer, 1805 and ‘* KEnoplognatha ’’? Pavesi, 1880 (Class Arachnida, Order Araneae) By HERBERT W. LEVI (University of Wisconsin, Department of Zoology, Madison, Wisconsin, U.S.A.) The principal purpose of the present application is to ask the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature to use its Plenary Powers to designate a type species in harmony with accustomed usage for the genus Theridion Walckenaer, 1805 (Tabl. Aran. : 72) (Class Arachnida, Order Araneae). This genus is the type genus of the family THERIDIIDAE, and this makes it important that there should be no change in the concept represented by the generic name Theridion, for any such change would lead to serious confusion, more especially in view of the fact that in the present case (as shown below) the application of the normal provisions of the Régles would involve a particularly objection- able transfer of the name Theridion to an allied genus now known as Enoplognatha Pavesi, 1880. As currently interpreted, Theridion Walckenaer is a large genus containing about four hundred described species, many of which are common. 2. Walckenaer did not designate or indicate a type species for his genus Theridion but from the originally included species Latreille in 1810 (Consid. gén. Anim. Crust. Arch. Ins. : 424, 144) selected a species placed in this genus by Walckenaer as Theridion redimitum (i.e. Araneus redimitus Clerck, [1758], Aran. svec. : 59, Pl. 3, Tab. 9) to be the type OPINION 517 51 species of this genus. The above nominal species is accepted by arachnologists as representing the same taxon as that represented by the nominal species Araneus ovatus Clerck, [1758] (ibid. : 58, Pl. 3, Tab. 8) and it is by this name that the species concerned is currently known. 3. In 1869 (Nova Acta Soc. Sci. upsal. (3) 7(1)(No. 5) : 90) Thorell noticed that Araneus ovatus Clerck differed in various respects from the other species then (and now) placed in the genus Theridion. Over- looking Latreille’s prior selection of this species to be the type species of Theridion Walckenaer, he erected a new genus Phyllonethis, of which he designated the above species as type species. At the same time he selected Araneus sisyphius Clerck, [1758] (Aran. svec. : 54) as the type species of Theridion Walckenaer. 4. In 1880 Pavesi (P.) established another genus to which he gave the name Enoplognatha. This name was published twice in the year 1880. The relevant references are :—(a) Rend. reale Instituto Lom- bardo di Scienze e Lettero (2)13 : 192 ; (b) Ann. Mus. civico Stor. nat. Genova 15 (for 1879—1880) : 325. No type species was designated in the first of these papers but in the second Pavesi selected as the type species, the first of the species cited as belonging to this genus in the earlier paper. The species so selected was Theridion mandibulare Lucas, 1846 (Explor. Algér., Zool. 2(1) : 260, pl. 17, fig. 1). In 1950 (Paper Alabama Mus. nat. Hist. No. 30 : 23) Archer, after a study of the male genitalia, pointed out that Araneus ovatus Clerck belongs to the genus Enoplognatha. The observations that Araneus ovatus Clerck (Theridion ovatum (Clerck)) has a colulus, that the male has modified chelicerae and that the female has a tooth on the posterior margin of the chelicerae, substantiates the evidence brought forward by Thorell and Archer. 5. Accordingly, the generic name Enoplognatha Pavesi, 1880, is a subjective junior synonym of Theridion Walckenaer, 1805. The most serious confusion would however result if under the normal provisions of the Régles the name Theridion were to be transferred to the genus now known as Enoplognatha and some new name had to be found for the genus which for one hundred and fifty years has been known by the name Theridion. It is to prevent these serious results that the International Commission is now asked to use its Plenary Powers to designate for Theridion Walckenaer a type species which will make it possible to continue to use this generic name in its accustomed sense. Of the species included in the genus Theridion by Walckenaer in 1805 the one most suitable for designation as the type species of that genus is that which in 1802 (Faune paris. 2 : 207) he had described under the name Aranea picta. That name is however, invalid, being a junior primary homonym of Aranea picta Razoumowsky, 1789 (Hist. nat. 52 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Jorat. : 242). The oldest available name for this species is Theridion ornatum Hahn, 1831 (Mon. Spinnen (6) : pl. 3, fig. c2). The proposal now submitted is therefore that Theridion ornatum Hahn should be designated as the type species of the genus Theridion Walckenaer, 1805. At the same time the Commission is asked to preserve the well-known generic name Enoplognatha Pavesi, 1880, by using its Plenary Powers to suppress its senior subjective synonym Phyllonethis Thorell, 1869, a name which has hardly been used at all. 6. As the present proposal will involve the placing of the foregoing names on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology, it is necessary at this point to note that in 1824 Leach (W.E.) (Ency. brit. Suppl. 4th—6th Eds. 1(2) : 438) emended the spelling of the name Theridion to Theridium, without, however, giving his grounds for so doing. In North America the spelling Theridium was used by the majority of authors during the nineteenth century, although Hentz, who described many species in the fifties, used Theridion. Since 1912 the spelling Theridion has been consistently used by all authors both in the United States and in South America. In Germany Wiehle in 1937 used the spelling Theridium but in his more recent papers he has used Theridion. Tullgrun used the spelling Theridium in comments on Swedish Theridiids in the 1940’s. This spelling is also used by Bonnet (1955, Bibl. Aran., vol. 2). The great French arachnologist Simon used Theridion seventy years ago. Roewer has always used this spelling and has employed it in his recent Katalog. The same spelling has been used also by Berland and by Locket & Millidge in 1953 in vol. 2 of their British Spiders. To sum up, the spelling Theridium is certainly not in general use, although individual authors have used this spelling in recent years. Under a decision taken by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology at Copenhagen, 1953 (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 43, Decision 71) the spelling Theridion is, it should be noted, a Valid Original Spelling and is therefore not subject to emendation. 7. The genus Theridion Walckenaer is, as has already been noted (paragraph 1 above), the type genus of the family THERIDIIDAE. Accord- ing to Kaston (B.J.) in his “‘ Family Names of the Order Araneae ” (1938, Amer. Midland Nat. 19(3) : 645) the genus Theridion Walckenaer was first made the base of a family-group name by Sundevall (J.C.) in 1833 (Conspectus Arachnidum:15). The form in which Sundevall published this name was THERIDIIDES. 8. The following are the recommendations which for the reasons set forth above are now submitted for the consideration of the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, namely that it should :— (1) use its Plenary Powers (a) to set aside all selections of type species for the genus Theridion Walckenaer, 1805, made prior to the —— eee SS ee a — © OPINION 517 53 Ruling now asked for, (b) having done so, to designate Theridion ornatum Hahn, 1831, to be the type species of the foregoing genus, and (c) to suppress the generic name Phyllo- nethis Thorell, 1869, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy ; (2) to place the under-mentioned generic names on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology :— (a) Theridion Walckenaer, 1805 (gender : neuter) (type species, by designation under the Plenary Powers under (1)(b) above : Theridion ornatum Hahn, 1831) ; (b) Enoplognatha Pavesi (P.), 1880 (gender : feminine) (type species, by designation by Pavesi (1880): Theridion mandibulare Lucas, 1846) ; (3) place the under-mentioned specific names on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology :— (a) ornatum Hahn, 1831, as published in the combination Theridion ornatum (specific name of type species of Theridion Walckenaer, 1805) ; (b) mandibulare Lucas, 1846, as published in the combination Theridion mandibulare (specific name of type species of Enoplognatha Pavesi, 1880) ; (c) ovatus Clerck, [1758], as published in the combination Araneus ovatus ; (d) sisyphius Clerck, [1758], as published in the combination Araneus sisyphius ; (4) place the under-mentioned generic names on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology :— (a) Phyllonethis Thorell, 1869, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers under (1)(c) above ; (b) Theridium Leach (W.E.), 1824 (an Invalid Emendation of Theridion Walckenaer, 1805) ; 54 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (5) place the under-mentioned specific name on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology :—picta Walckenaer, 1802, as published in the combination Aranea picta (a junior primary homonym of picta Razoumowsky, 1789, as published in the foregoing combination) : (6) place the under-mentioned family-group name on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology :—THERIDIIDAE (correction of THERIDIDES) Sundevall, 1833 (type genus : Theridion Walckenaer, 1805) ; (7) place the under-mentioned family-group name on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology :— THERIDIIDES Sundevall, 1833 (type genus : Theridion Walckenaer, 1805) (an Invalid Original Spelling for THERIDIIDAE). Ii, THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of Dr. Levi’s application : Upon the receipt of Dr. Levi’s preliminary enquiry, the question of providing a valid basis for the continued employment of the generic names Theridion Walckenaer, 1805, and Enoplognatha Pavesi, 1880 (Class Arachnida), in their accustomed sense was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 1008. 3. Publication of Dr. Levi’s application : Dr. Levi’s application was sent to the printer on 30th November 1955 and was published on 12th June 1956 in Part 1 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Levi, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 ; 27—30). 4. Issue of Public Notices regarding the possible use of the Pienary Powers for the purposes specified in Dr. Levi’s application: 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 OPINION 517 55) of its Plenary Powers for the purposes specified in Dr. Levi’s application was given on 12th June 1956 (a) in Part 1 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Dr. Levi’s application was published) and (b) to the other prescribed serial publications. In addition such Notice was given to four general zoological serial publications. 5. Comments Received: The Prescribed Six-Month Waiting Period following publication in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomen- clature expired in the present case on 12th December 1956 and not long thereafter a Voting Paper was prepared for the consideration of the Commission. By that date five comments had been received in regard to the present case. Of the specialists who so expressed their views four (all resident in the United States) supported the action proposed in the present application and one (resident in Germany) expressed opposition thereto. The com- munications so received are reproduced in the immediately following paragraphs. 6. Support for Dr. Levi’s application received from Harriet E. Frizzell (Rolla, Missouri, U.S.A.) : On 28th November 1956 Mrs. Harriet E. Frizzell (Rolla, Missouri, U.S.A.)! addressed the following letter to the Office of the Commission in support of Dr. Levi’s application (Frizzell, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 92) :— I wish to support Dr. Herbert W. Levi’s petition in regard to clarifying the nomenclature of Theridion and Enoplognatha. Dr. Levi’s proposals include :— (a) Suppression of the generic name Phyllonethis Thorell, 1869, with T. ovatum as type species. Theridion ovatum (Clerck) has recently been discovered to belong to Enoplognatha Pavesi, 1880, a well established genus in arachnid literature ; (b) Retention of the original spelling of Theridion Waickenaer. 1 For a later communication received from this specialist see paragraph 43 of the present Opinion. 56 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 7. Support for Dr. Levi’s application received from B. J. Kaston (Teachers College of Connecticut, New Britain, Connecticut, U.S.A.) : On 28th December 1956 Professor B. J. Kaston (Teachers College of Connecticut, New Britain, Connecticut, U.S.A.)2 addressed the following letter to the Office of the Commission in support of Dr. Levi’s application (Kaston, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 92) :— I have just received from Dr. Levi a copy of his. proposal regarding the preservation of the generic names Theridion Walckenaer, 1805, and Enoplognatha Pavesi, 1880. I wish to state that I endorse his recom- mendations whole-heartedly, and hope that the powers that be will see fit to act favorably upon them. I wish also to state that I do not approve of the change in spelling from Theridion to Theridium, even though my good friend Dr. Bonnet of Toulouse suggests that it should be changed. 8. Support for Dr. Levi’s application received from Vincent D. Roth (Yuma, Arizona, U.S.A.): On 3rd January 1957 Dr. Vincent D. Roth (Yuma, Arizona, U.S.A.)? addressed the following note to the Office of the Commission in support of Dr. Levi’s application (Roth, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 92):— I am in support of Dr. Herbert W. Levi’s petition to preserve the current usage of the generic names Theridion and Enoplognatha. | agree entirely with his recommendations as given in his paper in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature. In addition, I feel that the original spelling Theridion should be used in preference to the proposed emendation Theridium since the former has been utilized consistently to a greater extent in arachnology. 9. Support for Dr. Levi’s application received from Allan F. Archer (Union University, Jackson, Tennessee, U.S.A.) : On 3rd January 1957 Dr. Allan F. Archer (Union University, Jackson, Tennessee, U.S.A.)* addressed the following note to the is} For a later communication received from this specialist see paragraph 50 of the present Opinion. For a later communication received from this specialist see paragraph 61 of the present Opinion. For a later communication received from this specialist see paragraph 32 of the present Opinion. i) rs OPINION 517 57 Office of the Commission in support of Dr. Levi’s application (Archer, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 92) :— As an arachnologist I want to indicate herewith my support of the petition to preserve the accumstomed usage of the generic names Theridion Walckenaer, 1805, and Enoplognatha Pavesi, 1880. 10. Objection to Dr. Levi’s application received from Otto Kraus (Senckenbergische Naturforschende Gesellschaft, Frankfurt a.M., Germany): On 16th July 1956 Dr. Otto Kraus (Senckenbergische Naturforschende Gesellschaft, Frankfurt a.M.., Germany)? addressed the following letter to the Office of the Commission in which he expressed his objection to Dr. Levi’s application (Kraus, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 95) :— Stellungnahme zu dem vorgeschlagenen Verfahren : (1) Der Name Theridion Walckenaer, 1805, soll unter allen Um- standen beibehalten, die Emendation Theridium Leach, 1824, soll unterdriickt werden. (2) Theridion im alten Sinne ist eine sehr artenreiche Gattung (mehrere hundert Arten). Nachdem bereits friihere Autoren kleinere Gruppen von diesem Komplex generisch abgetrennt hatten, wurde vor allem durch Archer (1947, 1950) die Aufteilung weiter vorwarts getrieben, der weitere Gattungsnamen (z.B. Allotheridion, Parasteatoda und andere) einfitihrte. Regelgemadss ist hierbei der alte Name Theridion Waickenaer, 1805 (s. str.) auf diejenige Gruppe zu beziehen, bei der die genotypische Art (Araneus redimitus Clerck, 1757) verblieben ist. Archer ist auch durchaus korrekt in diesem Sinne verfahren (1950 : 23). (3) Die Gattung Theridion Walckenaer im strengen Sinn enthalt hierdurch nur noch wenige Arten. Dies ist jedoch nach unserer Ansicht kein Grund, dem Namen durch Veranderung des Genotypus einen anderen Sinn zu geben und ihn so fiir den bisherigen “‘Theridion ”’- Komplex zu erhalten, dessen Aufteilung im Gange ist. Wir erinnern in diesem Zusammenhang an 4hnliche Verhdltnisse bei Gattungs- namen wie Helix oder Mus. 5 For a later communication received from this specialist see paragraph 51 of the present Opinion. 58 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (4) Enoplognatha Pavesi 1880a ist nach Archer (1950 : 23) jiingeres, subjektives Synonym von Theridion (s. str.). Wir halten den Namen Enoplognatha bei weitem nicht fiir so wichtig und bekannt, als dass zu seiner Erhaltung eine Suspension der Regeln gerechtfertigt ware. POSTSCRIPT (dated 31st January 1957) : Abschliessend kahn ich Ihnen noch mitteilen, dass Herr Prof. Dr. C. Fr. Roewer (Bremen) mich ermiachtigt, hier Ihnen mitzuteilen, dass er meine Objections Wort fiir Wort unterstiitzt. Prof. Roewer ist Ihnen sicher als einer der fiihrenden Arachnologen bekannt. 11. Two minor proposals added in and two corrections noted on, the Voting Paper prepared in the present case: On 14th January 1957 the Secretary prepared the Voting Paper (paragraph 12 below) for submission to the Commission in the present case and, in doing so, added two notes, in the first of which (Note 5) he gave particulars of two minor additional proposals which it was desired to submit under the “‘ Completeness-of-Opinion ” Rule, while in the second (Note 6) he drew attention to two small corrections which required to be made in the application as published in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature. The notes so added were as follows :— 5. Two minor additional propesals : Attention is drawn to two minor omissions which it is now proposed should be made good :—_(1) Theridio Simon, 1864 (Invalid Emendation) should be placed on the Official Index ; (2) The Erroneous Subsequent Spelling THERIDIONIDAE Simon, 1881, should be placed on the Official Index. 6. Two Minor Corrections : The specific name of the type species of Enoplognatha Pavesi was published as mandibulare and not as mandi- bularis. The date “‘ 1840” given for this name in the Bulletin is a misprint for “‘ 1846’. 12. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(57)10 : On 22nd January 1957 a Voting Paper (V.P.(57)10) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, ** the proposal relating to the generic name Theridion Walckenaer, 1805 (Class Arachnida), as set out in points (1) to (7) in paragraph 8 on pages 19 and 30 in Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature [i.e. in the paragraph numbered as above in the OPINION 517 59 paper reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion] subject (a) to the two minor additions specified in Note 5, and (b) to the two minor corrections specified in Note 6” [the text of both of which has been given in paragraph 11 of the present Opinion]. 13. Receipt of comments from eleven specialists during the fortnight immediately following the issue of Voting Paper V.P.(57)10 : In the fortnight immediately following the issue of Voting Paper V.P.(57)10 comments on this case were received from eleven specialists (United Kingdom, four ; U.S.A., two; Austria, Denmark, Finland, France, Norway, one each). Of these all except one supported the action recommended by the applicant. The communications so received are reproduced in the immediately following paragraphs. 14. Support for Dr. Levi’s application received from Clarence J. Goodnight (Purdue University, Lafayette, Indiana, U.S.A.) : On 20th January 1957 Dr. Clarence J. Goodnight (Purdue University, Lafayette, Indiana, U.S.A.)® addressed the following letter to the Office of the Commission in support of Dr. Levi’s application (Goodnight, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 93) :— I would like to support Dr. Levi’s proposal to preserve the accus- tomed usage of the generic names Theridion and Enoplognatha. I believe this would cause less confusion than to change them according to strict interpretations of the Law of Priority. 15. Support for Dr. Levi’s application received from T. H. Savory (London): On 21st January 1957 Mr. T. H. Savory (London) addressed the following note to the Office of the Commission in support of Dr. Levi’s application (Savory, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 93) :— This is to say that I support Dr. H. W. Levi’s petition to preserve the current use of Theridion and Enoplognatha. 6 For a later communication received from this specialist see paragraph 45 of the present Opinion. ; ? For a later communication received from this specialist see paragraph 62 of the present Opinion. 60 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 16. Support for Dr. Levi’s application received from Hans Tambs-Lyche (Norway) : On 22nd January Dr. Tambs-Lyche (Norway)® addressed the following letter to the Office of the Commission in support of Dr. Levi’s application (Tambs-Lyche, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 93) : I fully support the application to designate Theridion ornatum Hahn, 1831, as type species of the genus Theridion. There can, I think, be no doubt that the confusion arising from a normal application of the Régles would be a very serious one, and one that by no means ought to be avoided. As to the suppression of Thorell’s generic name Phyllonethis, I feel that it would be very inconvenient to change the name for a genus containing many species, but on the other hand it ought to be con- sidered that the two cases do not conform. There will in the Phyllonethis/Enoplognatha case be no question of transfer of a well- known name from one genus to another. I therefore doubt if reasons are strong enough for the suspension of the normal application of the Régles in that case. As to the Theridion/Theridium question, I support the usage of the original spelling Theridion, presuming that Dr. Levi is right in stating that the original spelling is to be considered valid under the Copenhagen Decisions. 17. Support for Dr. Levi’s application received from J. E. Hull (Durham, England): On 24th January 1957 Dr. J. E. Hull (Durham, England)® addressed the following note to the Office of the Commission in support of Dr. Levi’s application (Hull, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 93) :— With regard to the application concerning the status of the names Theridion and Enoplognatha, I wish to inform you that I am entirely in agreement with all the proposals. 8 For a later communication received from this specialist see paragraph 65 of the present Opinion. ® For a later communication received from this specialist see paragraph 49 of the present Opinion. OPINION 517 61 18. Support for Dr. Levi’s application received from Harald Nemenz (Vienna, Austria): On 25th January 1957 Dr. Harald Nemenz (Vienna, Austria)!° addressed the following note to the Office of the Commission in support of Dr. Levi’s application (Nemenz, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 93) :— I readily support Dr. Levi’s petition to preserve the current usage of the generic name Theridion and Enoplognatha. Further, I would prefer the spelling Theridion although Theridium may be more correct as the former is much more often used and appears also in the recent Katalog by Roewer, the most important compilation of the last years. 19. Support for Dr. Levi’s application received from Jens Braendegard (Copenhagen, Denmark): On 28th January 1957 Dr. Jens Braendegard (Copenhagen, Denmark)" addressed the following note to the Office of the Commission in support of Dr. Levi’s application (Braendegard, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 94) :— I would appreciate the spelling Theridion because it is the most used spelling, and I support the petition to preserve the current usage of the generic names Theridion and Enoplognatha proposed by Dr. Herbert Levi. 20. Support for Dr. Levi’s application received from Walter Hackman (Museum Zoologicum Universitatis, Helsinki) : On 28th January 1957 Dr. Walter Hackman (Museum Zoologicum Universitatis, Helsinki)! addressed the following letter to the Office of the Commission in support of Dr. Levi’s application. (Hackman, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 94) :— Professor Herbert Levi has asked me my opinion regarding his petition for the use of the generic names Theridion and Enoplognatha. 10 For a later communication received from this specialist see paragraph 58 of the present Opinion. 11 For a later communication received from this specialist see paragraph 34 of the present Opinion. 12 For a later communication received from this specialist see paragraph 46 of the present Opinion. 62 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS I fully support his petition and I am of the opinion that the genus name Theridion should be used in the old wider sense and not for the Enoplognatha species, in spite of the fact that the type species for Theridion must be changed. I prefer the spelling Theridion. The generic name Enoplognatha should be preserved and Theridion ovatum and some allied species transferred to this genus. 21. Support for Dr. Levi’s application received from A. M. Chickering, Albion College, Albion, Michigan, U.S.A.): On 28th January 1957 Dr. A. M. Chickering (Albion College, Albion, Michigan, U.S.A.) addressed the following note to the Office of the Commission in support of Dr. Levi’s application (Chickering, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 94) :— This communication is written in support of Dr. Herbert W. Levi’s petition to preserve the current usage of the generic names Theridion . Walckenaer, 1805, and Enoplognatha Pavesi, 1880. Moreover, it would seem to the writer that it would be better to retain the original spelling even though that is not etymologically as desirable as Theridium. 22. Support for Dr. Levi’s application received from G. H. Locket (Harrow, Middlesex) and A. F. Millidge (Coulsdon, Surrey) : On Ist February 1957 Mr. G. H. Locket (Harrow, Middlesex)? addressed on behalf of himself and on behalf of Dr. A. F. Millidge (Coulsdon, Surrey)" the following note to the Office of the Commission in support of Dr. Levi’s application (Locket & Millidge, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 94) :— We support the petition to preserve the correct usage of the generic names Theridion and Enoplognatha as set out in the paper by Dr. H. W. Levi and we support the recommendations under paragraph 8 on p. 29 of this paper. We are opposed to the suggestion that the spelling Theridion be changed to Theridium. 23. Objections to two aspects of the present case received from Pierre Bonnet (Université de Toulouse, France) : On 28th January 1957 Professor Pierre Bonnet (Université de Toulouse, France) 18 For a later communication received from this specialist see paragraph 54 of the present Opinion. 14 For a later communication received from this specialist see paragraph 57 of the present Opinion. OPINION 517 63 addressed the following letter to the Office of the Commission in which he expressed his objections to two aspects of the present case (Bonnet, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 96—97) :— Accord sur le maintien des genres ‘‘ Theridium ’’ et ‘‘ Enoplognatha ”’ En ce qui concerne le fond du probleme, le maintien des genres Theridium et Enoplognatha, je suis entiérement de l’avis de H. W. Levi, dans le sens méme ow ill’a expliqué. D2/ailleurs mon collégue américain m’avout écrit a ce sujet-la, en juillet 1955 et je lui avais donné mon accord pour qu il présente a la Commission intern. de Nomenclature sa proposition en vue du maintien de ces deux genres. Mais il a introduit deux faits nouveaux contre lesquels je m’éléve avec la plus grande énergie. Le nouveau type du genre ‘‘ Theridium ”’ est ‘‘ pictum ”’ (1) Nom de l’espéce-type du genre Theridium. Nous avions convenu avec Mr. Levi que cette espéce-type serait Theridium pictum, nommé pour la lére fois par Walckenaer en 1802 sous le nom d’Aranea picta. Des 1805, Walckenaer lui-méme a placé son Aranea picta dans le genre Theridium et a nommeé Theridion pictum en 1805, 1841 et 1847. Parla suite, cette espéce a été désignée, jusqu’en 1939, sous ce terme, 211 fois : 103 Theridion pictum, 95 Theridium pictum, 13 Steatoda picta avec un seul synonyme, Theridion ornatum Hahn, 1831, qui nest cité qu’une seule fois par cet auteur. Il est exact quil y a une autre Aranea picta décrite en 1789 par Razoumowsky, qui, elle ausi, n’a jamais été nommeée qu’une seule fois, lors de sa description par son auteur et que Thorell, en 1873, p. 545, a mis en synonymie d’Epeira patagiata (= Araneus ocellatus (P.)). Si de 1802 a 1805, il y a en homonymie entre ces deux Aranea picta, nul ne s’en est apercu, il n’y a jamais en de confusion entre les deux espéces et on peut dire que, pratiquement, cette homonymie n’a jamais existé. Aussi, je trouve absurde (je dis bien absurde) que l’on vienne aujourd@’hui changer le nom de l’espéce Theridium pictum (nommeé 211 fois dans ce terme spécifique) sous le prétexte de cette homonymie 64 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS rétrospective, et remplacer ce nom bien connu, par un terme qui n’a jamais été employé jusqu’ici. Faire cela n’a aucune utilité, ne présente que des inconvénients, et ce n’est véritablement pas sérieux ! J'ai traité de cette question de l’homonymie rétrospective dans introduction de *‘ Bibliographia Araneorum ’’, p. 19, dont je vous al envoyé un separatum. I] faudra au prochain Congrés rédiger une régle dans ce sens, pour s’opposer a ce genre de changement et sans que l’on ait chaque fois 4 soumettre 4 la Commission de Nomenclature, les nombreux cas qui peuvent se présenter, comme celui-ci. Je vous ferai d’ailleurs cette proposition dans quelque temps. En conséquence, je m’oppose au changement de Theridium pictum en Theridium ornatum et je maintiens que le nouveau type du genre Theridium est pictum (et non ornatum). Il faut écrire ‘* Theridium ”’ (2) Graphie du nom de genre Theridium. Javais mis en garde Mr. Herbert W. Levi contre la graphie Theridion ; je regrette qu’il n’en ait pas tenu compte et qu'il n’ait pas signalé dans son article mon opposition a cette graphie et les raisons que je lui donnais. En effet, si Theridion a pour lui d’étre la graphie originelle (Walckenaer, 1805), cette graphie est contraire au principe de latinisa- tion admis par les Régles intern. de Nomenclature (Appendice, para- graphe F) et n’oublions pas que les noms scientifiques des animaux sont des noms latins ou latinisés (Article 3). La disinence ion doit donc se latiniser en ium. I] s’agit 1a dailleurs dune mesure générale ; en aranéologie, de la méme fagon que nous écrivons Zodarium, Chieracanthium, Myrmecium, etc., nous devons écrire aussi Theridium. Il n’est pas possible, en Nomenclature d’ad- mettre deux poids et deux mesures ! Il vaut remarquer aussi que la désinence latine on (qui peut aussi exister : Neon, Sason, Saperdon) est du genre masculin. Quand un ‘genre est du neutre (comme Theridium, Zodarium, etc.) il doit obliga- toirement se terminer par um. D/ailleurs, a Pheure actuelle, contrairement a4 ce qui dit H. W. Levi, il y a plus d’auteurs qui écrivent Theridium que Theridion. Si, jusqu’a nos jours, les auteurs de langue anglaise ou francaise ont surtout graphié Theridion, tous les auteurs de l’école allemande ont employé OPINION 517 65 Theridium (Scandinavie, Europe centrale, Italie, Balkans, Russie, et cela malgré Vinfluence considérable de notre grand Simon). Et lorsquun auteur comme Thorell, qui était un savant helleniste et latiniste, a décidé que la graphie correcte était Theridium, on ne doit plus aller contre sa décision, 4 moins de donner une explication grammaticale pour démontrer qu'il s’est trompé. Non, Theridion présente une faute de translittération et doit étre changé en Theridium, suivant le libellé de V’article 19 qui prévoit que ““ Porthographe originelle d’un nom doit étre rectifiée s’il présente une faute de transcription, d’orthographe ou d’impression ”’. 24. Review of the present case by the Secretary on 6th February 1957 and consequent withdrawal of Voting Paper V.P.(57)10 relating thereto in order to permit of a further examination of the issues involved: On 6th February 1957 the present case was reviewed by the Secretary in the light of the comments which had been received since the issue a fortnight earlier of Voting Paper V.P.(57)10 (paragraphs 14—23 above) and, in particular, the twofold objection raised by Professor Bonnet (paragraph 23 above), each part of which, if it were to be met, would involve the use by the Commission of its Plenary Powers. The conclusion reached by Mr. Hemming was that, despite the late receipt of Professor Bonnet’s objections—for which Professor Bonnet expressed regret—the issues which he thus raised were such that they required to be given consideration by the Commission before taking a decision on the application submitted by Dr. Levi. Accordingly, as a first step, Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, on the date specified above executed a Minute directing the withdrawal of the Voting Paper referred to above in order to permit of the consideration of the issues newly raised by Professor Bonnet. 25. Arrangements made by the Secretary to minimise the delay resulting from the withdrawal of Voting Paper V.P.(57)10 : Simultaneously with the withdrawal of Voting Paper V.P.(57)10 consideration was given by the Secretary as to the action to be taken to minimise the delay resulting from the postponement of a decision by the Commission in this case. The conclusion reached by the Secretary was that the best course would be to arrange for the publication of Professor Bonnet’s communication at the earliest possible moment and for the publication therewith of a formal Public Notice of the possible use of the Plenary Powers in relation to the two supplementary questions raised by Professor 66 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Bonnet. Mr. Hemming at once prepared a brief note on which to base the required Public Notices and that note, with Professor Bonnet’s communication, was thereupon sent to the printer with a request that it should be given all possible priority. The two documents were published on 29th March 1957 in Double- Part 2/3 of Volume 13 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature. The communication submitted by Professor Bonnet has been reproduced in paragraph 23 above ; that by Mr. Hemming was as follows (Hemming, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 98) :— Use of the Commission’s Plenary Powers involved in the counter- proposals on two points involved in Dr. Herbert W. Levi’s application regarding the generic name ‘‘ Theridion ’’ Walckenaer, 1805 (Class Arachnida) submitted by Professor Pierre Bonnet By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. (Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature) In the letter dated 28th January 1957, reproduced on pages 96 to 97 of the present Part of the Bulletin, Professor Pierre Bonnet (Université de Toulouse), while supporting the general purpose of the application relating to the generic name Theridion Walckenaer, 1805 (Class Arachnida) submitted by Dr. Herbert W. Levi (University of Wisconsin) (1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl.12 : 27—30), puts forward counter-proposals on the two following points as to which he advocates :— (a) The acceptance of the emendation Theridium in place of the Original Spelling Theridion Walckenaer, 1805 ; (b) The acceptance, as the specific name for the species recommended by Dr. Levi to be designated as the type species of the genus Theridion Walckenaer, 1805, of the specific name picta Walckenaer, 1802, as published in the combination Aranea picta, notwithstanding the fact that that name is a junior homonym of the specific name picta Razoumowsky, 1789, as published in the combination Aranea picta. 2. Attention is here drawn to the fact that the acceptance by the International Commission of either of the foregoing proposals would involve the use of its Plenary Powers. Accordingly, Public Notice of the possible use of the above Powers for the foregoing purposes is being given forthwith in the prescribed manner. The Notice so required to be given in the present serial will be found on page 34 of the present part. OPINION 517 67 26. Issue of Public Notices regarding the possible use of the Plenary Powers in respect of the supplementary matters raised by Professor Bonnet : 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 respect of the supplementary matters raised by Professor Pierre Bonnet in his communication dated 28th January 1957 (that is, (a) the possible validation of the emendation to Theridium of Theridion Walckenaer, 1805, and (b) the possible validation of the specific name picta Walckenaer, 1802, as published in the combination Aranea picta) was given on 29th March 1957 (a) in Double-Part 2/3 of Volume 13 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part containing Professor Bonnet’s communication and Mr. Hemming’s note on the scope of the action under the Plenary Powers thereby involved) and (b) to the other prescribed serial publications. In addition such ‘Notice was given to four general zoological serial publications. 27. Submission to the Commission by the Secretary on 11th February 1957 of a Report on the decision to withdraw Voting Paper V.P.(57)10 and on the action consequential thereon subsequently taken : On 6th February 1957 the Secretary prepared a Report on the decision that he had taken to withdraw Voting Paper V.P.(57)10 and on the action consequential thereon which he had already taken or which he had set in motion. The Report so prepared was submitted to the Commission on 11th February 1957. It was as follows :— Withdrawal of Voting Paper V.P.(57)10 relating to the generic name ‘¢ Theridion ’? Walckenaer, 1805 (Class Arachnida) in order to permit of the examination of a new aspect of the problem just come to light By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. (Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature) I have to report that within the last few days I have received a communication from Professor Pierre Bonnet (Université de T oulouse) in regard to the application relating to the generic name Theridion 68 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Walckenaer, 1805 (Class Arachnida) (Levi, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 27—30) which has led me to the view that it is necessary temporarily to withdraw Voting Paper V.P.(57)10 in regard to the above case issued on 22nd January last. The circumstances which have led me to this conclusion are set out below. 2. Professor Bonnet raises two points. The first (which is con- cerned with the relative merits of the Original Spelling Theridion and the emendation Theridium) is expressly raised in the application and, as regards this, it appears to me that the material available is sufficient to enable the Commission to reach an appropriate decision. Professor Bonnet’s second point is concerned with the specific name to be accepted for the type species of the genus Theridion Walckenaer. In this connection it will be recalled that the principal point made by Dr. Levi in his application was that the acceptance as the type species of this genus of the species which is the type species under the Régles would lead to the most serious confusion and that it was desirable therefore that the Commission should use its Plenary Powers to designate as the type species a species in harmony with accustomed usage. Dr. Levi pointed out that the species most suitable for such designation is Aranea picta Walckenaer, 1802, but that this name for the species in question was not available, being invalid as a junior homonym of Aranea picta Razoumowsky, 1789. Dr. Levi recommended therefore that the next available name, Theridion ornatum Hahn, 1831, should be accepted and that that nominal species should be designated as the type species of Theridion. \n the letter now received Professor Bonnet, while fully supporting the general purpose of Dr. Levi’s application, dissents strongly from the suggestion that the name ornatum Hahn should be substituted for the name picta Walckenaer and recommends that the latter name should be validated by the Commission under its Plenary Powers. Professor Bonnet supports this view by the following arguments :—(i) The name Aranea picta Razoumowsky, 1789, has been used only once since it was first published 170 years ago and no inconvenience of any kind would result from the suppression of this name under the Plenary Powers ; (ii) that on the other hand the name Aranea picta Walckenaer, 1802, was used continuously up to the year 1939 and has appeared in the literature no less than 211 times. 3. Notwithstanding its late receipt, which Professor Bonnet explains was due to preoccupation with seeing his book through the press and for which he expresses regret, the point discussed in paragraph 2 above appears to me to justify the postponement of a decision on this case in order to permit of the examination of the novel issue so raised. I accordingly propose (a) immediately to publish Professor Bonnet’s communication in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature and (b) to issue a questionnaire to the specialists who have commented on this application and to any others who may be likely to. be interested OPINION 517 69 asking (i) for information as to the relative usage of the specific names picta Walckenaer and ornatum Hahn since 1939 and (ii) for their views on the advisability of validating the name picta Walckenaer by suppressing the earlier homonym picta Razoumowsky. I propose at the same time to seek the views of the specialists concerned on the other question raised by Professor Bonnet, namely, the relative acceptability of the spellings Theridion and Theridium for the generic name here in question. 4. Both the proposals now submitted by Professor Bonnet would require for their acceptance the use by the Commission of its Plenary Powers. For this purpose the issue of Public Notices in the prescribed manner will be necessary and a further Waiting Period of six months will be involved. In order that this six-month period may start to run as soon as possible—thereby minimising the further delay involved in the consideration of the present case—I propose to issue the pre- scribed Public Notices concurrently with the publication of Professor Bonnet’s communication in the Bulletin. 28. Consultation with specialists on the issues raised by Professor Bonnet : Having withdrawn Voting Paper V.P.(57)10 for the purpose of permitting an examination of the two issues raised by Professor Bonnet in his communication of 28th January 1957, Mr. Hemming drew up a questionnaire to specialists asking them to furnish the Commission with their views on each of the above issues and in addition to advise generally on the proposal originally submitted in this case by Dr. Levi. This Questionnaire, which was prepared on 6th February 1957, was issued on 22nd February 1957. It was as follows :— Two problems relating to the generic name ‘‘ Theridion ”’ Walckenaer, 1805 (Class Arachnida) A Request to Specialists for Advice Note by the Secretary The advice of interested specialists is sought both generally upon the issues involved in connection with an application now before the International Commission in regard to the generic name Theridion Walckenaer, 1805 (Class Arachnida) and in particular in regard to two aspects of the problem involved in this case. 70 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS I. Name to be accepted for the type species of ** Theridion ’’ Walckenaer 2. The application in the present case was submitted to the Inter- national Commission by Dr. Herbert W. Levi (University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, U.S.A.) and was published in 1956 (Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 27—-30). The principal point in this application was concerned with the species to be accepted as the type species of the genus Theridion Walckenaer. Dr. Levi explained that the most serious confusion would ensue if the species which is in fact the type species of this genus under the Régles were to be accepted as such and he accordingly recommended that the Commission should use its Plenary Powers to designate as the type species of this genus a species in harmony with long-established and current usage. Dr. Levi stated that the most suitable species for this purpose was the nominal species Aranea picta Walckenaer, 1802. Unfortunately, however, that name was invalid as it was a junior homonym of the earlier name Aranea picta Razoumowsky, 1789. Dr. Levi then explained that the oldest available name for the taxon which Walckenaer had called Aranea picta in 1802 was Theridion ornatum Hahn, 1831. He accordingly recommended that the above taxon under the name Theridion ornatum Hahn should be designated by the Commission under its Plenary Powers to be the type species of the genus Theridion Walckenaer. 3. Professor Pierre Bonnet (Université de Toulouse) has now notified the Office of the Commission that, while he is in full agreement with Dr. Levi as to the need for providing a valid basis for the current use of the generic name Theridion, he is strongly opposed to the substitution of the name Theridion ornatum Hahn for the name Aranea picta Walckenaer. On this subject Professor Bonnet makes the following points :— (a) The specific name picta Razoumowsky, 1789, as published in the combination Aranea picta, is not in use as the name for any species. He adds that it was listed by Thorell (1893 : 545) as a junior synonym of Epeira patagiata (=Aranea ocellata Linnaeus, 1758) (b) The name Aranea picta Razoumowsky has since its publication in 1789 been used on one occasion only, whereas the name Aranea picta Walckenaer, 1802, was used continuously from its publication in 1802 up to 1939, occurring in the literature of that period no less than 211 times. 4. Professor Bonnett concludes therefore that not the slightest inconvenience would be occasioned if the Commission were to suppress the specific name picta Razoumowsky, 1789. On the contrary, there OPINION 517 aa are, in his opinion, very strong reasons in favour of such action by the Commission, for by so doing, the Commission would render available for the species here in question the long-established and well- known specific name picta Walckenaer, 1802. 5. On receiving Professor Bonnet’s proposal on the above matter I immediately consulted Professor Levi who has now replied (letter dated 14th February 1957) as follows :— I favor Professor Bonnet’s idea to include a suppression of Aranea picta Razoumowsky in order to preserve the name Aranea picta Walckenaer, 1805 (=Theridion picta (Walckenaer)). Theridion picta (Walckenaer) has been used much more commonly than T. ornatum Hahn. Ii. The emendation ‘‘ Theridium ’’ versus the original spelling ‘** Theridion ’’ Walckenaer, 1805 6. A secondary question involved in the present case is whether the Original Spelling Theridion as used by Walckenaer in 1802 should be emended to the spelling Theridium. This subject was discussed by Dr. Leviin his application. After pointing out that the emendation Theridium had been introduced by Leach in 1824, Dr. Levi described as follows (paragraph 6) the position as regards usage in this matter : *““In North America the spelling Theridium was used by the majority of authors during the nineteenth century, although Hentz, who described many species in the fifties, used Theridion. Since 1912 the spelling Theridion has been consistently used by all authors both in the United States and in South America. In Germany Wiehle in 1937 used the spelling Theridium but in his more recent papers he has used Theridion. Tullgren used the spelling Theridium in comments on Swedish Theridiids in the 1940’s. This spelling is also used by Bonnet (1955, Bibl. Aran., vol. 2). The great French arachnologist Simon used Theridion seventy years ago. Roewer has always used this spelling and has employed it in his recent Katalog. The same spelling has been used also by Berland and by Locket & Millidge in 1953 in vol. 2 of their British Spiders. To sum up, the spelling Theridium is certainly not in general use, although individual authors have used this spelling in recent years. Under a decision taken by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology at Copenhagen, 1953 (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 43, Decision 71) the spelling Theridion is, it should be noted, a Valid Original Spelling and is therefore not subject to emendation.”’ In the concluding paragraph of his application Dr. Levi recommended that this generic name in the Original Spelling Theridion should be placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology and that the Invalid Emendation Theridium Leach, 1824, should be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology. 12 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 7. Professor Bonnet, however, strongly advocates the acceptance of the emendation Theridium and the rejection of the original spelling Theridion as being incorrectly formed. On the question of usage, Professor Bonnet writes as follows :—‘‘ D’ailleurs, a ’heure actuelle, contrairement a ce que dit H. W. Levi, il y a plus d’auteurs qui écrivent Theridium que Theridion. Si, jusqu’ 4 nos jours, les auteurs de langue anglaise ou francgaise ont surtout graphié Theridion, tous les auteurs de l’école allemande ont employé Theridium (Scandinavie, Europe centrale, Italie, Balkans, Russie, et cela malgré l’influence considérable de notre grand Simon). Et lorsqu’un auteur comme Thorell, qui était un savant helleniste et latiniste, a décidé que la graphie correcte était Theridium, on ne doit plus aller contre sa décision, 4 moins de donner une explication grammaticale pour démontrer qu’il s’est trompé. Non, Theridion présente une faute de translittération et doit étre changé en Theridium, suivant le libellé de Particle 19 qui prévoit que ** Porthographe originelle d’un nom doit étre rectifiée s’il présente une 99°99 faute de transcription, d’orthographe ou d’impression ”’. Ili. The position under the ‘‘ Régles ”’ 8. It will be convenient at this point to take note what is the position under the Régles in regard to the two questions discussed above, this being a necessary preliminary to the consideration of the action which would be needed to give effect to the counter-proposals sub- mitted by Professor Bonnet. The position in regard to this matter may be summarised as follows :— (i) Name for the species proposed in Dr. Levi’s application to be designated under the Plenary Powers to be the type species of the genus ‘* Theridion ’’ Walckenaer, 1805 : In order to secure a valid basis for the use, as advocated by Professor Bonnet, and as supported by Professor Levi, of the specific name picta Walckenaer, 1802, as published in the combination Aranea picta, it would be necessary for the Commission to use its Plenary Powers to suppress for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy the specific name picta Razoumowsky, 1789, as published in the same combination, for that name at present invalidates the same name as published by Walckenaer, 1802. OPINION 517 73 (ii) The relative status of the Original Spelling ‘‘ Theridion ’’ and the Emendation ‘‘ Theridium ”’ : In considering questions relating to the emendation of names it is necessary to put aside Article 19 as it existed prior to the Copenhagen Congress of 1953 and to consider only the revised provisions then substituted by that Congress (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl.: 43—44, Decision 71). Under those provisions an Original Spelling is to be accepted as a Valid Original Spelling, unless there is “‘ clear evidence in the original publication that this spelling was based on an inadvertent error, such as a Japsus or a copyist’s or printer’s error’’. Inthe present case there was nothing in Walckenaer’s work which could be held to show that the spelling Theridion was an inadvertent error. Accordingly, under the Copenhagen provision quoted above the spelling Theridion as used by Walckenaer is a Valid Original Spelling. If therefore the Commission were to decide in favour of the emendation Theridium (as recommended by Professor Bonnet), it would be necessary for it, when dealing with the present case, to use its Plenary Powers to validate that Emendation as against the Original Spelling Theridion. IV. The issues involved 9. It will be seen from the particulars given in the preceding para- graph that in each case the object sought by Professor Bonnet is one which would involve the use by the Commission of its Plenary Powers. It follows therefore that the decision to be taken on these matters will necessarily turn mainly upon the question of usage and the wishes expressed by specialists in the group in question. It is for the purpose of eliciting information that the present paper has been prepared for circulation to specialists for opinion and advice. (The present paper is being submitted to all specialists who have so far expressed views on this case in communications addressed to the Office of the Com- mission and in addition also to other specialists in the group who, it is thought, might be interested. It is for this latter reason that in the Questionnaire set out in the immediately following paragraph a question (Question (3)) has been added for the purpose of obtaining an expression of opinion on the merits of the general purpose of the proposal submitted by Dr. Levi without prejudice to whatever view may be held on the two subordinate, though important, questions with which the Questionnaire is primarily concerned.) T4 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS V. Questions on which the advice of specialists is now sought 10. A Request to Specialists for advice : In the light of the particulars given in the preceding paragraphs, specialists are. invited to furnish this Office for the information of the Commission with answers to the following questions :— Question (1) (question of the validation of the specific name ‘‘ picta ”’ (‘‘Aranea ’?) Walckenaer, 1802) : (a) Are you in favour of the Commission using its Plenary Powers to validate the specific name picta Walckenaer, 1802, as published in the combination Aranea picta (by suppressing the earlier homonym picta Razoumowsky, 1789, as published in the same combination) ? OR (b) Are you in favour of the permanent rejection of the specific name picta Walckenaer, 1802 (Aranea) (as will be necessary in the absence of action by the Commission under (a) above) and therefore of the acceptance for the species concerned of the specific name ornatum Hahn, 1831, as published in the combination Theridion ornatum ? Question (2) (question of the relative acceptability of the Original Spelling ‘‘ Theridion ’’ Walckenaer, 1805, and of the Emenda- tion ‘* Theridium ’’ Leach, 1824) : (a) Are you in favour of the use by the Commission of its Plenary Powers to validate the emendation to Theridium of the generic name Theridion Walckenaer, 1805 ? OR (b) Are you in favour of the acceptance of the Original Spelling Theridion for the generic name published with this spelling by Walckenaer in 1805 ? OPINION 517 7) Question (3) (general character of the proposals submitted by Dr. Herbert W. Levi in the present case) : Apart from the special points dealt with in Questions (1) and (2) above, are you :— (a) in favour of the general objects sought in the application submitted by Dr. Herbert W. Levi, OR (b) opposed to those objects, being of the opinion that the present is a case where the Rules should be strictly applied in the usual manner ? 11. It is hoped that specialists will furnish answers to the above questions as soon as possible. These should be addressed to the Secretary to the Commission (address : 28 Park Village East, Regent’s Park, London, N.W.1, England). 29. Specialists to whom the Questionnaire of 6th February was issued : In the first instance the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 was issued to all those specialists who up to that date had addressed communications to the Office of the Commission in regard to the present case. Later, the names of other specialists who might be interested in the issues raised by Professor Bonnet were ascertained and copies of the Questionnaire were issued to them also. Ultimately, the number of specialists to whom the Questionnaire was sent amounted to forty-six (46). The specialists so consulted were the following :— Alphabetical list of the specialists to whom the Questionnaire regarding the ‘* Theridion ’? case was issued in February 1957 or whose views thereon were otherwise ascertained Allan F. Archer (Union University, Jackson, Tennessee, U.S.A.) Robert D. Barnes (Gettysburg College, Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.) A. de Barros Machado (Laboratorio de Biologia, Dundo, Angola) L. Berland (Muséum National d’ Histoire Naturelle, Paris) 76 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS A. D. Blest (University College, London) Pierre Bonnet (Université de Toulouse, France) Jens Braendegard (Copenhagen, Denmark) Rudolf Braun (Johannes Gutenberg-Universitat, Mainz, Germany) W. S. Bristowe (Tunbridge Wells, England) E. Browning (British Museum (Natural History), London) R. V. Chamberlain (University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah, U.S.A.) A. M. Chickering (Albion College, Albion, Michigan, U.S.A.) D. J. Clark (British Museum (Natural History), London) J. L. Cloudsley-Thompson (King’s College, University of London) Jacques Denis (Correspondent du Muséum National d’ Histoire Naturelle, Paris) E. Duffey (The Nature Conservancy, Norwich, Norfolk) G. Owen Evans (British Museum (Natural History), London) Louis Fage (Muséum National d’ Histoire Naturelle, Paris) R. R. Forster (Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College, Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A.) Mrs. Harriet E. Frizzell (Rolla, Missouri, U.S.A.) Willis J. Gertsch (The American Museum of Natural History, New York, U.S.A.) Clarence J. Goodnight (Purdue University, Lafayette, Indiana, U.S.A.) Walter Hackman (Museum Zoologicum Universitatis, Helsingfors, Finland) Erich M. Hering (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) A. Holm (Zoologiska Institutionen, Uppsala, Sweden) H. Homann (Gottingen, Germany) J. E. Hull (Rowlands Gill, Co. Durham, England) A. Kaestner (Humboldt- Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) B. J. Kaston (Teachers College of Connecticut, New Britain, Connecticut, U.S.A.) Otto Kraus (Forschungsinstitut und Naturmuseum Senckenberg, Frank- furt a.M., Germany) R. F. Lawrence (Natal Museum, Pietermaritzburg, Union of S. Africa) OPINION 517 77 Herbert W. Levi (The University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, U.S.A.) G. H. Locket (Harrow School, Harrow, England) B. J. Marples (University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand) F, Miller (Vysoka Skola Zemendelska, Brno, Czechoslovakia) A. F. Millidge (Coulsdon, Surrey, England) Harald Nemenz (Zoologisches Institut der Universitdt, Vienna, Austria) Edwin Norgaard (Risskov, Denmark) C. Fr. Roewer (Ubersee-Museums, Bremen, Germany) Vincent D. Roth (Arizona Experimental Station, Yuma, Arizona, U.S.A.) T. H. Savory (London, England) Ginter E. W. Schmidt (Forschungsstation fiir Tierernéhrung Bosingfled- Waldfrieden (Lippe), Germany) R. H. N. Smithers (The National Museums of Southern Rhodesia, Bulawayo, Southern Rhodesia) Hans Tambs-Lyche (Espegrend, Norway) A. Tullgren (Experimentalfaltet, Sweden) Hermann Wiehle (Dessau, Germany) 30. Replies received to the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 : Replies to the Questionnaire were received from thirty-five (35) specialists and in addition three (3) other specialists (including Professor Bonnet) had previously furnished statements of their views on the questions raised in the Questionnaire. Altogether, therefore, the views of thirty-eight (38) out of the forty-six (46) specialists to whom the Questionnaire was issued were obtained. In the greater number of cases the specialists who replied gave answers to each of the three questions submitted, but in some cases views were expressed only on some of those questions. The views on these issues expressed prior to the issue of the Questionnaire by Dr. A. M. Chickering and Professor Pierre Bonnet have already been reproduced in paragraphs 21 and 23 of the present Opinion. The remaining statements, arranged alphabetically by reference to the names of the specialists concerned, are reproduced in the immediately following paragraphs (paragraphs 31-66). 78 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 31. Comment on certain aspects of the present application submitted by D. A. Kaestner (Direktor, Zoologisches Museum, Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin) On 30th January 1957 Professor D. A. Kaestner (Direktor, Zoologisches Museum, Humboldt- Universitdt zu Berlin) addressed the following letter to the Office of the Commission commenting on certain aspects of the proposal submitted in the present case :— Hiermit gestatte ich mir, Ihnen mitzuteilen, dass ich es fiir ausser- ordentlich erwiinscht halte, dass die Genus-Namen Theridium und Enoplognatha in die Official List of Generic Names in Zoology (Araneae) aufgenommen werden. Die Griinde dafiir sind im Bulletin of Zoo- logical Nomenclature aufgefiihrt. Die Schreibung Theridium halte ich fiir besser als Theridion. 32. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from Allan F. Archer (Union University, Jackson, Tennessee, U.S.A.) : On 2nd March 1957 there was received in the Office of the Commission a marked copy of the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 from Dr. Allan F. Archer (Union University, Jackson, Tennessee, U.S.A.)!° indicating that he favoured course (b) (rejection of picta Walckenaer) as regards Question (1) and course (b) (acceptance of Original Spelling Theridion) as regards Question (2). In answer to Question (3), Dr. Archer indicated that he was in favour of the general objects sought in Dr. Levi’s application. 33. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from Robert D. Barnes (Biology Department, Gettysburg College, Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.) : On 4th March 1957 there was received in the Office of the Commission the following letter from Dr. Robert D. Barnes (Biology Department, Gettysburg College, Gettysburg, Pennsylvania, U.S.A.) in answer to the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 :— I am in favour of the Commission using its Plenary Powers to validate the specific name picta Walckenaer, 1802. (Question 1 (a).) 15 For an earlier communication received from this specialist see paragraph 9 of the present Opinion. OPINION 517 719 I am in favour of the acceptance of the Original Spelling Theridion for the generic name published with this spelling by Walckenaer in 1805. (Question 2 (b).) I am in favour of the general objects sought in the application sub- mitted by Dr. Herbert Levi. (Question 3(a).) 34. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from Jens Braendegard (Copenhagen, Denmark) : On 27th March 1957 Dr. Jens Braendegard (Copenhagen, Denmark)'® returned to the Office of the Commission a marked copy of the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 indicating that he favoured course (a) (acceptance of picta Walckenaer) as regards Question (1) and course (b) (acceptance of Original Spelling Theridion) as regards Question (2). In answer to Question (3), Dr. Braendegard indicated that he was in favour of the general objects sought in Dr. Levi’s application. 35. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from Rudolf Braun (Johannes Gutenberg-Universitat, Mainz, Germany) : On 15th May 1957 Dr. Rodolf Braun (Johannes Gutenberg Universitat, Mainz, Germany) addressed the following note to the Office of the Commission in answer to the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 :— Ich méchte mich dem Antrag von Dr. Levi anschliessen und fiir Beibehaltung von Theridion (nicht Theridium) Walckenaer, 1805, statt Enoplognatha Pavesi, 1880, pladieren. 36. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from W. S. Bristowe (Tunbridge Wells, England) : On 3rd March 1957 Dr. W. S. Bristowe (Tunbridge Wells, England) addressed the following letter to the Office of the Commission in answer to the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 :— My answers to the questions listed in your circular are as follows : Question (1) : (a) Yes ; (b) No. Question (2): (a) No; (b) Yes. Question (3): (a) Yes; (b) No. 16 For an earlier communication received from this specialist see paragraph 19 of the present Opinion. 380 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS As regards (2) I accept Theridion for the reasons stated by you in para. 8 (ii). If “‘ savants hellenistes et latinistes ’’ were to go through all the generic names, conflicts between original spellings and usage on the one hand and classical scholars’ verdicts on orthodoxy would multiply quite unnecessarily and to a tiresome extent. 37. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from D. J. Clark (British Museum (Natural History), London) : On 27th February 1957 Dr. D. J. Clark (British Museum (Natural History), London) addressed the following letter to the Office of the Commission in answer to the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 :— My answers to your questions are set out below : ‘Question (1) (question of the validation of the specific name picta Walckenaer, 1802): I am entirely in favour of the Commission using its Plenary Powers to validate the specific name picta Walckenaer 1802, and the suppression of the earlier homonym picta Razoumowsky, 1789. ‘Question (2) (question of the relative acceptability of the Original Spelling Theridion Walckenaer, 1805, and of the Emendation Theridium Leach, 1824) : I am in favour of the acceptance of the Original Spelling Theridion for the generic name published with this spelling by Walckenaer in 1805. ‘Question (3) (general character of the proposals submitted by Dr. Herbert W. Levi in the present case) : I am in favour of the general objects sought in the application submitted by Dr. Levi, and agree with him that undoubted confusion would ensue in future literature if the species name picta Walckenaer, 1802, were suppressed, and the little known name ornatum Hahn, 1831, substituted. On the question of the spelling Theridion. 1 believe that Professor Bonnet’s views, although interesting, are not of sufficient importance to justify substituting the spelling 7heridium for the long established and well known spelling Theridion. As Walckenaer’s original spelling Theridion is already considered valid, I believe this should be adhered to. OPINION 517 St 38. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from J. L. Cloudsley-Thompson (University of London, King’s College,, Department of Zoology): On 8th March 1957 Dr. J. L. Cloudsley-Thompson (University of London, King’s College, Department of Zoology) addressed the following note to the Office of the Commission in answer to the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 :— Thank you for your letter. I am in favour of the following :— 1(a) validating picta Walckenaer, 1802 ; 2(b) Original Spelling Theridion ; 3(a) Dr. Levi’s objects. 39. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from Jacques Denis (Correspondant, Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris): On 4th March 1957 Dr. Jacques Denis (Correspondant, Muséum National d’ Histoire Naturelle, Paris) addressed the following letter to the Office of the Commission in answer to the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 :— Please find hereafter my answers to the questions for which you seek my advice :— Question (1) : I am in favour of (a). Question (2) : I think it advisable to validate the emendation to Theridium of the generic name Theridion Walckenaer, Theridium being more in accordance with Latin terminations. Such a remark is valid for other genera with similar endings, such as. Zodarium, Megamyrmecium, etc. Question (3) : Concerning the proposals submitted by Dr. Herbert Levi, I agree with the suppression of the generic name Phyllonethis and with the preservation of the now current usage of the generic names Theridium and Enoplognatha ; if this is not done, great confusion will occur in nomenclature. 40. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from E. Duffey (The Nature Conservancy, Norwich, England): On 14th March 1957 Dr. E. Duffey (The Nature Conservancy, Norwich, $2 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS England) addressed the following letter to the Office of the Commission in answer to the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 :— I do not think it is necessary for me to go into any detail about the application submitted by Dr. Levi and I am noting my comments as follows :— Question (1): I am in favour of the Commission using its Plenary Powers to validate the specific name picta Walckenaer, 1802, as published in the combination Aranea picta. Question (2) : I am in favour of the acceptance of the original spelling Theridion for the generic name published with this spelling by Walckenaer in 1805. Question (3): I am in favour of the general objects sought in the application submitted by Dr. Levi. 41. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from Louis Fage (Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris) : On 19th February 1957 Dr. Levi (the applicant in the present case) transmitted to the Office of the Commission the following note from Professor Louis Fage (Muséum National d’ Histoire Naturelle, Paris) in answer to the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 :— Tous mes remerciements pour |’envoi le votre travail. . Tout a fait d’accord pour Theridion Walckenaer et non pour Theridium. 42. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from R. R. Forster (Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College, Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A.) : On 15th February 1957 Dr. R. R. Forster (Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College, Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A.) addressed the following note to the Office of the Commission in answer to the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 :— I favour the retention of the original spelling of Theridion Walckenaer. With reference to the suggestions made by Bonnet that Aranea picta Razoumowsky be suppressed in order to preserve the name Theridion picta (Walckenaer) I would express agreement. OPINION 517 83 43. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from Harriet Frizzell (Rolla, Missouri, U.S.A.) : On 28th February 1957 Mrs. Harriet Frizzell (Rolla, Missouri, U.S.A.)!" returned to the Office of the Commission a marked copy of the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 indicating that she favoured course (a) (validation of picta Walckenaer) as regards Question (1) and course (b) (acceptance of the Original Spelling Theridion) as regards Question (2). In answer to Question (3), Mrs. Frizzell indicated that she was in favour of the general objects sought in Dr. Levi’s application. 44. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from Willis J. Gertsch (American Museum of Natural History, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) : On 18th February 1957 Dr. Willis J. Gertsch (American Museum of Natural History, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) addressed the following letter to the Office of the Commission in answer to the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 :-— I would like to add my voice to those who are in favour of the proposal by Dr. Herbert Levi to retain the generic name Theridion in its present usage. It seems to me that stability would best be served by this action since exercise of the Rules in normal fashion would garble the usage of two of our very familiar generic names. I am further in favour of using Theridion instead of the etymologically more correct Theridium for the reason that the former is well established in our writing habits and has been used by most spider students for a long period. To accomplish this it will be necessary to suppress the name A. picta Razoumowsky to permit the continued use of the name Theridion picta Walckenaer. I have discussed this matter with several of my colleagues here in this Museum and find that they all are favorably inclined towards this type of action to preserve well-known names. 45. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from Clarence J. Goodnight (Purdue University, Lafayette, Indiana, U.S.A.) : On 6th March 1957 there was received in the Office of 17 For an earlier communication received from this specialist see paragraph 6 of the present Opinion. 84 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS the Commission the following letter from Dr. Clarence J. Goodnight (Purdue University, Lafayette, Indiana, U.S.A.)'® in answer to the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 :— Concerning the first question on the validation of the specific name picta (Aranea) Walckenaer, 1802, I favour the first alternative (A). That is, that the commission validate the specific name picta Walckenaer, 1802, as published in the combination Aranea picta, by suppressing the earlier homonym picta Razoumowsky, 1789. On question (2), I favour the (B) alternative ; that is, that the original spelling Theridion be accepted. On Question (3), I am in favour of alternative (A), the general objects sought in the application of Dr. H. W. Levi. 46. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from Walter Hackman (Museum Zoologicum Universitatis, Helsinki) : On 26th February 1957 Dr. Walter Hackman (Museum Zoologicum Universitatis, Helsinki)'® addressed the following letter to the Office of the Commission in answer to the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 :— I have been asked to express my opinion about the case of the genus name Theridion including two problems taken up by Dr. Herbert Levi and Professor Pierre Bonnet. I have the honour to give the following answers :— Question (1) (question of the validation of the specific name picta (Aranea) Walckenaer, 1802) : The alternative (b) is preferred and I accept for the species concerned the name Theridion ornatum Hahn, 1831. Question (2) (the spelling of Theridion Walckenaer) : I am in favour of the acceptance of the original spelling Theridion. Question (2) (general character of the proposals submitted by Dr. Herbert W. Levi) : I am fully in favour of the general objects sought in Dr. Herbert W. Levi’s application. 18 Ror an earlier communication received from this specialist see paragraph 14 of the present Opinion. 19 For an earlier communication received from this specialist see paragraph 20 of the present Opinion. OPINION 517 85 47. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from Erich M. Hering (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin) : On 23rd April 1957 there was received in the Office of the Commission the following statement from Professor Erich M. Hering (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitdt zu Berlin) in answer to the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 and in which also were included his objections to the proposed emendation to erythropterus of the specific name erytropterus Linnaeus, 1758 (Staphylinus)*°, a case of a similar character then before the Commission :— Es war ein begriissenswerter Fortschritt, als die “‘ Copenhagen Decisions ” im Gegensatz zu der nicht so strengen Formulierung der Régles die Méglichkeiten der Emendation zoologischer Namen noch starker eingeschrankt hatten. Besonders wichtig war dabei der Paragraph 71, der in (1)(a)(I) festlegte, dass ein Irrtum der Trans- literation in das lateinische Alphabet kein Recht gibt, die Original- Schreibwese eines Namens zu dndern. jIn den Sitzungen des Collo- quiums, die zur Formulierung der C. D. gefiihrt haben, war immer wieder der richtige Gedanke augedeutet worden, dass philologische Erwagungen erst in zweiter Linie fiir Aenderungen der Schreibweise zoologischer Namen herangezogen werden sollten. Wie unbedenklich auf anderen Geistesgebieten in dieser Hinsicht vorgegangen wird, zeight eine auch nur fliichtige Betrachtung der Bildung der allgemein anerkannten Termini in der Medizin. Wollte jeder Spezialist auf seinem Gebiet die durch falsche Trans- cription oder Transliteration gebildeten Namen zur Genehmigung der Emendation der International Commission vorschlagen, so bliebe dieser zur Erledigung wichtiger Aufgaben tiberhaupt keine Zeit mehr, denn : die Zahl der falsch gebildeten Namen ist Legion ! Es kommt hinzu, dass in gewissen Fallen auch verschiedene Klassiker verschiedene Schreibweisen angewendet haben, und dass auch der Philologe manch- mal mehr als eine Schreibweise als richtig anerkennen muss. Wie viele Namen, die aus dem Griechischen stammen, sind mit der Original- Endung “-on”’ beibehalten worden. Es erscheint nicht statthaft, von ihnen nun nur eine oder mehrere, wie Theridion zu Theridium, zu emendieren, wahrend andere Namen mit der gleichen Endung un- verandert bleiben. Dem sprachlich Gebildeten sehen die zahlreichen Namen mit der Endung “‘-pterix’’ ebenso abscheulich aus wie etwa “ erytropterus ’’. Wenn aber einige Spezialisten auf ihrem Gebiete Aenderungen herbeifiihren lassen, die anderen nicht, kommt es in 20 For the application here referred to, see Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 84—88. 86 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS kurzer Zeit zu einem Wirrwarr, in dem sich niemand mehr zurecht- findet. Bleibt es beim strikten Verbot der Emendation, und ist die Kommission konsequent, braucht man nur die Original-Beschreibung nachzuschlagen, um zu wissen, wie ein Name richtig zu schreiben ist. Im anderen Falle muss die grosse, dauernd noch steigende Zahl der verOffentlichten Opinions durchgesehen werden, wenn man Sicherheit uber eine Schreibweise haben will, das bedeutet eine grosse Erschwerung der wissenschaftlichen Arbeit. Durch solch eine Durchlécherung des. Emendation-Verbotes gelangt die rein philologisch motivierte Emenda- tion durch die Hintertiir der Kommissions-Entscheidung wieder zu der Stellung, die ihr durch § 71 ff, der C.D. entzogen werden sollte. Die Kommission hat in friiheren Opinions in 4 Jahrzehnten nur 12 Emendationen genehmigt, im Marzheft des “‘ Bulletin’? werden deren gleichzeitig schon 3 vorgeschlagen ! Es sei der Kommission bei der Behandlung aller Emendation-Voschlage zugerufen: “ Landgraf, werde hart ! ” Die International Commission mége aus den angezeigten Griinden die drei im Titel genannten Vorschlage ablehnen. 48. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from H. Homann (Gottingen, Germany) : On 27th March 1957 there was received in the Office of the Commission a marked copy of the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 from Dr. H. Homann (Gottingen, Germany) indicating that he favoured course (b) (rejection of picta Walckenaer) as regards Question (1) and course (b) (acceptance of Original Spelling Theridion) as regards Question (2). In answer to Question (3), Dr. Homann indicated that he was in favour of the general objects sought in Dr. Levi’s application. 49. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from J. E. Hull (Durham, England) : On 25th February Dr. J. E. Hull (Durham, England)! returned to the Office of the Commission a marked copy of the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 indicating that he favoured course (b) (rejection of picta Walckenaer) as regards Question (1) and course (b) (acceptance of Original Spelling Theridion) as regards Question (2). In answer to Question (3), Dr. Hull indicated that he was in favour of the general objects sought in Dr. Levi’s application. | 21 For an earlier communication received from this specialist see paragraph 17 of the present Opinion. OPINION 517 87 50. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from B. J. Kaston (Teachers College of Connecticut, New Britain, Connecticut, U.S.A.) : On 6th March 1957 Professor B. J. Kaston (Teachers College of Connecticut, New Britain, Connecticut, U.S.A.)?? addressed the following letter to the Office of the Commission in answer to the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 :— Question (1) : I am in favour of validating picta Walckenaer, 1802, and suppressing picta Razoumowsky, 1789. Question (2): I am in favour of the original spelling Theridion Walckenaer, 1805. Question (3): I am in favour of the general objects sought in the application submitted by Dr. Levi. 51. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from Otto Kraus (Senckenbergische Naturforschende Gesellschaft, Frankfurt a.M., Germany and Professor C. Fr. Roewer (Direktor, Ubersee-Museums, Bremen, Germany) : On 5th March 1957 there was received in the Office of the Commission a marked copy of the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 from Dr. Otto Kraus (Senckenbergische Naturforschende Gesellschaft, Frankfurt a.M., Germany)? signed jointly by himself and Professor C. Fr. Roewer (Direktor, Ubersee-Museums, Bremen, Germany) indicating that. they favoured course (b) (rejection of picta Walckenaer) as. regards Question (1) and course (b) (acceptance of Original Spelling Theridion) as regards Question (2). In answer to Question (3), both Dr. Kraus and Professor Roewer indicated that they were not in favour of the general objects sought in Dr. Levi's. application. 52. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1956 received from R. F. Lawrence (Natal Museum, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa) : On 14th March 1957 Dr. R. F. Lawrence (Natal Museum, 22 For an earlier communication received from this specialist see paragraph 7 of the present Opinion. *3 For an earlier communication received from this specialist see paragraph 10: of the present Opinion. 88 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Pietermaritzburg, South Africa) addressed the following note to the Office of the Commission in answer to the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 :— With regard to the Levi vs. Bonnet contretemps, although I side on the whole with Dr. Levi, I have never had the time to take up the intricacies of zoological nomenclature. 53. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from Herbert W. Levi (University of Wisconsin, Department of Zoology, Madison, Wisconsin, U.S.A.) : On ist March 1957 there was received in the Office of the Commission a marked copy of the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 from Dr. Herbert W. Levi (University of Wisconsin, Department of Zoology, Madison, Wisconsin, U.S.A.), the applicant in the present case, indicating that he favoured course (a) (validation of picta Walckenaer) as regards Question (1) and course (b) (acceptance of Original Spelling Theridion) as regards Question (2). 54. Repiy to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from G. H. Locket (Harrow, Middlesex): On 7th March 1957 Mr. G. H. Locket (Harrow, Middlesex)** addressed the following letter to the Office of the Commission in answer to the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 :— Question (1): I am in favour cf the Commission using its Plenary Powers to validate the specific name picta Walckenaer, 1802, as published in the combination Aranea picta (by suppressing the earlier homonym picta Razoumowsky, 1789 as published in the same combination). Question (2): I am in favour of the acceptance of the original spelling Theridion for the generic name published with this spelling by Walckenaer in 1802. Question (3): I am in favour of the general objects sought in the application submitted by Dr. Herbert W. Levi. 24 For an earlier communication received from this specialist see paragraph 22 of the present Opinion. OPINION 517 89 55. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from A. de Barros Machado (Laboratorio de Biologia, Dundo, Angola) : On 9th March 1957 Dr. A. de Barros Machado (Laboratorio: de Biologia, Dundo, Angola) returned to the Office of the Commission a marked copy of the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 indicating that he favoured course (a) (validation of picta Walckenaer) as regards Question (1) and course (a) (validation of emendation Theridium) as regards Question (2). In answer to Question (3) Dr. Machado indicated that he was in favour of the general objects sought in Dr. Levi’s application. 56. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from B. J. Marples (University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand) : On 25th March 1957 there was received in the Office of the Commission a marked copy of the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 from Dr. B. J. Marples (University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand) indicating that he favoured course (a) (validation of picta Walckenaer) as regards Question (1) and course (b) (acceptance of the Original Spelling Theridion) as regards Question (2). In answer to Question (3), Dr. Marples indicated that he was. in favour of the general objects sought in Dr. Levi’s application. 57. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from A. F. Millidge (Coulsdon, Surrey): On Ist March 1957 Mr. A. F. Millidge (Coulsdon, Surrey)?” addressed the following letter to the Office of the Commission in answer to the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 :— Question (1) (validation of the specific name picta Walckenaer, 1802) : I am in favour of (a). The specific name picta Walckenaer, 1802 has been much more commonly in use than the name ornatum Hahn, 1831. Question (2): (the relative acceptability of the Original Spelling Theridion Walckenaer, 1805, and of the Emendation Theridium Leach, 1824) : I am in favour of (b). This has been the accepted spelling by 25 For an earlier communication received from this specialist see paragraph 22 of the present Opinion. 90 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS most arachnologists ; very few have used Theridium. It seems to me that little justification exists for changing the Original Spelling in this case. It is very well known, and causes no inconveniences in nomen- clature. Question (3) (general character of the proposals submitted by Dr. Herbert W. Levi): I am in favour of (a). If the application is not granted, considerable confusion will result in the arachnological nomenclature. This can largely be avoided by the Commission’s use of its Plenary Powers to designate picta Walckenaer or ornatum Hahn (see Question (1)) as the type species of the genus Theridion Walckenaer, 1805. 58. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February received from Harald Nemenz (Vienna, Austria) : On 9th March 1957 there was received in the Office of the Commission a marked copy of the Questionnaire of 6th February from Dr. Harald Nemenz (Vienna, Austria)*® indicating that he favoured course (a) (validation of picta Walckenaer) as regards Question (1) and course (b) (acceptance of the Original Spelling Theridion) as regards Question (2). In answer to Question (3), Dr. Nemenz indicated that he was in favour of the general objects sought in Dr. Levi's application. 59. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from Edwin Norgaard (Risskoy, Denmark): On 8th March 1957 Dr. Edwin Norgaard (Risskov, Denmark) addressed the following letter to the Office of the Commission in answer to the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 :— In reply to your letter I give the following answers to the questions set forth :— Question (1): I am in favour of the Commission using its Plenary Powers to validate the specific name picta Walckenaer, 1802. Question (2) : I am in favour of the acceptance of the original spelling Theridion. Question (3): I am in favour of the general objects sought in the application submitted by Dr. Herbert W. Levi. 26 For an earlier communication received from this specialist see paragraph 18 of the present Opinion. OPINION 517 9] 60. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from C. Fr. Roewer (Direktor, Ubersee-Museums, Bremen, Germany) : On 5th March 1957 there was received in the Office of the Commission a marked copy of the Questionnaire of 6th February signed jointly by Dr. Otto Kraus (Senckenbergische Natur- forschende Gesellschaft, Frankfurt a.M., Germany) and Professor C. Fr. Roewer (Direktor, Ubersee-Museums, Bremen, Germany), the text of which has been given in paragraph 51 above. Professor Roewer, however, made the following observation with regard to Question (2), course (b) (acceptance of the Original Spelling Theridion) :— The original first publication of a zoological name, whether generic or specific, should be valid in every case (if right or false) in order to avoid further orthographical or philological changes or speculations. 61. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from Vincent D. Roth (Yuma, Arizona, U.S.A.) : On 22nd March 1957 there was received in the Office of the Commission a marked copy of the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 from Dr. Vincent D. Roth (Yuma, Arizona, U.S.A.)?" indicating that he favoured course (a) (validation of picta Walckenaer) as regards Question (1) and course (b) (acceptance of the Original Spelling Theridion) as regards Question (2). In answer to Question (3), Dr. Roth indicated that he was in favour of the general objects sought in Dr. Levi’s application. 62. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from T. H. Savory (London): On Ist March 1957 there was received in the Office of the Commission a marked copy of the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 from T. H. Savory (London)?® indicating that he favoured course (a) (validation of picta Walckenaer) as regards Question (1) and course (b) (acceptance of the Original Spelling Theridion) as regards Question (2). In answer to Question (3), Dr. Savory indicated that he was in favour of the general objects sought in Dr..Levi’s application. 27 For an earlier communication received from this specialist see paragraph 8 of the present Opinion. 28 For an earlier communication received from this specialist see paragraph 15 of the present Opinion. 92 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 63. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from Giinter Schmidt (Forschungsstation fiir Tierernéhrung Bosingfled- Waldfrieden (Lippe), Germany) : There were received in the Office of the Commission two letters, dated 17th February 1957 and 20th March 1957 respectively, from Dr. Giinter Schmidt (Forschungs- station fiir Tierernohrung Bosingfled-Waldfrieden (Lippe), Germany) in reply to the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957. The communications so received were as follows :— (a) Letter dated 17th February 1957 Ich méchte meinerseits entschieden den Antrag unterstiitzen, die Namen Theridion und Enoplognatha im bisher iiblich gewesenen Sinne Zu gebrauchen, um weitere Verwirrungen in den Benennungen zu vermeiden. Obgleich normalerweise Genusnamen auch dann zu gelten haben, wenn die philologisch inkorrekt gebildet sind, méchte ich im Falle von Theridion vorschlagen, die Schreibweise “‘ Theridium”’ (an Stelle von Theridion) fiir giiltig zu erklaren, und zwar in erster Linie, weil der Familienname THERIDIIDAE nur von Theridium abgeleiten werden kann, nicht aber von Theridion. Sollte die Schreibweise ‘“‘ Theridion”’ fir verbindlich erklart werden, dann hatte die Familien-bezeichnung THERIDIONIDAE zu lauten, wie O. Kraus 1955 bereits folgerichtig schrieb. Es sollte aber die Prioritat Sundevalls gewahrt werden, und damit auch das nomen THERIDIIDAE. Entsprechendes gilt auch fiir die Familienbezeichnung ZODARIIDAE, die von Zodarium und nicht von Zodarion absuleiten ist. (b) Letter dated 20th March 1957 Fiir die Uebersendung Ihres Schreibens v. 22.2.1957 méchte ich Ihnen vielmals danken. Unter Bezugnahme auf mein Schreiben v.17.2.1957 mochte ich die drei Fragen wie folgt beantworten : 1. Ich bin der Meinung, dass Aranea picta Razoumowsky, 1789 als Synonym zu Araneus patagiatus Cl.1778 zu gelten hat, wahrend A. picta Walck. 1802 Genotypus fiir Theridion sein muss. 2. Sollte es ausser Zweifel stehen, dass Theridion keinen Druckfehler oder dergl. darstellt, so muss dieser Name, selbst wenn er philologisch unrichtig gebildet sein sollte, fiir giiltig angesehen werden. OPINION 517 93 3. Die Ansicht Dr. Levi sollte auf jeden Fall einer strikten Befolgung der Regeln vorgezogen werden. Ich bitte um Mitteilung, ob es statthaft ist, die Familienbezeichnung THERIDIIDAE beizubehalten, wenn fiir das Genus der Name Theridion festgelegt wird. Ich war der Ansicht, dass dann die Familie THERI- DIONIDAE lauten miisse. Herr Dr. Levi, mit dem ich in dieser Frage korrespondierte, war sich nicht ganzsicher, ob die Kopenhagener Beschliisse hier eine eindeutige Klarheit geschaffen haben. Sollte es hiertiber zu einer Diskussion kommen, so méchte ich die Familien- bezeichnung THERIDIIDAE (anstelle von THERIDIIDES Sund.) die Herr Dr. Levi wahlte, unterstititzen. 64. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from R. H. Smithers (National Museums of Southern Rhodesia, Bulawayo, Southern Rhodesia) : On 30th March 1957 Dr. R. H. Smithers (National Museums of Southern Rhodesia) : addressed the following note to the Office of the Commission in answer to the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 :— I am in favour of the Commission using its Plenary Powers to validate the specific name picta Walckenaer and of the acceptance of the original spelling of Theridion. 65. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from Hans Tambs-Lyche (Norway) : On 2nd March 1957 Dr. Hans Tambs-Lyche (Norway) returned to the Office of the Commission a marked copy of the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 indicating that he favoured course (a) (validation of picta Walckenaer) as regards Question (1) and course (b) (acceptance of Original Spelling Theridion) as regards Question (2). Dr. Tambs-Lyche pointed out in a covering note with regard to Question (1) that in the circumstances now disclosed he now “had no objection against suppressing the name Aranea picta Razoumowsky, 1789, as proposed by Dr. Bonnet”, this view being different from that given in his letter of 22nd February 1957 which is reproduced in paragraph 16 of the present Opinion. In answer to Question (3), Dr. Tambs-Lyche indicated that he was in favour of the general objects sought in Dr. Levi’s application. 94 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 66. Reply to Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from Hermann Wiehle (Dessau, Germany): On 15th March 1957 Dr. Hermann Wiehle (Dessau, Germany) returned to the Office of the Commission a marked copy of the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 indicating that he favoured course (b) (rejection of picta Walckenaer) as regards Question (1) and course (a) (validation of emendation Theridium) as regards Question (2). In answer to Question (3), Dr. Wiehle indicated that he was in favour of the general objects sought in Dr. Levi’s application. 67. Submission to the Commission by the Secretary in September 1957 of a Report on the replies to the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from specialists, together with recommendations as to the action to be taken by the Commission thereon : On 29th September 1957 the Secretary prepared for the consideration of the Commission the following Report, giving particulars of the replies to the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 received from specialists, together with recommendations as to the action to be taken by the Commission in the light of the advice so obtained :— Dr. Herbert W. Levi’s Proposal for the designation under the Plenary Powers of a type species in harmony with accustomed usage for the genus ‘‘ Theridion’’ Walckenaer, 1805 (Class Arachnida, Order Araneae) Resubmission with particulars regarding two supplementary matters and submission of revised proposals By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. (Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature) In the present paper I resubmit Dr. Herbert W. Levi’s proposal for the designation under the Plenary Powers of a type species in harmony with accustomed usage for the genus Theridion Walckenaer, 1805 (Class Arachnida, Order Araneae), together with proposals on two supplementary points, representations on which were received in this Office after the close of the Prescribed Six-Month Waiting Period OPINION 517 95 following the publication of the application in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature and indeed after the submission to the Commission of a Voting Paper on this case. It will be recalled that on 6th February 1957 I submitted a paper to the Commission in which I reported the emergence of the two supplementary points in question and explained that in the circumstances I had decided to withdraw the Voting Paper (V.P.(57)10) which had been issued in this case in order to provide an opportunity for the examination, in consultation with specialists, of the two newly disclosed points, before the Commission was asked to vote on the issues involved in the present case. 2. Dr. Levi’s original application was published on 12th June 1956 (Levi, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 27—-30). As the possible use of the Plenary Powers was involved in the present case, Public Notice was issued in the prescribed manner and in addition was given to four general zoological serials. The publication of this application and the issue of Public Notices in regard thereto elicited comments from five specialists, of whom four (4) supported Dr. Levi’s proposals and one (1) raised objection thereto. The specialists who supported the application were :—(i) Vincent D. Roth (Yuma, Arizona, U.S.A.) ; (ii) Allan F. Archer (Union University, Jackson, Tennessee, U.S.A.) 3 (ii) H. E. Frizzell (Mrs.) (Rolla, Missouri, U.S.A.) ; (iv) B. J. Kaston (Teachers College of Connecticut, New Britain, Connecticut, U.S.A.). The specialist who opposed Dr. Levi’s application was O. Kraus (Senckenbergische Naturforschende Gesellschaft, Frankfurt a.M., Germany). 3. In January 1957 at the close of the Prescribed Six-Month Waiting Period following the publication of the present application in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature \ prepared the Voting Paper to be submitted to the Commission in the present case. After giving particulars of the publication of the present application and of the issue of Public Notices in regard thereto and enumerating the comments on this case which had been received from specialists—as set out in paragraph 2 above—I submitted (in Note 5) two minor supplementary proposals which had been inadvertently omitted from the original application and drew attention (in Note 6) to two minor corrections which it was necessary should be made in the application submitted by Dr. Levi. The Notes so submitted were as follows :— (5) Two minor additional proposals : Attention is drawn to two minor omissions which it is now proposed should be made good :— (1) Theridio Simon, 1884 (an Invalid Emendation of Theridion Walckenaer) should be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology ; (2) the Erroneous Subsequent Spelling THERIDIONIDAE Simon, 1881, should be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family- Group Names in Zoology. 96 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (6) Two minor corrections : The specific name of the type species of the genus Enoplognatha Pavesi, 1880 was published as mandi- bulare and not as mandibularis. - The date “ 1840” given for this name in the Bulletin is a misprint for ‘‘ 1846’. 4. The Voting Paper described above, was issued on 22nd January 1957. It was its submission which brought to light the two supple- mentary issues with which the present paper is mainly concerned. The supplementary issues on question, both of which were raised by Professor Pierre Bonnet, were the following :— (1) Should the specific name commonly used for the species proposed to be designated as the type species of the genus Theridion Walckenaer, 1805 (i.e. the specific name picta Walckenaer, 1802, as published in the conbination Aranea picta) be validated by the Commission under its Plenary Powers or should that name be rejected in favour of the much less well known name ornatum Hahn, 1831, as published in the combination Theridion ornatum ? (2) Should the emendation to Theridium of the generic name Theridion Walckenaer, 1805, be validated by the Commission under its Plenary Powers ? 5. On the first of these questions Professor Bonnet strongly advocated the validation of the specific name picta Walckenaer, 1802, as the specific name for the species proposed to be designated as the type species of the genus here in question, pointing out that the name picta Walckenaer had been in continuous use for 138 years up to 1939, having been so employed no less than 211 times. In 1939, however, it was realised that this name was invalid as a junior homonym of picta Razoumowsky, 1789, as published in the combination Aranea picta. On this discovery the name picta Walckenaer had . been abandoned by some workers in favour of the later subjective synonym ornatum Hahn, 1831, as published in the combination Theridion ornatum. Professor Bonnet added that not the slightest inconvenience would be caused by the suppression under the Plenary Powers of the senior homonym picta Razoumowsky, that name having appeared in the literature only once during the 170 years which have elapsed since it was first published. On being informed by this Office of Professor Bonnet’s proposal, Dr. Levi, the original applicant in this case, intimated that he fully supported the modification of his application in the sense suggested. OPINION 517 97 6. The second question raised by Professor Bonnet was whether the Original Spelling Theridion as used by Walckenaer in 1805 should be emended to the spelling Theridium. This subject was discussed by Dr. Levi in his application. After pointing out that the emendation. Theridium had been introduced by Leach in 1824 Dr. Levi described as follows (paragraph 6) the position as regards usage in this matter : *“In North America the spelling Theridium was used by the majority of authors during the nineteenth century, although Hentz, who described many species in the ’fifties, used Theridion. Since 1912 the: spelling Theridion has been consistently used by all authors both in the United States and in South America. In Germany Wiehle in 1937 used the spelling Theridium but in his more recent papers he has used Theridion. Tullgren used the spelling Theridium in comments on Swedish Theridiids in the 1940’s. This spelling is also used by Bonnet. (1955, Bibl. Aran. vol. 2). The great French Arachnologist Simon used Theridion seventy years ago. Roewer has always used this spelling and has employed it in his recent Katalog. The same spelling has been used also by Berland and by Locket & Millidge in 1953 in vol. 2 of their British Spiders. To sum up, the spelling Theridium is certainly not in general use, although individual authors have used this spelling in recent years. Under a decision taken by the Fourteenth Inter- national Congress of Zoology at Copenhagen, 1953 (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 43, Decision 71) the spelling Theridion is,. it should be noted, a Valid Original Spelling and is therefore not. subject to emendation.” In the concluding paragraph of his applica-: tion Dr. Levi recommended that this generic name in the Original Spelling Theridion should be placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology and that the Invalid Emendation Theridium Leach, 1824, should be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology. 7. Professor Bonnet, for his part, strongly advocated the acceptance: ef the emendation Theridium and the rejection of the original spelling Theridion as being incorrectly formed. On the question of usage, Professor Bonnet wrote as follows :—‘‘ D’ailleurs, a ’heure actuelle, contrairement a ce que dit H. W. Levi, il y a plus d’auteurs qui écrivent Theridium que Theridion. Si jusqu’a nos jours, les auteurs. de langue, anglaise ou francaise ont surtout graphié Theridion, tous les auteurs de l’école allemande ont employé Theridium (Scandinavie, Europe centrale, Italie, Balkans, Russie, et cela malgré l’influence considérable de notre grand Simon). Et lorsqu’un auteur comme Thorell, qui était un savant helleniste et latiniste, a décidé que la graphie correcte était Theridium, on ne doit plus aller contre sa décision, a moins de donner une explication grammaticale pour démontrer quwil s’est trompé. Non, Theridion présente une faute de translittération et doit étre changé en Theridium, suivant le libellé de l’article 19 qui prévoit que ‘l’orthographe originelle d’un nom doit étre rectifiée s’l > o> présente une faute de transcription, d’orthographe ou d’impression ’. 98 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 8. The representations described above led me on 6th February 1957 to issue to the Commission a notice in which I explained the situation which had developed and reported that in consequence I had executed a Minute withdrawing the Voting Paper (V.P.(57)10) issued in this case, in order thereby to permit of the consideration of the issues now for the first time brought to light. 9. Simultaneously with the withdrawal of the foregoing Voting Paper I arranged for the immediate publication in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature of the communication in regard to the fore- going matters received from Professor Bonnet. Further, in view of the fact that each of the proposals submitted by Professor Bonnet would re- quire for their adoption the use by the Commission of its Plenary Powers, I prepared the required Public Notices for issue simultaneously with the publication of the communication referred to above. Professor Bonnet’s communication was published on 29th March 1957 (Bonnet, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 96—98), together with a note by myself as Secretary drawing attention to the extent to which the possible use of the Commission’s Plenary Powers was involved in Professor Bonnet’s proposals (Hemming, 1957, ibid. 13 : 98). On the same day the required Public Notices were issued in the prescribed manner. 10. Each of the two points raised by Professor Bonnet were matters which were concerned not with the interpretation of the Régles but with questions turning upon the individual judgment of specialists as to the action which it was desirable should be taken by the Commission in the interest of stability in nomenclature. It was evident, therefore, that it was desirable that special efforts should be made to obtain a full and representative sample of the views of specialists as to the nature of the solutions to be adopted by the Commission. Accordingly, at the time of the withdrawal of Voting Paper V.P.(57)10 (paragraph 8 above), I decided to issue a questionnaire to as many active specialists in the group concerned as possible. I immediately entered into communication with certain specialists with a view to ascertaining the names and addresses of specialists to whom the proposed question- naire might usefully be issued. 11. In drawing up the questionnaire to be issued to specialists I decided to seek answers to three questions ; the first two were con- cerned with the points specifically raised by Professor Bonnet, namely :— (a) whether it was desirable that the little-known specific name picta Razoumowsky, 1789 (Aranea) should be suppressed under the Plenary Powers for the purpose of validating for the type species of the genus Theridion Walckenaer, 1805, the specific name picta Walckenaer, 1802 (Aranea), the name by which it had for so long been known ; (b) whether it was desirable that the Commission should use the foregoing OPINION 517 99 Powers to validate the emendation to Theridium of the generic name published by Walckenaer with the spelling Zheridion. The third question included in the questionnaire was whether, subject to the solution of the particular problems referred to above, the general objects sought in Dr. Levi’s original proposal (the designation for the genus Theridion of a type species in harmony with accustomed usage) was considered to be desirable. The text of the questions so submitted in the questionnaire is given in Appendix | to the present paper. 12. The consultations described in paragraph 10 above led to the compilation of a list of over forty specialists, to whom the questionnaire described above was issued on 22nd February 1957. The names and addresses of the specialists so consulted, together with those of a few additional specialists whose interest in this matter became known at a somewhat later date are given in Appendix 2 to the present paper 7°. The total number of names included in the foregoing list amounted ultimately to forty-six. The countries of residence of the specialists so consulted were as follows :— TABLE 1 List by countries of the specialists consulted on the three questions in connection with the generic name ‘‘ Theridion ’? Walckenaer raised in the Questionnaire issued on 22nd February 1957 Country of Residence Number of Specialists - consulted Angola Austria Czechoslovakia Denmark Finland France Germany New Zealand Norway Southern Rhodesia Sweden Union of S. Africa United Kingdom US.A. BNR RH OP ENR = 29 This Appendix is not reproduced here because the particulars in question have already been given in paragraph 29 of the present Opinion. 100 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 13. Replies to all or some of the questions set out in the question- naire issued on 22nd February 1957 were received from thirty-eight (82 per cent.) of the specialists consulted. The information obtained from the issue of this questionnaire can therefore, in my opinion, be regarded as providing a representative coverage of the opinions of specialists on the problems at issue in the present case. 14. The advice received from specialists in regard to each of the three issues involved in the present case is shown in Appendix 3 to the present paper. The following is a global summary of the advice so furnished :— TABLE 2 Summary of the advice received from specialists on the three questions in regard to the case of the generic name ‘‘ Theridion ’? Walckenaer raised in the Questionnaire issued on 22nd February 1957 Question (1) Question (2) Question (3) (validation of (spelling Theridion (whether in favour picta Walckenaer) versus Theridium) of general purpose | of Dr. Levi’s application) | infavour | against |in favourof|in favourof| in favour | against Original |Emendation Theridion | Theridium 32 > 15. The replies received to the Questionnaire issued on 22nd February 1957 show decisive majorities (1) in favour of the general purpose of Dr. Levi’s application (the designation under the Plenary Powers for the genus Theridion Walckenaer of a type species in harmony with accustomed usage), (2) in favour of the validation under the same Powers of the specific name picta Walckenaer, 1802, as published in the combination. Aranea picta, by the suppression of the senior OPINION 517 101 homonym picta Razoumowsky, 1789, as published in the same com- bination, and (3) in favour of the retention of the Original Spelling Theridion for the genus established under that name by Walckenaer in 1805 and the consequent rejection of the proposal for the use of the Plenary Powers for the validation of the emendation of that name to Theridium. 16. In these circumstances the proper course appears to be to re- submit Dr. Levi’s application adjusted to such extent as is necessary to harmonise it with the replies received to Questionnaire issued on 22nd February 1957 (i.e. by the insertion of a proposal for the validation of the specific name picta Walckenaer, 1802, as published in the com- bination Aranea picta and for the designation of the species so named to be the type species of the genus Theridion Walckenaer, 1805). Dr. Levi’s proposals, so adjusted, are set out in Appendix 4 to the present paper. APPENDIX 1 TO THE SECRETARY’S REPORT OF 29TH SEPTEMBER 1957 Questions relating to the generic name ‘‘ Theridion ’’ Walckenaer, put to specialists in the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 [Note: This Appendix is here omitted because the Questions which had appeared in the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 set out in it have been repro- duced in paragraph 28 of the present Opinion.] APPENDIX 2 TO THE SECRETARY’S REPORT OF 29TH SEPTEMBER 1957 Alphabetical list of the specialists to whom the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 regarding the ‘‘ Theridion’’ case was issued or whose views thereon were otherwise ascertained [Note : This Appendix is here omitted because the list of the names of the specialists to whom the Questionnaire of 6th February 1957 was issued has been reproduced in paragraph 29 of the present Opinion.] 102 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS APPENDIX 3 TO THE SECRETARY’S REPORT OF 29TH SEPTEMBER 1957 Analysis of the views of specialists on the ‘‘ Theridion ’’ problem elicited by the Questionnaire of 22nd February 1957 or otherwise obtained Question (1) (question of the validation of the specific name “ picta ”’ Walckenaer, 1802 (‘‘Aranea ’’) as the name for the type species of ‘‘ Theridion ’’ Walckenaer, 1805) (a) In favour of validation of the name ‘‘ picta ’? Walckenaer, twenty- four (24) specialists : R. D. Barnes (U.S.A.); A. de Barros Machado (Angola) ; P. Bonnet (France) ; Braendegard (Denmark); W. S. Bristowe (United Kingdom); D. J. Clark (United Kingdom); J. L. Cloudsley-Thompson (United Kingdom) ; J. Denis (France) ; E. Duffey (United Kingdom) ; R. R. Forster (U.S.A.) ; Mrs. H. E. Frizzell (U.S.A.) ; W. J. Gertsch (U.S.A.) ; C. J. Goodnight (U.S.A.); B. J. Kaston (U.S.A.); H. W. Levi (U.S.A.) ; G. H. Locket (United Kingdom) ; B. J. Marples (New Zealand) ; A. F. Millidge (United Kingdom); H. Nemenz (Austria) ; E. Norgaard (Denmark) ; V. D. Roth (U.S.A.) ; T. H. Savory (United Kingdom) ; G. E. W. Schmidt (Germany) ; H. Tambs- Lyche (Norway) ; (b) Against the validation of the name ‘‘ picta ’’ Walckenaer, seven (7) specialists ; A. F. Archer (U.S.A.) ; W. Hackman (Finland) ; H. Homann (Germany) ; J. E. Hull (United Kingdom) ; O. Kraus (Germany) ; C. Fr. Roewer (Germany) ; H. Wiehle (Germany) ; Question (2) (question of the relative merits of the spellings ‘‘ Theri- dion *’? and the emendation ‘‘ Theridium ’’) (a) In favour of the validation of the Emendation ‘‘ Theridium ”’, five (5) specialists : A. de Barros Machado (Angola) ; P. Bonnet (France) ; J. Denis (France) ; A. Kaestner (Germany) ; H. Wiehle (Germany) ; OPINION 517 103 (b) Against the validation of the Emendation ‘‘ Theridium ’’, thirty- two (32) specialists : A. F. Archer (U.S.A.); R. D. Barnes (U.S.A.) ; J. Braendegard (Denmark) ; R. Braun (Germany); W. S. Bristowe (United Kingdom) ; A. M. Chickering (U.S.A.) ; D. J. Clark (United Kingdom) ; J. L. Cloudsley-Thompson (United Kingdom) ; E. Duffey (United Kingdom) ; L. Fage (France) ; R. R. Forster (U.S.A.) ; Mrs. H. E. Frizzell (U.S.A.) ; W. J. Gertsch (U.S.A.) ; C. J. Goodnight (U.S.A.); W. Hackman (Finland); E. M. Hering (Germany); H. Homann (Germany); J. E. Hull (United Kingdom) ; B. J. Kaston (U.S.A.); O. Kraus (Ger- many) ; H. W. Levi (U.S.A.) ; G. H. Locket (United Kingdom) ; B. J. Marples (New Zealand) ; A. F. Millidge (United Kingdom) ; H. Nemenz (Austria) ; E. Norgaard (Denmark) ; C. Fr. Roewer (Germany); V. D. Roth (U.S.A.); T. H. Savory (United Kingdom) ; G. E. W. Schmidt (Germany) ; R. H. N. Smithers. (S. Rhodesia) ; H. Tambs-Lyche (Norway) ; Question (3) (general character of proposals submitted by Dr. Levi for the designation for the genus ‘‘ Theridion ’? Walckenaer of a type species in harmony with accustomed usage) (a) In favour of Dr. Levi’s proposals, thirty-five (35) specialists : A. F. Archer (U.S.A.) ; R. D. Barnes (U.S.A.) ; A. de Barros Machado (Angola); P. Bonnet (France); J. Braendegard (Denmark) ; R. Braun (Germany); W. S. Bristowe (United Kingdom) ; A. M. Chickering (U.S.A.) ; D. J. Clark (United Kingdom) ; J. L. Cloudsley-Thompson (United Kingdom) ; J. Denis (France); E. Duffey (United Kingdom); L. Fage (France) ; R. R. Forster (U.S.A.) ; Mrs. H. E. Frizzell (U.S.A.) ; W. J. Gertsch (U.S.A.) ; C. J. Goodnight (U.S.A.) ; W. Hack- man (Finland); H. Homann (Germany) ; J. E. Hull (United Kingdom) ; A. Kaestner (Germany) ; B. J. Kaston (U.S.A.) ; R. F. Lawrence (Union of South Africa) ; H. W. Levi (U.S.A.) ; G. H. Locket (United Kingdom) ; B. J. Marples (New Zealand) ; A. F. Millidge (United Kingdom); H. Nemenz (Austria) ; E. Nergaard (Denmark) ; V. D. Roth (U.S.A.) ; T. H. Savory (United Kingdom) ; G. E. W. Schmidt (Germany) ; R. H. N. Smithers (Southern Rhodesia) ; H. Tambs-Lyche (Norway) ; H. Wiehle (Getmany) ; (b) Against Dr. Levi’s proposals, two (2) specialists : O. Kraus (Germany) ; C. Fr. Roewer (Germany). 104 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS APPENDIX 4 TO THE SECRETARY’S REPORT OF 29TH SEPTEMBER 1957 Dr. Herbert W. Levi’s proposal relating to the generic name ‘“* Theridion ’’ Walckenaer, 1805 (Class Arachnida, Order Araneae) adjusted in the light of the replies received to the Questionnaire of 22nd February 1957 (1) Rejection of the proposal that the spelling of the generic name Theridion Walckenaer, 1805, be amended under the Plenary Powers to Theridium. (2) The following action to be taken under the Plenary Powers :— (a) the specific name picta Razoumowsky, 1789, as published in the combination Aranea picta, to be suppressed for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy ; (b) all selections of type species for the genus Theridion Walckenaer, 1805, made prior to the Ruling now asked for to be set aside and the nominal species Aranea picta Walckenaer, 1802, as validated under (a) above to be designated to be the type species of the above genus ; (c) the generic name Phyllonethis Thorell, 1869, to be suppressed _for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy. (3) The under-mentioned generic names to be placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology :— (a) Theridion Walckenaer, 1805 (gender : neuter) (type species, by designation under the Plenary Powers in (2)(b) above : Aranea picta Walckenaer, 1802, as validated under the Plenary Powers in (2)(a) above) ; (b) Enoplognatha Pavesi (P.), 1880, as validated under the Plenary Powers in (1)(c) above (gender : feminine) (type species, by selection by Pavesi (P.), 1880 (in the second paper published in that year): Theridion mandibulare Lucas, 1846). OPINION 517 105: (4) The under-mentioned specific names to be placed on the Official’ List of Specific Names in Zoology :— (a) picta Walckenaer, 1802, as published in the combination Aranea picta and as validated under the Plenary Powers. in (2)(a) above (specific name of type species of Theridion Walckenaer, 1805) ; (b) mandibulare Lucas, 1846, as published in the combination Theridion mandibulare (specific name of type species of Enoplognatha Pavesi, 1880) ; (c) ovatus Clerck, [1758], as published in the combination Araneus ovatus ; (d) sisyphius Clerck, [1758], as published in the combination Araneus sisyphius. (5) The under-mentioned generic names to be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology :— (a) Phyllonethis Thorell, 1869, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers in (2)(c) above ; (b) Theridium Leach (W.E.), 1824 (an Invalid Emendation of Theridion Walckenaer, 1805) ; (c) Theridio Simon, 1884 (an Invalid Emendation of Theridion Walckenaer, 1805). (6) The under-mentioned specific name to be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology :— picta Razoumowsky, 1789, as published in the combination Aranea picta and as suppressed under the Plenary Powers. in (2)(a) above. (7) The under-mentioned family-group name to be placed on the: Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology :— THERIDIDAE (correction of THERIDIIDES) Sundevall, 1833 (type genus : Theridion Walckenaer, 1805). 106 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (8) The under-mentioned family-group names to be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology :— (a) THERIDIDES Sundevall, 1833 (type genus: Theridion Walckenaer, 1805) (an Invalid Original Spelling for THERIDIIDAE) ; (b) THERIDIONIDAE Simon, 1881 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling for THERIDIIDAE). IW. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 68. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(57)55 : On 11th October 1957 a Voting Paper (V.P.(57)55) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “ the proposal relating to the generic name Theridion Walckenaer, 1805, and associated names, as set out in Appendix 4 to the paper bearing the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 1008 [i.e. in Appendix 4 to the paper reproduced in paragraph 67 of the present Opinion] submitted by the Secretary simultaneously with the present Voting Paper. 69. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 11th January 1958. 70. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)55, except the voting on the status to be accorded to the emendation ‘*Theridium ’’ of the generic name ‘‘ Theridion *’ Walckenaer, 1805 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period the state of the voting on the proposals submitted with Voting Paper OPINION 517 107 V.P.(57)55, other than the portion relating to the status to be accorded to the emendation Theridium of the generic name Theridion Walckenaer, 1805, was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following twenty-five (25) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) :— Holthuis; Vokes; Bonnet; Mayr; Bradley (J.C.) ; Riley; do Amaral; Lemche; Hering; Dymond ; Prantl ; Esaki; Bodenheimer ; Boschma ; Hemming ; Mertens ; Hanko ; Jaczewski; Miller ; Stoll ; Kiihnelt ; Cabrera ; Sylvester-Bradley ; Key; Tortonese ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) Voting Papers not returned : None. 71. Particulars of the Voting on the request for the rejection of the proposal for the emendation under the Plenary Powers of the generic name ‘‘ Theridion ’’ Walckenaer, 1805, to ‘‘ Theridium ”’ submitted with Voting Paper V.P.(57)55: At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period the state of the voting on the request for the rejection of the proposal for the emendation under the Plenary Powers of the generic name Theridion Walckenaer, 1805, to Theridium was as follows :— (a) In favour of the rejection of the proposal for the emendation to “ Theridium” of “ Theridion” Walckenaer, 1805, twenty-two (22) votes) : Holthuis ; Vokes; Mayr; Bradley (J.C.); Riley ; do Amaral; Lemche ; Hering ; Dymond ; Prantl; Esaki ; Boschma ; Hemming; Mertens; Jaczewski; Miller ; Stoll; Kiuhnelt ; Cabrera; Sylvester-Bradley; Key ; Tortonese ; 108 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (b) Against the proposal for the rejection of the emendation to “ Theridium” of “ Theridion” Walckenaer, 1805, three (3) votes : Bonnet ; Bodenheimer ; Hanko ; (c) Voting Papers not returned : None. 72. Declaration of Result of Vote : On 12th January 1958, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)55, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraphs 70 and 71 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in both portions of 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. 73. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 21st January 1958 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.(57)55. 74. Original References for Generic and Specific Names : 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 :— Enoplognatha Pavesi (P.), 1880, Rend. real. Inst. Lombardo Sci. Lett. (2) 13 : 192 [also later in 1880, Ann. Mus. Stor. nat. Genova 15 (for 1879—1880) : 325] mandibulare, Theridion, Lucas, 1846, Explor. Sci. Algérie, Zool. 2(1) : 260, pl. 17, fig. 1 ovatus, Araneus, Clerck, [1758], Aran. svec. : 58, pl. 3, Tab. 8 Phyllonethis Thorell, 1869, Nova Acta K. vet.-Soc. Upsala (3) 7(1) (No. 5) : 90 OPINION 517 109 picta, Aranea, Razoumowsky, 1789, Hist. nat. Jorat. : 242 picta, Aranea, Walckenaer, 1802, Faune paris. 2 : 207 sisyphius, Araneus, Clerck, [1758], Aran. svec. : 54 Theridio Simon, 1864, Hist. nat. Araignées : 165 Theridion Walckenaer, 1805, Tabl. Aran. : 72 Theridium Leach (W.E.), 1824, Ency. brit. Suppl. 4th-6th Eds. 1(2) : 438 75. Selection of a type species for a nominal genus: The following is the reference for the selection of a type species for a nominal genus specified in the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— For Enoplognatha Pavesi (P.), Pavesi (P.), 1870, Ann. Mus. 1880, Rend. real. Inst. Lombardo Stor. nat. Genova 15 (for Ser. Lett. (2) 13: 192 1879—1880) : 325 76. Original References for Family-Group Names: 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 may be, on the Official Index of names for taxa belonging to the family-group category :— THERIDIDAE (correction of THERIDIIDES) Sundevall (J.C.), 1833, Conspectus Arachnidum : 15 THERIDIIDES Sundevall (J.C.), 1833 (an Invalid Original Spelling for THERIDIIDAE) THERIDIONIDAE Simon, 1881, Ins. Arachn. France 5(1) : 13 110 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 77. Compliance with Prescribed Procedures : 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. 78. ‘* Opinion ’? Number : The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Five Hundred and Seventeen (517) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twenty-First day of January, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Eight. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING eee ee eee Se NT ener neni at nee AS ES © 1958. THE INTERNATIONAL TRUST FOR ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Printed in England by METCALFE & COOPER LIMITED, 10-24 Scrutton St., London E C2 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 19. Part5. Pp. 111—132 eens ( JUN 25 1958] ) OPINION 518 ce ee [ IBF >A to Addition to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoolo ee of the generic name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878] ey Crustacea, Order Decapoda) 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 1958 Price Fourteen Shillings and Sixpence (All rights reserved) Issued 30th May, 1958 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 518 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). Dr. Penning LEMCEe (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July , 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) (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. VoxeEs (University of Tulane, Department of Geology, New Orleans, Louisiana, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezégazdasdgi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August noe Dr. Norman R. STOLL (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, 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 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 POUNEEE (Zoologisches Institut der Universitat, Vienna, Austria) (6th November 1954 Ne S. BODENHEIMER (The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel) (11th November OPINION 518 ADDITION TO THE ‘OFFICIAL LIST OF GENERIC NAMES IN ZOOLOGY” OF THE GENERIC NAME ‘* EURYRHYNCHUS ”’ MIERS, [1878] (CLASS CRUSTACEA, ORDER DECAPODA) RULING :—(1) It is hereby directed that in accordance with the provisions of Declaration 39 the gender to be attributed to the generic name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878] (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda) is the masculine gender. (2) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Number 1274 :— Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878] (gender: masculine) (type species, by monotypy : Euryrhynchus wrzesniowskii Miers, [1878] ) (3) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Number 1524 :— wrzesniowskii Miers, [1878], as published in the combination Euryrhynchus wrzesniowskii (specific name of type Boas of Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878]). | ]’RAITLIOONAIHARI 114 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (4) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Number 1161:— Euryrhynchus Nitzsch, 1829 (an Erroneous Sub- ae Spelling for Eurynorhynchus Nilsson, 1821 (5) The under-mentioned family-group name is hereby placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology with the Name Number 235 :— EURYRHYNCHINAE Holthuis (L.B.), 1950 (type genus : Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878)]). 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 in which he asked that the International Commission should use its Plenary Powers to validate the generic name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878] (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda) by suppressing the older name Euryrhynchus Nitzsch, 1829 (Class Aves), a name treated in the application as an Invalid Emendation of Eurynorhynchus Nilsson, 18211 :— Proposed validation under the Plenary Powers of the generic name ** Kuryrhynchus ’’ Miers, [1878] (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda) By L. B. HOLTHUIS (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) In carcinological literature the generic name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878] (Proc. zool. Soc. Lond. 1877 : 662) (type species, by monotypy : 1 The name Eurynorhynchus Nilsson, 1821 (Class Aves) was placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology as Name No. 54 by the Ruling given in Opinion 67 (1916, Smithson. Publ. 2409 : 177—182). OPINION 518 115 Euryrhynchus wrzesniowskii Miers, [1878], Proc. zool. Soc. Lond. 1877 : 662) has been used to indicate a small genus of fresh water shrimps inhabiting Northern Brazil and the three Guianas. Of this genus only two species are known and not more than ten authors have dealt with it seriously. Nevertheless, it is rather important, since it is the type genus of the subfamily EURYRHYNCHINAE belonging to the family PALAEMONIDAE. The name Euryrhynchus is the only generic name ever employed for the genus and the present spelling has been adopted by all authors, though Von Martens, 1879 (Zool. Rec. 14 Crust. : 21) in writing the name as Euryr[r|hynchus showed his preference for having it written with two r’s after the first y. In 1829 the name Euryrhynchus was given by Nitzsch (1829, Obs. Ayium. Art. carot. comm.:18) as an intentional or unintentional substitute for the generic name Eurynorhynchus Nilsson (1821, Ornith. suec. 2(1) : 29) (type species, by monotypy: Platalea pygmea Linnaeus, 1758, Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1: 140) to a genus of birds. Dr. G. C. A. Junge, curator of birds of the Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, was so kind to inform me that the generic name Eurynorhynchus Nilsson at present still is commonly used in ornithological literature and that the name Euryrhynchus Nitzsch seems not to have been used except by Nitzsch in his anatomical publication. So, for instance, Peters 1934 (Check-List of Birds of the World 2 : 282) does not even cite the name Furyrhynchus under Eurynorhynchus. Unfortunately I have not had the opportunity to examine Nitzsch’s book, but it seems very probable that his name Euryrhynchus is nothing but a clerical error for Eurynorhynchus ; Ridgway, 1919 (Bull. U.S. Nat. Mus. 50(8) : 303), however, clearly indicates Euryrhynchus Nitzsch as an emendation of Eurynorhynchus Nilsson. During the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology it was decided that the principles which are to be observed in interpreting Article 34 of the Régles and which are laid down in Opinion 148, should be inserted in the Régles (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4(7/9) : 163). According to these principles ‘‘a generic name is to be rejected as a homonym, where the word of which that name consists has previously been published as an emendation, whether valid or invalid, of another generic name”. It is clear therefore that in the present case the generic name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878], is invalidated by the name Euryrhynchus Nitzsch, 1829. In my opinion it is highly desirable that the generic name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878], be preserved, since it has been accepted by all authors dealing with this genus and so has been unchallenged during the 74 years of its existence. On the other hand the name Euryrhynchus Nitzsch, which probably was created by error or by 116 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS carelessness, almost certainly has been used by its original author only. I accordingly recommend that the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature should :— (1) use its Plenary Powers :— (a) to suppress the generic name Euryrhynchus Nitzsch, 1829 (an invalid emendation of Eurynorhynchus Nilsson, 1821), for the purposes of the Law of Priority and for those of the Law of Homonymy, and (b) to validate the generic name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878] ; (2) place on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology the generic name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878] (gender of generic name : masculine) (type species, by monotypy: Euryrhynchus wrzesniowskii Miers, [1878]), as validated under (1)(b) above ; (3) place on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology the generic name Euryrhynchus Nitzsch, 1829, as suppressed under (1)(a) above ; (4) place on the Official List of Specific Trivial Names in Zoology the trivial name wrzesniowskii Miers, [1878], as published in the combination Euryrhynchus wrzesniowskii (trivial name of type species of Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878]). Il. THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt in 1951 of Dr. Holthuis’ application the question of the validation of the generic name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878] (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda) was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 616. 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 OPINION 518 117 Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Holthuis, 1952, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 269—270). 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. Holthuis’ application was published) and (b) to the other prescribed serial publications. In addition, such Notice was given to four general zoological serial publications. 5. Comments received during the Prescribed Six-Month Waiting Period : During the Prescribed Six-Month Waiting Period following the publication of Dr. Holthuis’ application comments were received from two specialists. Of these one supported Dr. Holthuis’ proposals, while the other expressed opposition thereto. The communications so received are reproduced in the immediately following paragraphs. 6. Support received from Ricardo Zariquiey (Barcelona, Spain) : On 25th February 1953 Dr. Ricardo Zariquiey (Barcelona, Spain) addressed a letter to the Office of the Commission in which he supported a number of applications by Dr. Holthuis which had recently been published in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature. The following extract is that which bears upon the present case :— He recibido las Commission’s References Z.N.(S.)616 .. . propuestas por el Dr. L. B. Holthuis, estando en todo conforme con las proposiciones del citado Doctor. 7. Objection received from K. S. Misra (Zoological Survey of India, Calcutta, India) : On 22nd January 1953 Dr. K. S. Misra (Zoological Survey of India, Calcutta, India) addressed a letter to the Office of the Commission in which he commented on a 118 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS number of applications which had recently been published in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature. The portion of the letter giving Dr. Misra’s objections to the action proposed in the present case is as follows :— Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878], is a homonym of Euryrhynchus Nitzsch, 1829, a genus of birds and thus it should be invalidated by the name Euryrhynchus Nitzsch, 1829. 8. Postponement in January 1953 of the submission of a Voting Paper in relation to the present case until after the meeting at Copenhagen in August 1953 of the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology: At the close in January 1953 of the Prescribed Six-Month Waiting Period following publication in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature, the problems raised by the present case were reviewed by the Secretary who then took the view that, as the central feature involved was the status of a senior homonym consisting of a name published as an emendation of a name belonging to an entirely different group, it would be more satisfactory if, instead of at once submitting a Voting Paper to the Commission in this case, action were to be deferred until after the meeting at Copenhagen in July-August of that year of the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, having regard to the fact that by direction of the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948, the whole question of the provisions to be included in the Rég/es relating to the emendation of zoological names was to be considered by the coming Congress. Accordingly, on 23rd January 1953 Mr. Hemming as Secretary executed a Minute directing (1) that no further action be taken on the present case until after the close of the Copenhagen Congress in August of that year and (2) that, as soon as could conveniently be found practicable after the above date the present case should be re-examined for the purpose of determining whether any, and, if so, what, amendment of the proposals submitted in it was called for in the light of the decor taken by the above Congress. 9. Review in October 1953 of the proposals in regard to the generic name ‘* Kuryrhynchus ’? Miers, [1878], submitted by Dr. L. B. Holthuis in September 1951: In accordance with the provisions of the Minute executed by the Secretary on 23rd OPINION 518 119 January 1953 the proposals regarding the generic name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878], submitted by Dr. Holthuis in September 1951 were reviewed jointly by the Secretary and Dr. Holthuis in October 1953 in the light of the revised provisions relating to the emendation of names inserted in the Régles by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 43—45, Decisions 70—73). It was immediately apparent that the distinction recognised by that Congress between an Invalid Emendation and an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling, the former possessing status under the Law of Priority and the latter possessing no such status, made it necessary definitely to establish whether the name Euryrhynchus Nitzsch, 1829, the suppression of which under the Plenary Powers had been asked for by Dr. Holthuis, fell in the first, or in the second of the above categories. This examination was carried out by Mr. Hemming who was fortunately able to consult a copy of Nitzsch’s rare work preserved in the library of the Zoological Society of London. This examination showed conclusively that the above name as used by Nitzsch was not an intentional emendation of the name Eurynorhynchus Nilsson, 1821, as it had been believed to be by Dr. Holthuis at the time when he submitted his original application but was either an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling for Nilsson’s generic name or, less probably, a nomen nudum. In either case the name Euryrhynchus Nitzsch, 1829, possessed no status under the decisions taken by the Copenhagen Congress. Accordingly, that name did not invalidate the name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878], in the Class Crustacea. That name was therefore already an available name and no action under the Plenary Powers was required to secure its protection. 10. Submission in October 1953 of a Revised Application prepared jointly by Mr. Hemming and Dr. Holthuis: At the conclusion of the review described in the preceding paragraph it was agreed between Dr. Holthuis and Mr. Hemming that in the altered circumstances what was required was a revised application to be submitted to the Commission in substitution for the application originally submitted in September 1951, in which account would be taken of the changes brought about by the decisions taken by the Copenhagen Congress. Accordingly on 30th October 1953 the following Revised Application was 120 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS submitted jointly by Mr. Hemming and Dr. Holthuis in substitution for the application previously submitted by the latter specialist in September 1951 :— Proposed modification of the application submitted to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature regarding the generic name ‘* Euryrhynchus ’’ Miers, [1878] (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda) By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. (Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature) and L. B. HOLTHUIS (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (Note dated 30th October 1953) In his application to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature published in July 1952 (Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 ; 269— 270) Holthuis asked for the use of the Plenary Powers for the purpose of validating the name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878] (the type genus of the subfamily EURYRHYNCHINAE of the family PALAEMONIDAE) (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda) by suppressing the senior homonym Euryrhynchus Nitzsch, 1829 (Class Aves), an unaccepted emendation or variant spelling of the name Eurynorhynchus Nilsson, 1821. 2. At the time when the foregoing application was prepared, the meaning to be attached to the provision (Article 19) of the Régles relating to the emendation of names was by no means clear and Plenary action by the Commission was the only assured means for securing a solution of the kind sought in Holthuis’ application. 3. In August 1953 the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology at its meeting held at Copenhagen cancelled the existing Article 19 and inserted in its place comprehensive provisions for regulating (and limiting) the emendation of names. After the Copenhagen Congress it became necessary to review the application submitted in regard a OPINION 518 121 to the names Euryrhynchus Nitzsch, 1829, and Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878], in order to ascertain whether the action proposed was in any way affected by the decisions taken by the Copenhagen Congress. 4. In his original application Holthuis explained that he had been unable personally to consult Nitzsch’s work of 1829 and was therefore not in a position to state whether the spelling ‘‘ Euryrhynchus”’ used by Nitzsch in place of the spelling “* Eurynorhynchus”’ used by Nilsson when establishing the genus so named was, on the one hand, a deliberate emendation of Nilsson’s name or, on the other hand, only an unexplained or accidental variation of that name. In the light of the Copenhagen decisions, it became essential that the position in regard to this matter should be definitely established, for, if the spelling Euryrhynchus was a deliberate emendation by Nitzsch of the spelling originally used by Nilsson, the name Euryrhynchus would have status in nomenclature as a separate name (ranking from Nitzsch, 1829), while, if the spelling variant used by Nitzsch could not be shown from the original publication to be a deliberate emendation, that spelling would rank only as an “‘ Erroneous Subsequent Spelling ”’, would possess no status in nomenclature and would not preoccupy the name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878], for the purposes of the Law of Homonymy. 5. An exchange of correspondence between the present authors led Holthuis, who had still been unable to obtain access to a copy of Nitzsch’s Observationes of 1829, to ask the other author, if possible, to examine a copy in one of the large zoological libraries in London. Investigation showed that there was a copy of this rare work in the library of the Zoological Society of London. This copy has now been examined by Hemming who has furnished the following Report :— I examined this morning (28th October 1953) the copy of Nitzsch’s Observationes in the library of the Zoological Society of London. It is a small quarto work of 26 pages—hardly more than a pamphlet—and its subject matter is purely anatomical, as may be judged by its full title which is: ‘*‘ Observationes de Avium Arteria Carotide communi’. On the basis of the observations so brought forward, Nitzsch divided the birds into four main groups, which he styled “‘ Caput Primum ”’, “ Caput Secundum ”’, etc. The group with which we are concerned is Nitzsch’s “* Caput Tertium”’. As in the case of the other ‘‘ Capita’’, Nitzsch divided his ‘‘ Caput Tertium” into a number of sub-divisions. Of these, the third main sub-division (Sub-Division ‘‘C’’) Nitzsch styled ‘“‘ Aves Carmatae Aquaticae”’. This unit Nitzsch further subdivided, his first sub-unit being given the title “‘ Grallae 122 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Linn.”. Within this sub-unit Nitzsch recognised a number of “* familiae ’’. The following is a quotation from the entry relating to the seventh of these familiae :— 7. Limicolae (olim scolopacinae [sic] nobis nuncupatae), quarum genera : Ibis, Numenius, Limosa, Machetes Cuv., Tringa (cum qua Calidris utique coniungenda), Phalaropus, Euryrhynchus, Strepsilas, Recurvirostra, .. . The foregoing passage is on page 18 of Nitzsch’s work and is the only place in it where he refers to the name Euryrhynchus. It is true that at a later point (in the account given for “ Caput Quartum ”’) Nitzsch referred (: 22) again to what he called the ** Limicolarum familia ’’, but on this occasion the list of genera enumerated is shorter and does not include Euryrhynchus. The particulars furnished above show quite clearly that the alleged name Euryrhynchus Nitzsch is not an Emendation, as that term is defined under the Copenhagen decisions, for, as will be seen, there is nothing whatever to show that Nitzsch was deliberately emending the spelling of the name Eurynorhynchus Nilsson. Indeed, although it is probable that that was the genus to which Nitzsch was referring, even that must be regarded as conjectural in view of the fact that (contrary to what he had done when citing the name Machetes) Nitzsch cited no author for the name “ Euryrhynchus’’. 6. In view of the information contained in the foregoing Report, we now see that, under the Copenhagen decisions, the so-called name Euryrhynchus Nitzsch, 1829, is not an Emendation, being no more than an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling and that, since as such it possesses no status in zoological nomenclature, it does not invalidate the name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878], under the Law of Homonymy. The problem involved in the application submitted by Holthuis thus becomes much simpler, for the name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878], is now seen to be an available name and no action under the Plenary Powers is called for. It is likely, however, that, unless some action is taken by the International Commission, the ghost of the Erroneous Subsequent Spelling Euryrhynchus Nitzsch, 1829, may continue to haunt the literature. In the circumstances, the following revised proposal is submitted to the International Commission in substitution for the application originally submitted by Holthuis, namely that the International Commission should :— (1) place the name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878] (gender of name : masculine) (type species, by monotypy: Euryrhynchus wrzesniowskii Miers, [1878]) on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology ; (2) place the name wrzesniowskii Miers, [1878], as published in the combination Euryrhynchus wrzesniowskii (specific name of type OPINION 518 123 species of Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878]) on the Official list of Specific Names in Zoology ; (3) place the alleged name Euryrhynchus Nitzsch, 1829 (either an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling of Eurynorhynchus Nilsson, 1821, or a nomen nudum) on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology. 11. Publication in February 1954 of Revised Application submitted in October 1953: The revised application submitted in October 1953 was sent to the printer on 30th October of that year and was published on 26th February 1954 in Part 12 of Volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Hemming & Holthuis, 1954, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 6 : 367—369). 12. A Comment received during the Prescribed Six-Month Waiting Period following the publication of the Revised Application submitted in October 1953: Only one comment was received during the Six-Month Waiting Period following the publication on 26th February 1954 of the Revised Application submitted jointly by Mr. Hemming and Dr. Holthuis. This was a communication from Professor Dr. E. M. Hering (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin), who took exception to the proposal that the masculine gender should be assigned to the generic name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878], pointing out that under Decision 84 of the Copenhagen Congress the gender attributable to generic names having the termination “ -rhynchus ” was the neuter gender.? 13. Proposed addition to the ‘‘ Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology ”’ of a family-group name based on the generic name ‘* Kuryrhynchus ’’ Miers, [1878]: In September 1954 correspondence took place between Mr. Hemming and Dr. Holthuis on a further point arising out of a decision by the Copenhagen Congress, namely the family-group name aspect of the present case. It was then agreed between the joint applicants 2 For later developments in the matter of the gender to be attributed to the generic name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878], see paragraphs 19 and 20 below. 124 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS that the Commission should be invited, when dealing with this case, to complete the action required by placing the family- group name EURYRHYNCHINAE Holthuis (L.B.), 1950 (Siboga Exped. Mon. 39 (a.9): 1, 2) on the Official List of Family- Group Names in Zoology. 14. Preparations in November 1954 for the submission of a Voting Paper in the present case: On 18th November 1954 the Secretary prepared the Voting Paper (V.P.(54)86) to be submitted to the Commission in the present case. In Note 3 attached to this Voting Paper attention was drawn to the communication received from Professor Hering (paragraph 12 above) and it was recommended that the proposal submitted in the matter of gender be amended as there suggested, while in Note 4 a recommendation was submitted for the addition of the family- group name EURYRHYNCHINAE Holthuis, 1950 (paragraph 13 above), to the Official List of names for taxa of the family-group category. Ill. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 15. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(54)86 : On 26th November 1954 a Voting Paper (V.P.(54)86) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, ‘the proposal relating to the generic name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878], as set out in Points (1) to (3) in paragraph 6 on page 369 of Volume 6 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature [i.e. in the paragraph numbered as above in the paper reproduced in paragraph 10 of the present Opinion] subject to the correction specified in Note 3 and the addition specified in Note 4 [i.e. subject to the correction and addition referred to in paragraph 14 of the present Opinion]. 16. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 26th February 1955. OPINION 518 125 17. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)86 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(54)86 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) : Holthuis ; Hering; Lemche; Stoll; Bradley (J.C.) ; Vokes ; Esaki; Dymond; Bonnet; Riley ; Boschma; Miller; Key; Jaczewski; Hanké; do Amaral; Hemming ; Bodenheimer? ; Cabrera; Kiihnelt ; Sylvester-Bradley ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) On Leave of Absence, two (2) : Mayr ; Mertens ; (d) Voting Papers not returned : None. 8 Between the time of the issue of Voting Paper V.P.(54)86 and the close of the Prescribed Voting Period the following zoologists were elected to be Commissioners :— 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) 4 Commissioner Bodenheimer exercised in this case the right conferred by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology in 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). 126 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 18. Postponement in February 1955 of the Declaration of the Result of the Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)86, pending the completion of the review by the Commission under Copenhagen Decision 85 of the Gender Rules provisionally prescribed under Decision 84 of the Copenhagen Congress: At the time of the close in February 1955 of the Prescribed Voting Period in respect of Voting Paper V.P.(54)86 there appeared to be a possibility that at a fairly early date the Commission would be in a position to carry out under Decision 85 of the Copenhagen Congress the review which it had been charged to make of the gender rules provisionally laid down by that Congress in its Decision 84. Among the classes of name to be covered by that review were names having the termination “ -rhynchus”’, as regards which it was laid down in the decision referred to above that the gender to be attributed was the neuter gender. Already by the beginning of 1955 evidence had accumulated in the Office of the Commission that the general practice of specialists in all the groups for which information was available had been to treat names having the above termination as being of the masculine gender, that is, the gender which had been attributed to the name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878], in the application submitted in the present case. Further, in response to representations received from interested specialists proposals for the use of the Plenary Powers to validate the attribution of the masculine gender to certain generic names having the termination “ -rhynchus”’, which had been placed on the Official List in the period up to the end of 1936, were in process of being formulated for submission to the Commission. In these circumstances Mr. Hemming took the view that, if the result of the vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)86 were at once to be declared and an Opinion promulgated in which, as there agreed upon, the neuter gender was attributed to the generic name Euryrhynchus Miers, an anomalous and _ undesirable situation might develop if as the result of the review of Copenhagen Decision 84 the Commission were to rule that the gender to be attributed to names having the termination “ -rhynchus”’ was the masculine, and not the neuter, gender or if, while upholding the Copenhagen rule in this matter, the Commission were to use its Plenary Powers to validate the attribution of the masculine gender to the names ending in “rhynchus” which had been placed on the Official List in the period referred to above, for the situation as regards those names did not differ in any respect OPINION 518 127 from that arising in connection with the name Euryrhynchus Miers. Accordingly, Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, concluded that the proper course would be to defer the Declaration of the Result of the Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)86, pending the completion of the review by the Commission of the gender rules provisionally adopted by the Copenhagen Congress, and on this account he executed on 27th February 1954 a Minute directing that the Declaration of the Result of the Vote on the foregoing Voting Paper be so deferred. 19. Adoption in February 1958 of a ‘‘ Declaration ’’ reviewing under Copenhagen Decision 85 the Gender Rules provisionally prescribed by the Copenhagen Congress in its Decision 84: The investigations and consultations involved in the preparation of the material required to enable the Commission to carry out under Copenhagen Decision 85 the review which it had been charged to undertake of the Gender Rules provisionally prescribed by Copenhagen Decision 84 proved unexpectedly arduous and by the late summer of 1957 it was evident that there was no immediate prospect of assembling the whole of the material which would be needed by the Commission for the purpose of the prescribed review. Already by that date, however, the material relating to certain of the Rules involved, including those concerned with the gender to be attributed to names having the terminations “* -enathus’’ and “ -rhynchus’”’ respectively, was as complete as, it was judged, it was possible to secure. The decision then recently taken that the first instalment of the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology should be published without further delay made it a matter of great urgency that a decision should be taken by the Commission on the gender to be attributed to generic names having the above terminations, ten of which had been placed on the Official List in the period up to the end of 1936. It was accordingly decided to invite the Commission to adopt an Interim Report on those parts of the Gender Rules included in Copenhagen Decision 84, including in particular the Rules relating to the names having the terminations “-gnathus” and ** -rhynchus ’’, the material relating to which was considered to be complete. Accordingly, a paper on this subject bearing the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 1277 was submitted to the Com- 128 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS mission on 7th November 1957, together with a Voting Paper bearing the Number V.P.(57)61. In the paper so submitted grounds were advanced in support of the conclusion that the Gender Rules in regard to names having the above terminations set out in Copenhagen Decision 84 were incorrect and that the gender properly applicable to names having the above terminations was the masculine gender. The Prescribed Voting Period in respect of the above Voting Paper expired on 6th February 1958. It was then found that the Commission had approved and adopted the recommendations submitted to it in the paper referred to above, including the proposals for the attribution of the masculine gender to names having the terminations specified above. The Result of the Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(57)61 was declared on 7th February 1958 and later on the same day the decision so declared was embodied in a Declaration which it was directed should be known as Declaration 39.° 20. Adoption in February 1958 of a Ruling regarding the gender to be attributed to certain generic names having the terminations **-onathus ®’ and ‘‘-rhynchus ’’, including the generic name ‘* Kuryrhynchus ’’ Miers, [1878] : Simultaneously with the sub- mission to the Commission of the paper recommending the adoption of certain Rulings on the gender to be attributed to generic names of various classes referred to in the immediately preceding paragraph a second paper (bearing the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 1278) was submitted in which the Commission was recommended to direct that the generic names having the terminations “-gnathus’’ and “‘-rhynchus’”’ respectively which had been placed on the Official List in the period up to the end of 1936 should be treated as being masculine in gender, if on the Vote to be taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)61 the Commission were to rule that the above was the gender properly applicable to names having the foregoing terminations. With this second paper a Voting Paper numbered V.P.(57)62 was issued to the Commission in order to place it in a position to give a direction in the sense proposed simultaneously with the issue of a Declaration in the terms recommended in the paper submitted § Declaration 39 is being published in the immediately preceding Part (Part 4) of the present volume. | : OPINION 518 129 with Voting Paper V.P.(57)61, if on that Voting Paper the Commission were to decide in favour of the adoption of such a Declaration. At the time when the second of the two papers referred to above was in preparation it was judged desirable to include with the names of genera having the termination “* -rhynchus ”’ which had been placed on the Official List in the period up to the end of 1936 the generic name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878], the promulgation of a decision taken on which had (as explained in paragraph 18 above) been delayed since February 1955, in order to make it possible for the Commission to re-examine and, if necessary, to modify in the light of its review of the Gender Rules provisionally adopted by the Copenhagen Congress in its Decision 84 the gender which it had been decided to attribute to this name by the vote taken on the Voting Paper (V.P.(54)86) relating mainly to other aspects of that case. The Prescribed Voting Period in respect of Voting Paper V.P.(57)62 expired on 6th February 1958, when it was found that by the vote taken on that Voting Paper the Commission had approved the attribution of the masculine gender to the generic names submitted therewith, including the generic name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878], contingently upon an affirmative vote having been given on the proposal submitted with Voting Paper V.P.(57)61 for the adoption of a Declaration on the question of principle involved. Since, as explained in paragraph 19 above, the Commission had by that date voted in favour of the adoption of a Declaration in the sense recommended, the decision in favour of the attribution of the masculine gender to the ten names having either the termination “‘-gnathus”’ or the termination “ -rhynchus ” which had been placed on the Official List in the period up to the end of 1936 and also to the generic name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878], given contingently by the vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)62 became definitive forthwith. The result of the vote so taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)62 was thereupon formally declared by the Secretary, acting as Returning Officer for the vote taken on the said Voting Paper. At the same time the Secretary signed a Certificate 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. At this point consideration was given to the question of the procedure to be adopted for promulgating the decision so taken, having regard to the fact 130 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS that ten of the names covered by that decision had been placed on the Official List in the period up to the end of 1936, whereas the eleventh name (Euryrhynchus Miers) had not as yet been placed on that List, although a decision that it should be so placed had been taken by the Commission in February 1955. This question was determined by a Minute executed by the Secretary on 7th February 1958 in which directions were given (a) that the decision in regard to the ten generic names already placed on the Official List should be promulgated in a Direction and (b) that the decision in relation to the gender to be attributed to the name which had not as yet been placed on the Official List, 1.e. the generic name Euryrhynchus Miers, should be promulgated in the Opinion to be rendered for the purpose of placing that name on the Official List in pursuance of the decision taken by the Commission by its vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)86. 21. Declaration of Result of Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(54)86 : On 7th February 1958 Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the Inter- national Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(54)86, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 17 above and declaring that the proposal submitted in the foregoing Voting Paper had been duly adopted, save as respects the gender to be attributed to the generic name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878], as regards which the decision taken on the above Voting Paper had been revoked and replaced by the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)62, and that the decision taken on Voting Paper V.P.(54) 86, as modified in the respect specified above by the vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)62, was the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. 22. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 8th February 1958, 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)86, save as respects the gender to be attributed to the generic name Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878], as regards which the decision taken OPINION 518 131 on the said Voting Paper had been revoked and replaced by the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)62 in the terms specified in the Ruling prepared for the present Opinion. 23. Original References for Generic and Specific Names : 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 :— Euryrhynchus Nitzsch (C.L.), 1829, Obs. Avium Art. carot. comm. : 18 | Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878], Proc. zool. Soc. Lond. 1877 : 662 wrzesniowskii, Euryrhynchus, Miers, [1878], Proc. zool. Soc. Lond. 1877 : 662 24. Original References for Family-Group Names: The fol- lowing is the original reference for the family-group name placed on the Official List of names of that category by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— EURYRHYNCHINAE Holthuis (L.B.), 1950, Siboga Exped. Mon. 39 (a.9.) : 1, 2) 25. The expression “ specific ’’ name: At the time of the sub- mission 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 termin- ology have been incorporated in the Ruling given in the present Opinion. 26. Compliance with Prescribed Procedures : 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 132 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 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. 27. ** Opinion’? Number: The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Five Hundred and Eighteen (518) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Eighth day of February, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Eight. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING © 1958. THE INTERNATIONAL TRUST FOR ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Printed in England by METCALFE & Cooper LIMITED, 10-24 Scrutton St., London E C 2 asa matter of urgency 19, t arts & 10, ee effected in its publica- _ ‘US bay te 7 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. as Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 19. Part 6. Pp. 133—168 f OPINION 519 Addition to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology of the names of twenty-three genera of Macrura Reptantia (Class Crustacea) and use of the Plenary Powers in regard to three matters connected therewith 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 1958 Price One Pound Four Shitines— (All rights resé “xQ) AN SFP 1.0 1958 _J} Issued 8th August, 1958 | Saat y SE/BRAR INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 519 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President: Dr. Karl JorRDAN (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) Dr. Vinnie LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th July 1948) Professor Teiso Esaki (Kyushu University, Fukuol a, 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 HErinc (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitdt zu Berlin, Germany) (Sth July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice-President) Professor J. R. DymMonpD (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 (University of Tulane, Department of Geology, New Orleans, Louisiana, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezdégazdasdgi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. SToLi (Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research, New York, N.Y., U.S.A.) (2th August 1953) Mr. P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Sheffield University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) Dr. L. B. HoituHuis (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) (45th 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) Professor F. S. BODENHEIMER (The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel) (11th November 1954) Professor Ernst Mayr (Museum of Compares Zoology at Harvard College, Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A.) (4th December 195 Professor Enrico ToRTONESE (Museo di Stone Naturale “*“* G. Doria’’, Genova, Italy) (16th December 1954) OPINION 519 ADDITION TO THE ‘ OFFICIAL LIST OF GENERIC NAMES IN ZOOLOGY ”’ OF THE NAMES OF TWENTY- THREE GENERA OF MACRURA REPTANTIA (CLASS CRUSTACEA) AND USE OF THE PLENARY POWERS IN REGARD TO THREE MATTERS CONNECTED THEREWITH RULING :—(1) The following action is hereby taken under the Plenary Powers :— (a) It is hereby directed that of the generic names Cherax and Cheraps published by Erichson in 1846, the spelling Cherax is to be accepted as the Valid Original Spelling ; (b) The emendation to Palinurus of the generic name Pallinurus Weber, 1795, is hereby validated ; (c) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby suppressed for the purposes of the Law of Priority ‘but not for those of the Law of Homonymy :— goudotii Guérin-Méneville, 1839, as published in the combination Astacoides goudotii. (2) The under-mentioned names of genera in the Order Decapoda (Class Crustacea) are hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (i) Astacoides Guérin-Méneville, 1839 (gender : mas- culine) (type species, by monotypy: Astacoides goudotii Guérin-Méneville, 1839) (Name No. 1275). ; SMITHSONIAN © 136 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (ii) Cambarellus Ortmann, 1905 (gender: masculine) (type species, by original designation : Cambarus montezumae de Saussure, 1857) (Name No. 1276) ; (ii1) Cambarus Erichson, 1846 (gender : masculine) type species, by selection by Faxon (1898): Astacus bartonii Fabricius, 1798) (Name No. 1277) ; (iv) Cherax Erichson, 1846, the spelling for this name validated under the Plenary Powers under (1)(a) above (gender: masculine) (type species, by monotypy : Astacus (Cheraps) preissii Erichson, 1846) (Name No. 1278) ; (v) Engaeus Erichson, 1846 (gender : masculine) (type species, by selection by Clark (1936): Astacus (Engaeus) fossor Erichson, 1846) (Name No. 1279); (vi) Enoplometopus Milne Edwards (A.), 1862 (gender : masculine) (type species, by monotypy: Enoplometopus pictus Milne Edwards (A.), 1862) (Name No. 1280 ) ; (vii) Jbacus Leach, 1815 (gender: masculine) (type species, by monotypy: Jbacus peronii Leach, 1815) (Name No. 1281) ; (viii) Linuparus White, 1847 (gender : masculine) (type species, by monotypy: Palinurus trigonus von Siebold, 1824) (Name No. 1282) ; (ix) Orconectes Cope, 1872 (gender : masculine) (type species, by selection by Fowler (1912) : Orconectes inermis Cope, 1872) (Name No. 1283) ; (x) Palinurellus von Martens, 1878 (gender : masculine) (type species, by monotypy : Palinurellus gundlachi von Martens, 1878) (Name No. 1284) ; OPINION 519 137 (xi) Palinurus (emend. under the Plenary Powers in (1)(b) above of Pallinurus) Weber, 1795 (gender : masculine) (type species, by monotypy : Astacus elephas Fabricius, 1787) (Name No. 1285) ; (xii) Palinustus Milne Edwards (A.), 1880 (gender : masculine) (type species, by monotypy : Palinustus truncatus Milne Edwards (A.), 1880) (Name No. 1286) ; (xiii) Paracambarus Ortmann, 1906 (gender : masculine) (type species, by monotypy: Cambarus (Paracambarus) paradoxus Ortmann, 1906) (Name No. 1287) ; (xiv) Paranephrops White, 1842 (gender: masculine) (type species, by monotypy: Paranephrops planifrons White, 1842) (Name No. 1288) ; (xv) Parastacus Huxley, [1879] (gender: masculine) (type species, by selection by Faxon (1898) : Astacus pilimanus von Martens, 1869) (Name No. 1289) ; (xvi) Parribacus Dana, 1852 (gender: masculine) (type species, by selection by Holthuis (1956) : Scyllarus antarcticus Lund, 1793, as defined by the lectotype selected by Holthuis (1956)) (Name No. 1290) ; (xvii) Polycheles Heller, 1862 (gender: masculine) (type species, by monotypy : Polycheles typhlops Heller, 1862) (Name No. 1291) ; (xviii) Procambarus Ortmann, 1905 (gender: masculine) (type species, by selection by Fowler (1912): Cambarus digueti Bouvier, 1897) (Name No. 1292) ; (xix) Puerulus Ortmann, 1897 (gender : masculine) (type 138 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS species, by selection by Calman (1909) : Panulirus angulatus Bate, 1888) (Name No. 1293) ; (xx) Scyllarus Fabricius (J.C.), 1775(gender : masculine) (type species, by monotypy: Cancer arctus Linnaeus, 1758, as defined by the lectotype selected by Holthuis (1956)) (Name No. 1294) ; (xxi) Thaumastocheles Wood-Mason, 1874 (gender : _ masculine) (type species, by monotypy : Astacus zaleucus Thomson, 1873) (Name No. 1295) ; (xxii) Thenus Leach, 1815 (gender: masculine) (type species, by monotypy: Thenus indicus Leach, 1815) (Name No. 1296) ; (xxiii) Willemoesia Grote, 1873 (gender : feminine) (type species, by monotypy : Deidamia leptodactyla von Willemoes-Suhm, 1873) (Name No. 1297). (3) The under-mentioned specific names, being the specific names of species which are the type species of genera belonging to the Order Decapoda (Class Crustacea) placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology under (2) above, are hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (i) angulatus Bate, 1888, as published in the com- bination Panulirus angulatus (specific name of type species of Puerulus Ortmann, 1897) (Name No. 1526) ; (ii) antarcticus Lund, 1793, as published in the com- bination Scyllarus antarcticus, and as defined by the lectotype selected by Holthuis (1956) (specific name of type species of Parribacus Dana, 1852) (Name No. 1527) ; OPINION 519 139 (iii) arctus Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the com- bination Cancer arctus and as defined by the lectotype selected by Holthuis (1956) (specific name of type species of Scyllarus Fabricius, 1775) (Name No. 1528) ; (iv) bartonii Fabricius, (J.C.), 1798, as published in the combination Astacus bartonii (specific name of type species of Cambarus Erichson, 1846) (Name ING W529); (v) digueti Bouvier, 1897, as published in the com- bination Cambarus digueti (specific name of type species of Procambarus Ortmann, 1905) (Name No. 1530) ; (vi) elephas Fabricius (J.C.), 1787, as published in the combination Astacus elephas (specific name of type species of Palinurus Weber, 1795) (Name No. 1531) ; (vii) fossor Erichson, 1846, as published in the com- bination Astacus (Engaeus) fossor (specific name of type species of Engaeus Erichson, 1846) (Name No. 1532) ; (viii) gundlachi von Martens, 1878, as published in the combination Palinurellus gundlachi (specific name of type species of Palinurellus von Martens, 1878) (Name No. 1533) ; (ix) leptodactyla von Willemoes-Suhm, 1873, as pub- lished in the combination Deidamia leptodactyla (specific name of type species of Wéillemoesia Grote, 1873) (Name No. 1534) ; (x) montezumae de Saussure, 1857, as published in the combination Cambarus montezumae (specific name of type species of Cambarellus Ortmann, 1905) (Name No. 1535) ; 140 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (x1) paradoxus Ortmann, 1906, as published in the com- bination Cambarus (Paracambarus) paradoxus (specific name of type species of Paracambarus Ortmann, 1906) (Name No. 1536); (xii) peronii Leach, 1815, as published in the combina- tion Ibacus peronii (specific name of type species of Ibacus Leach, 1815) (Name No. 1537) ; (xiii) pictus Milne Edwards (A.), 1862, as published in the combination Enoplometopus pictus (specific name of type species of Enoplometopus Milne Edwards (A.), 1862) (Name No. 1538) ; (xiv) pilimanus von Martens, 1869, as published in the combination Astacus pilimanus (specific name of type species of Parastacus Huxley, [1879]) (Name No. 1539); (xv) planifrons White, 1842, as published in the com- bination Paranephrops planifrons (specific name of type species of Paranephrops White, 1842) (Name No. 1540) ; (xvi) trigonus von Siebold, 1824, as published in the combination Palinurus trigonus (specific name of type species of Linuparus White, 1847) (Name No. 1541) ; (xvii) truncatus Milne Edwards (A.), 1880, as published in the combination Palinustus truncatus (specific name of type species of Palinustus Milne Edwards (A.), 1880) (Name No. 1542) ; (xviii) typhlops Heller, 1862, as published in the combina- tion Polycheles typhlops (specific name of type species of Polycheles Heller, 1862) (Name No. 1543) ; OPINION 519 141 (xix) zaleucus Thomson, 1873, as published in the com- bination Astacus zaleucus (specific name of type species of Thaumastocheles Wood-Mason, 1874) (Name No. 1544). (4) The under-mentioned specific names, each of which is the name of a nominal species currently identified by specialists with a nominal species having a later available name which is the type species of a genus belonging to the Order Decapoda (Class Crustacea) placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology under (2) above, are hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in ee eey with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (i) madagascarensis Milne Edwards (H.) & Audouin, 1839, as published in the combination Astacus madagascarensis (Name No. 1545) ; (ii) bicarinatus Gray (J.E.), 1845, as published in the combination Astacus bicarinatus (Name No. 1546) ; (iii) pellucidus Tellkampf, 1844, as published in the combination Astacus pellucidus (Name No. 1547) : (iv) orientalis Lund, 1793, as published in the combina- tion Scyllarus orientalis (Name No. 1548). (5) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) Arctus De Haan, [1849] (a junior objective synonym of Scyllarus Fabricius, 1775) (Name No. 1170) ; 14 a Z OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (b) Arctus Dana, 1852 (a junior homonym of, and a junior objective synonym of, Arctus De Haan, [1849], and a junior objective synonym of Scyllarus Fabricius, 1775) (Name No. 1171) ; (c) Avus Ortmann, 1891 (a junior objective synonym of Linuparus White, 1847) (Name No. 1172) ; (d) Bartonius Ortmann, 1905 (a junior objective syno- nym of Cambarus Erichson, 1846) (Name No. ICS) (e) Chaeraps Huxley, [1879] (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling for Cherax Erichson, 1846) (Name No. 1174) ; (f) Cheraps Erichson, 1846 (an Invalid Original Spelling for Cherax Erichson, 1846, under the Ruling given under the Plenary Powers in (1)(a) above) (Name No. 1175) ; (g) Deidamia von Willemoes-Suhm, 1873 (a junior homonym of Deidamia Clemens, 1859) (Name No. 1176) ; (h) Palinurus Fabricius (J.C.), 1798 (a junior objective synonym of, and a junior homonym of, Palinurus Weber, 1795) (Name No. 1177) ; (i) Palinurus De Kay, 1842 (a junior homonym of Palinurus Weber, 1795) (Name No. 1178) ; (j) Pallinurus Weber, 1795 (an Invalid Original Spelling for Palinurus Weber, 1795) (Name No. 1179) ; (k) Polycheles Brady & Robertson, 1870 (a junior homonym of Polycheles Heller, 1862) (Name No. 1180) ; (1) Puer Ortmann, 1891 (a junior homonym of Puer Lefebvre, 1842) (Name No. 1181). —- OPINION 519 143 (6) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) goudotii Guérin-Méneville, 1839, as published in the combination Astacoides goudotii (a name suppressed under the Plenary Powers under (1)(c) above) (Name No. 528) ; (b) incisus (Péron MS.) Leach, 1815, as published in the combination Scyllarus incisus (a junior objec- tive synonym of peronii Leach, 1815, as published in the combination Jbacus peronii) (Name No. 529) 5 (c) madagascariensis Audouin & Milne Edwards (H.), 1841, as published in the combination Astacus madagascariensis (an Erroneous Subsequent Spel- ling for madagascarensis Milne Edwards (H.) & Audouin, 1839, as published in the combination Astacus madagascarensis) (Name No. 530) ; (d) quadricornis Weber, 1795, as published in the com- bination Pallinurus quadricornis (a junior objec- tive synonym of elephas Fabricius, 1787, as published in the combination Astacus elephas) (Name No. 531) ; (e) quadricornis Fabricius (J.C.), 1798, as published. in the combination Palinurus quadricornis (a junior objective synonym of elephas Fabricius (J.C.), 1787, as published in the combination Astacus elephas, and a junior homonym of, and a junior objective synonym of, quadricornis Weber, 1795, as published in the combination Pallinurus quadricornis) (Name No. 532) ; (f) ursus Dana, 1852, as published in the combination Arctus ursus (a junior objective synonym of arctus 144 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the combination Cancer arctus) (Name No. 533) ; (g) ursusmajor Herbst, 1793, as published in the com- bination Cancer (Astacus) ursus-major and as defined by the lectotype selected by Holthuis (1956) (a junior objective synonym of antarcticus Lund, 1793, as published in the combination Scyllarus antarcticus) (Name No. 534) ; (h) ursusminor Herbst, 1793, as published in the com- bination Cancer (Astacus) ursus-minor and as defined by the lectotype selected by Holthuis (1956) (a junior objective synonym of arctus Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the combination Cancer arctus) (Name No. 535) ; (i) vulgaris Latreille, [1802—1803], as published in the combination Palinurus vulgaris (a junior objective synonym of homarus Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the combination Cancer homarus) (Name No. 536) ; (j) vulgaris Latreille, 1804, as published in the combina- tion Palinurus vulgaris (a junior objective synonym of elephas Fabricius (J.C.), 1787, as published in the combination Astacus elephas, and a junior homonym of vulgaris Latreille, [1802—1803], as published in the combination Palinurus vulgaris) (Name No. 537). (7) The under-mentioned family-group names are here- by placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) CAMBARINAE Hobbs, 1942 (type genus : Cambarus Erichson, 1846) (Name No. 237) ; OPINION 519 145 (b) PALINURIDAE (correction by Samouelle (1819) of PALINURINI) Latreille, [1802—1803] (type genus : Palinurus Weber, 1795) (Name No. 238) ; (c) PARASTACIDAE Huxley, [1879] (type genus: Parastacus Huxley, [1879]) (Name No. 239) ; (d) POLYCHELIDAE Wood-Mason, 1874 (type genus: Polycheles Heller, 1862) (Name No. 240) ; (e) SCYLLARIDAE (correction by White (1847) of SCYLLARIDES) Latreille, 1825 (type genus: Scyllarus Fabricius, 1775) (Name No. 241). (8) The under-mentioned family-group names are here- by placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) PALINURINI Latreille, [1802—1803] (type genus : Palinurus Weber, 1795) (an Invalid Original Spelling for PALINURIDAE but available for a family-group taxon belonging to a category not having a prescribed termination) (Name No. 274) ; (b) SCYLLARIDES Latreille, 1825 (type genus: Scyllarus Fabricius, 1775) (an Invalid Original Spelling for SCYLLARIDAE) (Name No. 275). I. THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 4th November 1955 Dr. L. B. Holthuis (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) submitted the following application for the addition to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology of the names of twenty-five genera of Macrura Reptantia (Class Crustacea) and in connection therewith for the use by the Commission of its Plenary Powers (a) to direct 146 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS that of the two spellings Cherax and Cheraps published by Erichson in 1846, the former be accepted as the Valid Original Spelling, (b) to validate the emendation to Palinurus of Pallinurus Weber, 1795, and (c) to suppress the specific name goudotii Guérin-Méneville, 1839, as published in the combination Astacoides goudotii, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy :— Proposed addition to the “ Official List of Generic Names in Zoology ” of the names of twenty-five Genera of Macrura Reptantia (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), including proposals for the use of the Plenary Powers (a) to validate the spelling “ Cherax ”’ as the valid Original Spelling for the Generic Name Published as **Cherax ’? and ‘‘ Cheraps’’ by Erichson in 1846, (b) to suppress the Specific Name ‘‘ goudotii ’? Guérin-Méneville 1839, as published in the combination “ Astacoides goudotii ’’, and (c) to validate the Emendation to ‘* Palinurus ”’ of the generic Name ‘‘ Pallinurus ’, Weber, 1795 By L. B. HOLTHUIS (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) I submit herewith to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature a list of the names of twenty-five genera of Macrura Reptantia for addition to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology. Each of these names is an available name in the sense that it is not a homonym of any generic name previously published for a genus in the Animal Kingdom. All these names are currently used in catcino- logical literature and have been used for the last twenty-five years at the least. The validity of only one of these names has ever been questioned. This one case is dealt with in paragraph 4 below. Except for the two cases dealt with in paragraphs 3 and 5 below, the spelling of the names adopted here is the Valid Original Spelling. The species indicated here as the type species of the genera enumerated in para- graph 9, have been duly determined as such under Article 30 of the Régles Internationales de la Nomenclature Zoologique. For each generic name the gender is indicated. The following seven cases need some special comment :— 2. Astacoides Guérin-Méneville, 1839. The type species of this genus was described almost simultaneously (a) by Guérin-Meéneville and (b) by H. Milne Edwards and Audouin. In both cases the type specimens were collected by a M. Goudot in Madagascar, and they OPINION 519 147 possibly originally belonged to the same lot. Guérin-Méneville, who named the species Astacoides goudotii, published its description on page 109 of the April number of the Revue zoologique for the year 1839, a periodical which was published monthly. H. Milne Edwards & Audouin published a short description of the same species in L’Institut ((sect. 1) 7 (280): 152), under the name Astacus madagascarensis. This number of L’Institut, which is a weekly periodical, bears the date “9 mai 1839”, which confidently may be accepted as the date of publication. The April number of Revue zoologique contains (on page 119) a report of the session of April 29 of the ““Académie royale des sciences de Paris’’, and consequently must have been published after that date. Since this same April number was offered by Guérin-Meéneville to the Académie des Sciences in their session of 13th May 1839 (cf. C. R. Acad. Sci., Paris 8 : 766)* the date of publication of that number lies between April 29 and May 13, 1839 ; the fact that this number was not offered to the Academy in their session of May 6 is an indication that the day of issue lies somewhere between the 6th and 13th May 1839. Even this narrowing down of the date of publication to one week does not solve the present question, since Astacus madagascarensis was published in the same week (9th May 1839). With the available evidence the date of publica- tion of the name Astacoides goudotii Guérin-Méneville must be accepted as 13th May 1839, since this is the earliest date on which it is certain that the publication of that name had occurred. The specific name goudotii therefore is a junior subjective synonym of the name madagascarensis and must give way to the latter name. This agrees quite well with the practice adopted by carcinologists, since after 1839. practically all authors have used the specific name madagascarensis or (sometimes) its invalid emendation madagascariensis (first published as Astacus madagascariensis Audouin & Milne Edwards (H.), 1841, Arch. Mus. Hist. nat. Paris 2 : 35) and rejected the name goudotii. However, as additional evidence eventually may be forthcoming, giving a more exact date of publication of Astacoides goudotii, and as the possibility exists that this date actually falls before the date of publication of the name Astacus madagascarensis, it seems best to set all doubts as to the priority of the latter name at rest by suppressing the former under the Plenary Powers of the Commission. 3. Cherax Erichson, 1846. In the publication containing the original description of this genus, Erichson (1846, Arch. Naturgesch. * It is stated in these Comptes Rendus that the Academy received during their session of 13th May “* Revue zoologique ; par le méme [= Guérin-Méneville] ; 1839, in-8°”. Though the actual number of the Revue zoologique received at this session is not specially indicated here, it is evident that the April number (number 4) is meant, since Guérin offered No. 1 (the January number) of his Revue to the Academy in their session of 4th February 1839 (cf. C. R. Acad. Sci., Paris 8 : 180), No. 2 (the February number) in the session of 11th March (cf. C. R. Acad. Sci., Paris 8 : 366), No. 3 (the March number) in the session of ist April 1839 (cf. C.R. Acad. Sci., Paris 8 : 502). 148 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 12(1) : 86—103) used two different spellings for its name. On pages 88 and 89 the spelling Cherax is employed four times, while on page 101 the spelling Cheraps is used twice. According to the Rule formu- ‘lated at the Copenhagen Congress, “‘ where there was more than one Original Spelling and in the case of none of these spellings was there clear evidence that it was the result of an inadvertent error, the Valid Original Spelling is that one of the Original Spellings used by the First Subsequent User of the name’’ (Hemming, 1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 43, 44). In the present case the First Subsequent User was Erichson himself, who in an addendum to his above cited paper (1846, Arch. Naturgesch. 12(1) : 375—377) on pages 376 and 377 used the spelling Cheraps twice. Cheraps therefore is the nomenclatorially correct name for the genus discussed here. Up to 1936 this spelling was used by ten of the sixteen authors dealing with this genus, while three authors used the Invalid Subsequent Spelling Chaeraps (first published by Huxley, [1879], Proc. zool. Soc. Lond. 1878 : 752, 755, 764, 767—771, 775, 776, 786). I know of no-one in © the period up to 1936 who used the spelling Cherax, apart from Erichson himself. In 1936, however, Clark (1936, Mem. nat. Mus. Victoria 10 : 19) adopted the spelling Cherax because this was the spelling first used by Erichson in his original paper. Since Clark’s publication is a monographic treatment of the Australian freshwater crayfishes and contains a revision of the genus Cherax, it has been consulted by practically all subsequent workers in this group and her nomenclature has been generally adopted. Of the nine authors publishing on this genus since 1936, six used the spelling Cherax, two that of Cheraps. In 1949 Holthuis (Nova Guinea (n.s.) 5 : 299) in a revision of the New Guinea species of the genus in question also came to the conclusion that the spelling Cherax was to be preferred to that of Cheraps, though his reasons were different from those given by Clark. Holthuis, basing himself on the Principle of the First Reviser, pointed out that the first publication in which both the spellings Cherax and Cheraps were mentioned and in which one of these was selected as the correct spelling, is Schulze, Kiikenthal, Heider & Hesse’s (1927) Nomencl. Anim. Gen. Subgen. (2 : 649), where behind the word Cheraps the indication “‘ pro Cherax’”’ is given. Since during the Copenhagen Congress the Principle of the First Subsequent User, and not that of the First Reviser was adopted, the spelling Cherax employed by Clark and Holthuis proves to be incorrect, that of Cheraps being correct. However, as in modern carcinological literature the spelling Cherax has become generally accepted, it would seem senseless to switch back to Cheraps, thereby causing a new confusion. Therefore the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature is asked here to use its Plenary Powers to validate the spelling Cherax as the Valid Original Spelling and to suppress the spelling Cheraps. 4. Linuparus White, 1847 (spelling): This generic name is an ana- gram of the name Palinurus and evidently for that reason was rejected by Ortmann (1891, Zool. Jb. Syst. 6 : 21) who proposed the new name eS oo OPINION 519 149 Avus for it. In a later publication Ortmann (1897, Amer. J. Sci. (4) 4 :290) admitted his error and accepted White’s name. Very few authors have followed Ortmann (1891) in the use of the name Avus, which now is completely forgotten. 5. Palinurus Weber, 1795 (spelling) : Before Rathbun’s (1904, Proc. biol. Soc. Wash. 17 : 169—172) rediscovery of Weber’s (1795) Nomen- clator Entomologicus, the present genus was always referred to as Palinurus Fabricius, 1798, and its name spelled with one “1”. The genera Pallinurus Weber, 1795, and Palinurus Fabricius, 1798, are objective synonyms as both have the same type species. The generic name Pallinurus Weber, being the older of the two, has priority and under the Régles ought to be used. As, however, the spelling Palinurus has been consistently employed by practically every carcinologist from 1798 to the present day (even Miss Rathbun’s discovery of Webet’s Nomenclator did not cause any noticeable difference here) it would be very awkward to change the spelling to Pallinurus. This is the more true since the name Pallinurus has, as far as I am aware, no sensible meaning, while Palinurus is the name of a mythological figure, viz., the steersman of Aeneas’s ship. The Commission is therefore asked to use its Plenary Powers to approve the emendation of the spelling of the generic name Pallinurus Weber, 1795, to Palinurus. 6. Palinurus Weber, 1795 (name for type species) : The synonymy of the type species of this genus, Astacus elephas Fabricius, 1787 (Mant. . Ins. 1 : 331), is rather complicated. Fabricius’s original description of this species and his reference to the, then still unpublished, figure by Herbst leave not the least doubt as to itsidentity. Its place of occurrence was, however, incorrectly given as “‘ Habitat in Americae meridionalis Insulis ’’, for the species concerned, the European Spiny Lobster, is known only from the eastern Atlantic, the British Isles to the Mediter- ranean and N.W. Africa. For no apparent reason both Weber (1795, Nomencl. Ent. : 94) and Fabricius himself (1798, Suppl. Ent. syst. : 401) substituted the specific name quadricornis for that of elephas, while in 1804 Latreille (Ann. Mus. Hist. nat., Paris, 3 : 391) replaced the name quadricornis by that of vulgaris. The name Palinurus vulgaris Latreille, 1804, has been adopted by most subsequent authors who dealt with the European Spiny Lobster. Apart from the fact that this name is a junior objective synonym of the names Astacus elephas Fabricius, 1787, Pallinurus quadricornis Weber, 1795, and Palinurus quadricornis Fabricius, 1798, it is furthermore a junior homonym of Palinurus vulgaris Latreille, [1802—1803] (Hist. nat. gén. part. Crust. Ins. 6 : 191), which itself is a substitute name for, and thereby a junior objective synonym of, Cancer homarus Linnaeus, 1758 (Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1: 633). The latter species is an Indo-West Pacific spiny lobster which in modern literature is indicated with the name Panulirus homarus (Linnaeus). Though the name Palinurus vulgaris has been much used, it seems best in this case to follow the normal provisions of the Reégles 150 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS here and to place the correct name elephas Fabricius on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology, the more so since this name has been adopted by several modern authors. 7. Parribacus Dana, 1852: The original description of the type species of this genus, Scyllarus antarcticus, was published in 1793 by Lund (Skr. Naturh. Selsk. Kbh. 2(2) : 22). In the same year this same species was described by Herbst, 1793 (Versuch Naturgesch. Krabben Krebse 2(3) : 82) under the name Cancer (Astacus) ursus major. The available evidence is not sufficient to permit of a decision on the question as to which of these two names was published first. The Principle of the First Reviser has to be adopted in order to find out which of the two names should be used, for under the Régles the above names rank for priority as from the same day, i.e. 31st December 1793, the earliest date as from which each of these names is known to have been published. As pointed out by Holthuis, 1946 (Temminckia 7 : 104) the First Subsequent Reviser here is Milne Edwards (H.), 1837 (Hist. nat. Crust. 2 : 287, 288) who selected the name antarcticus for the present species. This specific name, which is far more widely used than that of ursusmajor, is now submitted for insertion in the Official List. In the synonymy of Scyllarus antarcticus, Lund (1793) cited four authors : “‘ Seba Mus. 3. Tab. 20. fig. 1. Rumph. Mus. Tab. 2. fig. C. Marcgraf H. Brasiliae p. 186. Johnston. exsangv. Tab. 9. fig. 14.” The first two of these references (namely those to Seba and Rumphius) are cited also by Herbst (1793) in the synonymy of Cancer (Astacus) ursusmajor. As the lectotype for both Scyllarus antarcticus Lund, 1793, and Cancer (Astacus) ursusmajor Herbst, 1793, I now select the specimen figured on plate 2 fig. C of Rumphius’s (1705) Amboinsche Rariteitkamer. By this action Scyllarus antarcticus Lund, 1793, and Cancer (Astacus) ursusmajor Herbst, 1793, become objective synonyms. It is now proposed that the specific name ursusmajor Herbst, as the junior of these two names, should be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology. 8. Scyllarus Fabricius, 1775: The type species of this genus is (by monotypy) Cancer arctus Linnaeus, 1758 (Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1 : 633). The original description of that species runs as follows : C.[ancer] macrourus, thorace subaculeato hirto, manibus adactylis. Marcgr. bras. 186. Poliquiquyixe. Jonst. exsangu. t. 4. f. 3, 4, 8, 12. Barrel. rar. t. 1288. f. 2. Rumph, mus. t. 2. f. C. D. Brown. jam. t. 41. f. 1. Habitat in M. Europae, Asiae, Africae, Americae. OPINION 519 151 Linnaeus’s definition of this species is so vague that it would fit any Scyllarid and indeed many other Crustacea. The literature referred to by Linnaeus deals with five different species of SCYLLARIDAE : Marcgraf’s animal, like that figured by Rumphius in his fig. C, belongs to the species known at present as Parribacus antarcticus (Lund), Jonston’s figs. 4 and 12 represent Scyllarides latus (Latreille), his figs. 3 and 8 show the species that at present is generally known as Scyllarus arctus(L.). The latter species is also figured by Barrelier. Rumphius’s fig. D is made from a specimen of Thenus orientalis (Lund), while Browne figured a specimen of Scy/larides aequinoctialis (Lund). Cancer arctus Linnaeus, 1758, is therefore a composite species. To fix the identity of that species in harmony with current usage, I here select as the lectotype of Cancer arctus Linnaeus, 1758, the specimen figured in fig. 8 of pl. IV of J. Jonstonus’s (1650) Historiae Naturalis de Exanguibus aquaticis Libri IV, which figure also may be found in the later (1657 and 1767) editions of Jonston’s work and in its 1660 Dutch translation. In all these editions it is shown as pl. IV fig. 8. Com- paring Jonston’s figure with those given in older publications it becomes evident that this figure is not original, but is a copy of a figure published by Gesner (1558, Hist. Anim. 4 : 1087), which itself again is copied from Rondelet’s (1554, Libri Pisc. mar. : 546) excellent figure of the species. Herbst (1793, Versuch Naturgesch. Krabben Krebse 2(3) : 83) described the present species under the name Cancer (Astacus) ursus- minor and cited with the synonymy: ‘Sulzer Gesch. der Ins. tab. 32. Fig. 3. Gesner nomenclat. aquatil. p. 217. Ursaminor. Rondelet. Squilla caelata.’’ Gesner’s figure is a copy of that by Rondelet, which as pointed out above is the original figure of the type specimen of Cancer arctus Linnaeus. I now select Rondelet’s specimen as the type specimen of Cancer (Astacus) ursusminor Herbst, 1793, making thereby Herbst’s species a junior objective synonym of Cancer arctus Linnaeus, 1758. 9. The following list contains the required particulars regarding the twenty-five generic names, which it is now recommended should be placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology :— Astacoides (masculine) Guérin-Méneville, 1839, Rev. zool. 2 : 109 (type species, by monotypy: Astacoides goudotii Guérin-Meéneville, 6—13 May 1839, Rev. zool. 2 : 109 [Note (not for inclusion in the Official List) : This name is a junior subjective synonym of Astacus madagascarensis Milne Edwards (H.) & Audouin, 9 May 1839, L’Institut (sect. 1) 7(280) : 152]) Astacopsis (masculine) Huxley, [1879], Proc. zool. Lond. 1878 : 760, 764 (type species, by monotypy : Astacus franklinii Gray (J.E.), 1845, in Eyre J. Exped. Discov. centr. Australia 1 : 409) Cambarellus (masculine) Ortmann, 1905, Proc. Amer. phil. Soc. 44: 97, 106 (type species, by original designation: Cambarus montezumae De Saussure, 1857, Rev. Mag. Zool. (2) 9 : 102) 152 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Cambarus (masculine) Erichson, 1846, Arch. Naturgesch. 12(1) : 88, 89, 95 (type species, by selection by Faxon, 1898 (Proc. U.S. Nat. Mus. 20 : 644): Astacus bartonii Fabricius, 1798, Suppl. Ent. syst. : 407) Cherax (masculine) Erichson, 1846, Arch. Naturgesch. 12(1) : 88, 89 (type species by monotypy : Astacus (Cheraps) preissii Erichson, 1846, Arch. Naturgesch. 12(1) : 101 [Note (not for inclusion in the Official List): This name is a junior subjective synonym of Astacus bicarinatus Gray (J.E.), 1845, in Eyre J. Exped. Discov. centr. Australia 1 : 410]) Engaeus (masculine) Erichson, 1846, Arch. Naturgesch. 12(1) : 88, 89, 102 (type species, by selection by Clark (1936, Mem. Nat. Mus. Victoria 10:37): Astacus (Engaeus) fossor Erichson, 1846, Arch. Naturgesch. 12(1) : 102) Enoplometopus (masculine) A. Milne Edwards, 1862, Ann. Sci. nat., Paris (Zool.) (4) 17 : 362 (type species, by monotypy: Enoplometopus pictus Milne Edwards (A.), 1862, Ann. Sci. nat., Paris (Zool.) (4) 17 : 362) Ibacus (masculine) Leach, 1815, Zool. Miscell. 2 : 151 (type species, by monotypy: Ibacus peronii Leach, 1815, Zool. Méiscell. Zit 152) Linuparus (masculine) White, 1847, List Crust. Brit. Mus. : 70 (type species, by monotypy: Palinurus trigonus von Siebold, 1824, Hist. nat. Japon. : 15) Nephropsis (masculine) Wood-Mason, 1872, Proc. asiat. Soc. Bengal 1872 : 151 (type species, by monotypy: Nephropsis stewarti Wood-Mason, 1872, Proc. asiat. Soc. Bengal 1872 : 151) Orconectes (masculine) Cope, 1872, Amer. Nat. 6 : 409, 410, 416, 417, 419 (type species, by selection by Fowler (1912, Ann. Rep. New Jersey State Mus. 1911 : 339) : Orconectes inermis Cope, 1872, Amer. Nat. 6: 409, 410, 419 [Note (not for inclusion in the Official List): This name is a junior subjective synonym of Astacus pellucidus Tellkampf, 1844, Arch. Anat. Phys. wiss. Medic. 1844 : 383]) Palinurellus (masculine) von Martens, 1878, S. B. Ges. naturf. Freunde Berlin 1878 : 131 (type species, by monotypy: Palinurellus gundlachi von Martens, 1878, S. B. Ges. naturf. Freunde Berlin 1878 : 131) Palinurus Weber, 1795, Nomencl. ent. Syst. Fabr. : 94 ( type species, by monotypy : Astacus elephas Fabricius, 1787, Mant. Ins. 1: 331) OPINION 519 153 Palinustus (masculine) Milne Edwards (A.), 1880, Bull. Mus. comp. Zool. 8 : 66 (type species, by monotypy: Palinustus truncatus Milne Edwards (A.), 1880, Bull. Mus. comp. Zool. 8 : 66) Paracambarus (masculine) Ortmann, 1906, Proc. Wash. Acad. Sci. 8: 1 (type species, by monotypy: Cambarus (Paracambarus) paradoxus Ortmann, 1906, Proc. Wash. Acad. Sci. 8 : 1, 3) Paranephrops (masculine) White, 1842, Gray’s Zool. Miscell. (5) : 78 (type species, by monotypy: Paranephrops planifrons White, 1842, Gray’s Zool. Miscell. (5) : 79) Parastacus (masculine) Huxley, [1879], Proc. zool. Soc. Lond. 1878 : 759, 771 (type species, by selection by Faxon (1898, Proc. U.S. nat. Mus. 20: 683): Astacus pilimanus von Martens, 1869, Arch. Naturgesch. 35(1) : 15) Parribacus (masculine) Dana, 1852, Proc. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad. 6: 14 (type species, by selection in paragraph 7 of the present application : Scyllarus antarcticus Lund, 1793, Skr. naturhist. Selsk. Kbh. 2(2) : 22, as defined by the lectotype selected in paragraph 7 above) Polycheles (masculine) Heller, 1862, S.B. Akad. Wiss. Wien 45(1) : 389 (type species, by monotypy: Polycheles typhlops Heller, 1862, S.B. Akad. Wiss. Wien 45(1) : 392) Procambarus (masculine) Ortmann, 1905, Ann. Carnegie Mus. 3(3) : 435, 437 (type species, by selection by Fowler (1912, Ann. Rep. New Jersey State Mus. 1911 : 340) : Cambarus digueti Bouvier, 1897, Bull. Mus. Hist. nat., Paris 3 : 227) Puerulus (masculine) Ortmann, 1897, Amer. J. Sci. (4) 4: 290 (sub- stitute name for Puer Ortmann, 1891, Zool. Jb. Syst. 6: 15, 37, a junior homonym of Puer Lefebvre, 1842, Mag. Zool. (2) 4: expl. pl. 92) (type species, by selection by Calman (1909, Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. (8) 3: 442): Panulirus angulatus Bate, 1888, Rep. Voy. Challenger (Zool.) 24 : 81) Scyllarus (masculine) Fabricius, 1775, Syst. Ent. : 413 (type species, by monotypy : Cancer arctus Linnaeus, 1758, Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1 : 633, as defined by the lectotype selected in paragraph 8 of the present application) Thaumastocheles (masculine) Wood-Mason, 1874, Proc. asiat. Soc. Bengal 1874:181 (type species, by monotypy: Astacus zaleucus Thomson, 1873, Nature, Lond. 8 : 246, 247) 154 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Thenus (masculine) Leach, 1815, Trans. linn. Soc. Lond. 11 : 335, 338 (type species, by monotypy : Thenus indicus Leach, 1815, Trans. linn. Soc. Lond. 11 : 338 [Note (not for inclusion in the Official List): This name is a junior subjective synonym of Scyllarus orientalis Lund, 1793, Skr. naturhist. Selsk. Kbh. 2(2) : 22]) Willemoesia (feminine) Grote, 1873, Nature, Lond. 8 : 485 (substitute name for Deidamia von Willemoes-Suhm in Thomson, 1873, Nature, Lond. 8 : 51, a junior homonym of Deidamia Clemens, 1859, J. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad. (2) 4 : 137) (type species, by monotypy: Deidamia leptodactyla von Willemoes-Suhm in Thomson, 1873, Nature, Lond. 8 : 51). 10. It is recommended that the specific names of the type species of the genera specified in paragraph 9 above should be placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology, in as far as these names are available names and at the same time are the oldest such names for the species concerned. The following list gives in the first column the specific names which fulfil the conditions mentioned above. In the second column is given the original combination in which these names were used. In column (3) is given the name of the genus of which the species cited in column (1) is the type species. seo - .. . Genus of which the | Original Combination in species cited in Col. Specific Name which the name cited in ; Col. (1) was published (1) is the type species (1) (2) (3) angulatus Bate, 1888 Panulirus angulatus Puerulus Ortmann, 1897 antarcticus Lund, 1793* Scyllarus antarcticus Parribacus Dana, 1852 arctus Linnaeus, 1758+ Cancer arctus Scyllarus Fabricius, 1775 bartonii Fabricius, 1798 Astacus bartonii Cambarus Erichson, 1846 digueti Bouvier, 1897 Cambarus digueti Procambarus Ortmann, 1905 elephas Fabricius, 1787 = Astacus elephas Palinurus Weber, 1795 * As defined by the lectotype selected in paragraph 7 of the present application. + As defined by the lectotype selected in paragraph 8 of the present application. Specific Name (1) fossor Erichson, 1846 franklinii Gray, 1845 gundlachi von Martens, 1878 leptodactyla von Willemoes-Suhm, 1873 montezumae de Saussure, 1857 paradoxus Ortmann, 1906 peronii Leach, 1815 pictus Milne Edwards (A.), 1862 pilimanus von Martens, 1869 planifrons White, 1842 stewarti Wood-Mason, 1872 trigonus von Siebold, 1824 truncatus Milne Edwards (A.), 1880 typhlops Heller, 1862 zaleucus Thomson, 1873 OPINION 519 Original Combination in which the name cited in Col. (1) was published (2) Astacus (Engaeus) fossor Astacus franklinii Palinurellus gundlachi Deidamia leptodactyla Cambarus montezumae Cambarus (Paracam- barus) paradoxus Ibacus peronii Enoplometopus pictus Astacus pilimanus Paranephrops planifrons Nephropsis stewarti Palinurus trigonus Palinustus truncatus Polycheles typhlops Astacus zaleucus 155 Genus of which the species cited in Col. (1) is the type species (3) Engaeus Erichson, 1846 Astacopsis Huxley, [1879] Palinurellus von Martens, 1878 Willemoesia Grote, 1873 Cambarellus Ortmann, 1905 Paracambarus Ortmann, 1906 Ibacus Leach, 1815 Enoplometopus Milne Edwards (A.), 1862 ParastacusHuxley, [1879] Paranephrops White, 1842 Nephropsis Wood- Mason, 1872 Linuparus White, 1847 Palinustus Milne Edwards (A.), 1880 Polycheles Heller, 1862 Thaumastocheles Wood-Mason, 1874. 156 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 11. In the case of four of the genera enumerated in paragraph 9 of the present application, the name of the nominal species, which is the type species of the genus concerned is not accepted by specialists as the oldest available name for the taxonomic species represented by the nominal species in question. These cases are :— Name of the nominal Oldest available species which is the name for the species Name of the genus type species of the specified in the genus specified in the second column the first column (1) (2) (3) Astacoides Guérin- Astacoides goudotii Astacus Meéneville, 1839 Guérin-Meéneville, 1839 madagascarensis Milne Edwards (H.) & Audouin, 1839 Cherax Erichson, 1846 Astacus (Cheraps) preissii Astacusbicarinatus Erichson, 1846 Gray, 1845 Orconectes Cope, 1872 Orconectes inermis Cope, Astacus pellucidus 1872 Tellkampf, 1844 Thenus Leach, 1815 Thenus indicus Leach, Scyllarus orientalis 1815 Lund, 1793. 12. The concrete proposals which I now submit for consideration are that the Commission should :— (1) use its Plenary Powers :— (a) to validate the spelling Cherax as the Valid Original Spelling for the generic name published with the spellings Cherax and Cheraps by Erichson in 1846 ; (b) to validate the emendation Palinurus of the generic name originally published as Pallinurus by Weber in 1795 ; (c) to suppress for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy the specific name goudotii Guérin-Méneville, 1839, as published in the combination Astacoides goudotii ; (2) place on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology the twenty- five generic names enumerated in paragraph 9 of the present application with the particulars there specified ; OPINION 519 157 (3) place on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology :— (a) the twenty-one specific names specified in Column (1) in paragraph 10 of the present application ; (b) the specific names of the four nominal species listed in Column (3) in paragraph 11 of the present application ; (4) place the under-mentioned generic names on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology :— (a) Arctus De Haan, 1849 in von Siebold, Fauna japon., Crust. (6, 7): xx, 238 (type species, by tautonymy: Cancer arctus Linnaeus, 1758, Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1: 633) (a junior objective synonym of Scyllarus Fabricius, 1775) ; (b) Arctus Dana, 1852, Proc. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad. 6 : 14, 19 (type species, by tautonymy : Cancer arctus Linnaeus, 1758, Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1 : 633) (a junior homonym, and a junior objective synonym, of Arctus De Haan, 1849, and a junior objective synonym of Scyllarus Fabricius, TTS) 8 (c) Avus Ortmann, 1891, Zool. Jb. Syst. 6: 15, 21 (type species, by monotypy : Palinurus trigonus von Siebold, 1824, Hist. nat. Japon. : 15) (a junior objective synonym of Linuparus White, 1847) ; (d) Bartonius Ortmann, 1905, Proc. Amer. phil. Soc. 44 : 97, 117 (type species, by original designation : Astacus bartonii Fabricius, 1798, Suppl. Ent. syst. : 407) (a junior objective synonym of Cambarus Erichson, 1846) ; (e) Chaeraps Huxley, [1879], Proc. zool. Soc. Lond. 1878 : 752, 755, 764, 767—771, 775, 776, 786 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling of Cherax Erichson, 1846) ; (f) Cheraps Erichson, 1846, Arch. Naturgesch. 12(1) : 101 (an Invalid Original Spelling of Cherax Erichson, 1846) ; (g) Deidamia von Willemoes-Suhm in Thomson, 1873, Nature, Lond. 8 : 51 (a junior homonym of Deidamia Clemens, 1859) ; (h) Palinurus Fabricius, 1798, Suppl. Ent. syst. : 376, 400 (type species, by selection by Latreille (1810, Consid. gén. Ordre nat. Crust. Arachn. Ins.: 422): Palinurus quadricornis Fabricius, 1798, Suppl. Ent. syst. : 401, 158 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS which is a junior objective synonym of Astacus elephas Fabricius, 1787, Mant. Ins. 1 : 331) (a junior objective synonym and junior homonym of Palinurus Weber, 1795); (i) Palinurus De Kay, 1842, Zool. New York 4: 118 (type species, by monotypy : Coryphaena perciformis Mitchill, 1818, Amer. mon. Mag. 2(4) : 244) (a junior homonym of Palinurus Weber, 1795) ; (j) Pallinurus Weber, 1795, Nomencl. ent. Syst. Fabr. : 94 (an Invalid Original Spelling of Palinurus Weber, 1795) ; (k) Polycheles Brady & Robertson, 1870, Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. (4) 6:25 (type species, by monotypy: Polycheles stevensoni Brady & Robertson, 1870, Ann. Mag. nat. ie (4) 6 : 25) (a junior homonym of Polycheles Heller, 1862) ; (1) Puer Ortmann, 1891, Zool. Jb. Syst. 6:15, 37 (a junior homonym of Puer Lefebvre, 1842, Mag. Zool. (2) 4: expl. pl. 92) ; (5) place on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology the under-mentioned names :— (a) goudotii Guérin-Méneville, 1839, as published in the com- bination Astacoides goudotii and suppressed under the Plenary Powers under (1)(c) above ; (b) incisus (Péron MS.) Leach, 1815, Zool. Misc. 2: 151, as published in the combination Scyllarus incisus (a junior objective synonym of peronii Leach, 1815, as published in the combination Ibacus peronii) ; (c) madagascariensis Audouin & Milne Edwards (H.), 1841, Arch. Mus. Hist. nat., Paris 2 : 35, as published in the combination Astacus madagascariensis (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling of madagascarensis Milne Edwards (H.) & Audouin, 1839, as published in the combination Astacus madagascarensis) ; (d) quadricornis Weber, 1795, Nomencl. ent. Syst. Fabr. : 94, as published in the combination Pallinurus quadricornis (a junior objective synonym of elephas Fabricius, 1787, as published in the combination Astacus elephas) ; (e) quadricornis Fabricius, 1798, Suppl. Ent. syst. : 401, as published in the combination Palinurus quadricornis (a junior objective synonym of elephas Fabricius, 1787, as published in the combination Astacus elephas, and a junior homonym, and a junior objective synonym of OPINION 519 159 quadricornis Weber, 1795, as published in the combination Pallinurus quadricornis) ; (f) ursus Dana, 1852, Proc. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad. 6 : 14, as published in the combination Arctus ursus (a junior objective synonym of arctus Linnaeus, 1758 as published in the combination Cancer arctus) ; (g) ursusmajor Herbst, 1793, Versuch Naturgesch. Krabben Krebse 2(3) : 82, as published in the combination Cancer (Astacus) ursus-major and as defined by the lectotype selected in paragraph 7 of the present application (a junior objective synonym of antarcticus Lund, 1793, as published in the combination Scyllarus antarcticus) ; (h) ursusminor Herbst, 1793, Versuch Naturgesch. Krabben Krebse 2(3) : 83, as published in the combination Cancer (Astacus) ursus-minor and as defined by the lectotype selected in paragraph 8 of the present application (a junior objective synonym of arctus Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the combination Cancer arctus) ; (i) vulgaris Latreille, [1802—1803] ,Hist. nat. gén. part. Crust. Ins. 6: 191, as published in the combination Palinurus vulgaris (a junior objective synonym of homarus Linnaeus, 1758, Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1: 633, as published in the combination Cancer homarus) ; (j) vulgaris Latreille, 1804, Ann. Mus. Hist. nat., Paris 3 : 391, as published in the combination Palinurus vulgaris (a junior objective synonym of elephas Fabricius, 1787, as published in the combination Astacus elephas, and a junior homonym of vulgaris Latreille, [1802—1803], as published in the combination Palinurus vulgaris) ; (6) place on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology the under-mentioned names :— (a) CAMBARINAE Hobbs, 1942, Univ. Florida Publ. (Biol. Ser.) 3(2) : 23 (type genus : Cambarus Erichson, 1846) ; (b) PALINURIDAE (correction by Samouelle (1819, Entomologists’ useful Compendium : 92) of PALINURINI (published as the name for a family)) Latreille, [1802—1803], Hist. nat. gén. partic. Crust. Ins. 3:31: (type genus: Palinurus Weber, 1795) ; (c) PARASTACIDAE Huxley, [1879], Proc. zool. Soc. Lond. 1878 : 771, 775 (type genus : Parastacus Huxley, [1879]) ; 160 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (d) POLYCHELIDAE Wood-Mason, 1874, Proc. asiat. Soc. Bengal 1874 : 180 (type genus: Polycheles Heller, 1862) ; (€) SCYLLARIDAE (correction by White (1847, List Crust. Brit. Mus.: 67) of SCYLLARIDES) Latreille, 1825, Fam. nat. Regn. anim. : 278 (type genus : Scyllarus Fabricius, 1775). (7) place on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology the under-mentioned names :— (a) PALINURINI Latreille, [1802—1803] (an Invalid Original Spelling for PALINURIDAE) (cf. (6)(b) above) ; (b) SCYLLARIDES Latreille, 1825 (an Invalid Original Spelling for SCYLLARIDAE) (cf. (6)(e) above). 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 addition to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology of the names of twenty- five genera of Macrura Reptantia (Class Crustacea) and matters incidental thereto was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 1039. 3. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 23rd April 1956 and was published on 20th July of that year in Part 4 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Holthuis, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 107—119). 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 20th July 1956 (a) in Part 4 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Dr. Holthuis’s application was published) and (b) to the other prescribed serial OPINION 519 161 publications. In addition, such Notice was given also to four general zoological serial publications. 5. No Objection Received : No objection to the action proposed in the present case was received from any source. Ill. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 6. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(57)12 : On 15th February 1957 a Voting Paper (V.P.(57)12) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “ the proposal relating to the proposed addition to the Official List of the names of twenty-five genera of Macrura Reptantia (Class Crustacea) as set out in Points (1) to (7) in paragraph 12 on pages 116—119 in Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature” [i.c. in the paragraph numbered as above in the paper 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 15th May 1957. 8. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)12 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)12 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) : Boschma; Mayr; Lemche; Hering; Jaczewski ; Prantl; Holthuis; Bonnet; Mertens; Dymond ; Vokes ; Bodenheimer; Bradley (J.C.); Key; Riley ; Stoll; Esaki; do Amaral; Hemming; Kihnelt ; Sylvester-Bradley ; Cabrera; Tortonese; Miller ; 162 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) Prevented from voting by interruption of postal communications consequent upon political disturbances, one (1) : Hanko ; (d) Voting Papers not returned : None. 9. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 16th May 1957, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)12, 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 Com- mission in the matter aforesaid. 10. Withdrawal from the scope of the decision taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)12 of the proposals submitted therewith in regard to two generic names having the termination ‘‘ -opsis”’: On 17th February 1958 the Secretary executed the following Minute in which he withdrew from the scope of the decision taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)12 the proposals submitted therewith in relation to two generic names having the termination “ -opsis”’, having regard to the fact that since the submission of the fore- going Voting Paper the Commission had adopted a Declaration (Declaration 36) in which it had confirmed the attribution of the feminine gender to names having the above termination and not OPINION 519 163 the masculine gender which in that application it had been recommended should be attributed to the generic names in question :— Withdrawal from the scope of the decision taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)12 of the proposals submitted in relation to the names ‘* Astacopsis ’? Huxley, [1879], and ‘* Nephropsis ’’ Wood- Mason, 1872 By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. (Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature) Among the names recommended in Application Z.N.(S.) 1039 for addition to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology were two names having the termination “‘ -opsis ’’, to which it was recommended that the masculine gender be attributed, that being the gender currently assigned to those names. The names in question were Astacopsis Huxley, [1879], and Nephropsis Wood-Mason, 1872. At the time when this case was submitted to the Commission for decision it was recognised that the attribution of the foregoing gender to these names was not in harmony with the gender rules provisionally adopted by the Copenhagen Congress in 1953, but the review of those rules as prescribed by that Congress was already in hand and it was accordingly decided that the best course would be to include the proposals in regard to the above names in the recommendation to be submitted for vote, subject to the question at issue being reviewed before the time came for the preparation of an Opinion embodying the decision taken by the Commission on the present application. 2. In the interval which has since elapsed the Commission has completed its review of the relevant portion of the Copenhagen gender rules and has agreed to uphold as being correct the rule that generic names having the termination “‘-opsis’’ are to be treated as being feminine in gender. The decision so taken has since been embodied in Declaration 36 (1958, Ops. Decls. int. Comm. zool. Nomencl. 18 : i—xil). 3. A new situation has been created by the adoption of the fore- going Declaration, for it now becomes evident that, if the masculine gender is to be attributed to the two generic names cited above, it will be necessary for the Commission to use its Plenary Powers for that purpose. Accordingly, the vote provisionally taken on this subject on Voting Paper V.P.(57)12 becomes non-effective, as that vote was not taken under the Plenary Powers Procedure. 164 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 4. Now therefore as Secretary I hereby direct that the proposals relating to the under-mentioned names included in the application submitted with Voting Paper V.P.(57)12 be withdrawn from the scope of the decision taken thereon and therefore that no reference to the names in question be included in the Ruling to be given in the Opinion to be prepared for the purpose of embodying the decision taken on the said Voting Paper :-— (1) the under-mentioned generic names having the termination ** -opsis ”” :— (a) Astacopsis Huxley, [1879] ; (b) Nephropsis Wood-Mason, 1872 ; (2) the under-mentioned specific names which are respectively the specific names of the type species of the genera specified in (1) above :— (a) franklinii Gray (J.E.), 1845, as published in the combination Astacus franklinii ; (b) stewarti Wood-Mason, 1872, as published in the combina- tion Nephropsis stewarti. 11. Confirmation of the attribution of the masculine gender to the generic name ‘‘ Paranephrops’’ White, 1842: On 17th February 1958 the Secretary executed the following Minute drawing attention to certain action taken by the International Commission subsequent to its provisional decision in Voting Paper V.P.(57)12 that the gender to be attributed to the generic name Paranephrops White, 1842, be the masculine gender by which the said decision was reinforced and confirmed, and directing that in the Ruling to be prepared for giving effect to the vote taken on the above Voting Paper the foregoing be the gender to be attributed to the said generic name :— Confirmation of the gender provisionally attributed to the generic name ‘* Paranephrops ’’ White, 1842, by the International Commission by its vote on Voting Paper V.P.(57)12 By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. (Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature) The names recommended in Application Z.N.(S.) 1039 for addition to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology included the name OPINION 519 165 Paranephrops White, 1842, to which it was proposed that the gender to be attributed should be the masculine gender. At the time of the submission of the above application to the Commission for decision on Voting Paper V.P.(57)12 the question of the gender to be attributed to names having the termination “-ops’’, like that to names having the termination “‘-opsis”’ which formed the subject of a Minute executed by myself as Secretary earlier today, was sub judice. For reasons similar to those set forth in the Minute referred to above, it was decided to include the proposal relating to the gender to be attributed to the name Paranephrops White among the proposals to be submitted to the Commission with the foregoing Voting Paper, subject, as in the parallel case of the two names having the termination ““ -opsis ’’, to the question at issue being reviewed before the time came for the preparation of the Opinion embodying the decision taken by the Commission on the present application. 2. Since the submission to the Commission of the above Voting Paper the question of the gender to be attributed to generic names having the termination “‘-ops’”’ has been the subject of a decision which has since been embodied in Declaration 36 (1958, Ops. Decls. int. Comm. zool. Nomencl. 18 : i—xii). Under this Declaration it was vuled that the gender normally attributable to names having the termination “‘ -ops ”’ is the feminine gender but that in certain specified cases the gender to be attributed to such names is the masculine gender. In the light of the decision embodied in the foregoing Declaration the Commission reviewed the question of the gender to be attributed to the generic name Nephrops [Leach], [1814], a name placed on the Official List many years ago for which no gender had hitherto been assigned on that List. The decision taken by the Com- mission on the above subject (by its vote on Voting Paper V.P.(57)63) was that under the terms of Declaration 36 the gender attributable to the generic name Nephrops [Leach] is the masculine gender. The decision so taken has since been embodied in Direction 101 (now in the press).+ 3. The foregoing decision by the Commission as to the gender to be attributed to the generic name Nephrops Leach carries with it automatically a like decision as to the gender of any compound name of which the word ‘‘ Nephrops’”’ forms the terminal portion. Accord- ingly, under the Ruling given in Direction 101 the gender attributable to the generic name Paranephrops White is the masculine gender. 4. Now therefore as Secretary I hereby direct and confirm that the vote taken provisionally by the Commission on Voting Paper 1 The Direction here referred to has since been published as Part F.12 of Section F of Volume 1 of the Opinions and Declarations Series (1958, Ops. Decls. int. Comm. zool. Nomencl. 1(F) : 191—200. 166 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS V.P.(57)12 that the gender to be attributed to the generic name Paranephrops White, 1842, shall be the masculine gender is in full accord with the provisions of Declaration 36, a Declaration adopted by a later vote of the Commission, and with the application of those provisions to the case of the name Nephrops [Leach], of which the name Paranephrops White is compounded, by the Ruling later given by the Commission in Direction 101. I accordingly direct that the said masculine gender be attributed to the generic name Paranephrops White when by the Ruling to be given in the Opinion embodying the decision taken by the Commission by its vote on Voting Paper V.P.(57)12 that name is placed upon the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology. 12. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 18th February 1958 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 i in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(57)12. 13. Original References for Generic and Specific Names : The original references for the generic and specific names placed on Official Lists and Official Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion are as set out in the under-mentioned paragraphs of the paper reproduced in the first paragraph of this Opinion :— (a) The references for the twenty-three generic names placed on the Official List are as set out in the list given in paragraph 9. . (b) The references for the nineteen specific names placed on the Official List are as set out in paragraph 9 under the names of the genera of which the species concerned are severally the type species, as specified in Column (3) in paragraph 10. (c) The references for the four specific names placed on the Official List which are not the specific names of the type species of genera are as set out in paragraph 9 under the names of the genera specified in Column (1) in para- graph 11. OPINION 519 167 (d) The references for the twelve generic names placed on the Official Index are set out in paragraph 12(4). (e) The references for the ten specific names placed on the Official Index are given as specified below :— (i) for the specific name goudotii Guérin-Méneville, 1839, as published in the combination Astacoides goudotii : as set out under the generic name Astacoides Guérin- Méneville, 1839, in paragraph 9 ; (ii) for the remaining nine specific names concerned: as set out in paragraph 12(5). 14. References for the selections of type species for nominal genera : The following are the references for the selections of type species for nominal genera specified in the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— For Cambarus Erichson, Faxon, 1898, Proc. U.S. nat. Mus. 1846 20 : 644 For Engaeus Erichson, Clark, 1936, Mem. Nat. Mus. 1846 Victoria 10 : 37 For Orconectes Cope, Fowler, 1912, Ann. Rep. New Jersey 1872 State Mus. 1911 : 339 For Parastacus Huxley, Faxon, 1898, Proc. U.S. nat. Mus. [1879] 20 : 683 For Parribacus Dana, Holthuis, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 1852 12 : 110 (paragraph 7), 114 (para- graph 9) For Procambarus Fowler, 1912, Ann. Rep. New Jersey Ortmann, 1905 State Mus. 1911 : 340 :, For Puerulus Ortmann, Calman, 1909, Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. 1897 (8) 3 : 442 15. References for the selections of lectotypes for nominal species : The following are the references for selections of lecto- types for nominal species specified in the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— For Scyllarus antarcticus Holthuis, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. Lund, 1793 12 : 111, paragraph 7 168 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS For Cancer arctus Holthuis, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. Linnaeus, 1758 12 : 111, paragraph 8 For Cancer (Astacus) Holthuis, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. ursusmajor Herbst, 12 : 111, paragraph 7 1793 For Cancer (Astacus) Holthuis, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. ursusminor Herbst, 12 : 112, paragraph 8 1793 16. Original References for Family-Group Names : 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 may be, on the Official Index for names of taxa belonging to the family- group category are as set out in paragraph 12 (6) of the Rees reproduced in the first paragraph of this Opinion. 17. Compliance with Prescribed Procedures: The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Com- mission 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 Com- mission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 18. ‘* Opinion ’’ Number : The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Five Hundred and Nineteen (519) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. DoNnE in London, this Eighteenth day of February, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Eight. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING © 1958. THE INTERNATIONAL TRUST FOR ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Printed in England by METCALFE & 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.c., C.B.E. as Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 19. Part 7. Pp 169—200 OPINION 520 Suppression under the Plenary Powers of the specific name tibiatrix Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combination Hyla tibiatrix, and of the generic name Acrodytes Fitzinger, 1843, and interpretation under the same Powers of the nominal species Rana venulosa Laurenti, 1768 (Class Amphibia) 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 Mites Price One Pound One Shilling/and Sixpence YN (All rights resery ay SEP 10 1958 } Issued 8th August, 1958 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 520 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) Dr. Nag Oa (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 HeErinGc (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. DyMoNnD (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canada) (12th August 1953) Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President) é Professor Harold E. Voxes (University of Tulane, Department of Geology, New Orleans, Louisiana, U.S.A.) 12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (MezGgazdasdgi 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. HoLtuHuls (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) Brotessor 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) OPINION 520 SUPPRESSION UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS OF THE SPECIFIC NAME “ TIBIATRIX ”? LAURENTI, 1768, AS PUBLISHED IN THE COMBINATION “HYLA TIBIATRIX ”, AND OF THE GENERIC NAME “¢ ACRODYTES ” FITZINGER, 1843, AND INTER- PRETATION UNDER THE SAME POWERS OF THE NOMINAL SPECIES “RANA VENULOSA ”? LAURENTI, 1768 (CLASS AMPHIBIA) RULING :—(1) The request for the suppression under the Plenary Powers of the specific name venu/osa Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combination Rana venulosa, is hereby rejected. (2) The following action is hereby taken under the Plenary Powers :— (a) The under-mentioned names are hereby suppressed for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy :— (i) the generic name Acrodytes Fitzinger, 1843 ; (ii) the specific name tibiatrix Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combination Hyla tibiatrix ; (b) It is hereby directed that the nominal species Rana venulosa Laurenti, 1768, be interpreted by refer- ence to the type specimen of Hyla zonata Spix, 1824. (3) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Number 1298 :— SMITHSONIAN .-, 5 400 7D OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Phrynohyas Fitzinger, 1843 (gender: feminine) (type species, by monotypy and through Declara- tion 21: Rana venulosa Laurenti, 1768, as inter- preted under the Plenary Powers in (2)(b) above) (4) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) venulosa Laurenti, 1768, as published in the com- bination Rana venulosa, and as interpreted under the Plenary Powers in (2)(b) above (specific name of type species of Phrynohyas Fitzinger, 1843) (Name No. 1549) ; (b) spilomma Cope, 1877, as published in the combina- tion Hyla spilomma (Name No. 1550). (5) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Number 1182 :— Acrodytes Fitzinger, 1843, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers in (2)(a)(i) above. (6) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) tibiatrix Laurenti, 1768, as published in the com- bination Hyla tibiatrix, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers in (2)(a)(ii) above (Name No. 538) ; | (b) zonata Spix, 1824, as published in the combination Hyla zonata (a junior objective synonym of venulosa Laurenti, 1768, as published in the com- OPINION 520 173 bination Rana venulosa, through the action taken under the Plenary Powers in (2)(b) above) (Name No. 539). I. THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 14th May 1953 Mr. William E. Duellman (University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A.) addressed a preliminary communication to the Office of the Commission on the question of the possible use of the Plenary Powers for the purpose of suppressing the specific name venulosa Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combination Rana venulosa (Class Amphibia). As the result of further correspondence Mr. Duellman submitted the following application on the above subject to the International Commission on 3rd April 1956 :— Proposed use of the Plenary Powers to suppress the specific names ** venulosa ’’ Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combination *“*Rana venulosa’’ and ‘“‘ tibiatrix’’ MLaurenti, 1768, as published in the combination ‘‘ Hyla tibiatrix ’’, together with the generic name ‘‘ Acrodytes ”’ Fitzinger, 1843 (Class Amphibia, Order Salientia) By WILLIAM E. DUELLMAN (Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A.) The purpose of the present application is to ask the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature to suppress the specific names venulosa and tibiatrix, both of Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combinations Rana venulosa and Hyla tibiatrix respectively. 2. The group of neotropical hylid frogs in question are characterised by having paired lateral vocal sacs behind the angle of the jaws in the males and in the absence of any co-ossification of the skin with the roof of the skull. Until recently these frogs were considered to be only one species, but it is now realised that several species are included in the group. 3. In 1768, Laurenti (: 31) assigned the name Rana venulosa to a figure in Seba (1734, Vol. I, Pl. 72, fig. 4), giving the following 174 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS description: ‘“‘ Corpore venulosa, maculoso, maculis confluentibus, insulsis interjectis ; pedibus digitatus.’”’ The locality was given as ** Indiis’’. In only one other instance has the combination Rana venulosa been used. This is to be found in Daudin (1802 : 24). The following year (1803) Daudin used the combination Ayla venulosa Laurenti (: 71). Since that time the combination Hyla venulosa has persisted in the literature, although the references to it are relatively few. 4. From the description given by Daudin and from careful study of his figure (1802, Pl. 13) I can find no similarity between the frog described by Laurenti and illustrated by Seba and that mentioned by Daudin. The bizarre illustration in Seba has been associated with a group of frogs, which do not resemble the figure nor the description based upon that figure. Seba’s illustration most certainly is not of a hylid frog, and it is completely unrecognisable as any known member of that large group of frogs. 5. The nomenclatorial problem with Hyla tibiatrix is much the same as that of Hyla venulosa. Laurenti, 1768 (: 34) assigned the name — Hyla tibiatrix to two figures in Seba (1734, Vol. I, Pl. 71, figs. 1—2) and gave the following description: ‘‘ Corpore dilute lactoe, maculis rubris, pedibus posticus palmatis. Mas coaxans utroque in latere colli, tibae inflar, inflat.’ The reference to locality given by Seba was ““Americanuarum’’. This name was treated as applying to a variety of Rana venulosa by Daudin in 1802, and in no time after that it was accorded a higher rank. The figure in Seba may reasonably be associated with any one of three genera of American hylid frogs. From the figure and description it is impossible to determine whether or not the skin is co-ossified with the skull and what is the condition of the vomerine teeth. These are characters that must be known to separate the genera in question. 6. Since the figure upon which the original description of Rana venulosa was based is unrecognisable as a member of the genus, and since the figure upon which the description of Hyla tibiatrix was based is not recognisable to genus, the specific names venulosa and tibiatrix, as published in the combinations Rana venulosa Laurenti, and Hyla tibiatrix Laurenti respectively should be considered nomina dubia. 7. A recent study of this group of frogs shows that the former wide- ranging “ Hyla venulosa’’ actually is a composite of several species, the names of most of which have been hidden in the synonymy of Hyla venulosa. The oldest available names that can definitely be assigned to the two most widely distributed of these species are Hyla spilomma Cope, 1877 (: 86) and Hyla zonata Spix, 1824 (: 41). The first of these species ranges throughout eastern Mexico and northern OPINION 520 175 Central America. The original description, accompanied by the definite type locality, are sufficient to identify this species beyond question. The latter species, Hyla zonata, occurs in the Amazon Basin of South America and extends into southern Central America. The original description, locality, and accompanying colour plate identify the nominal species with the population of these frogs occurring in the Amazon Basin. Although Hyla zonata was described in 1824 and Hyla spilomma in 1877, both have, for the most part, been referred to the synonymy of Hyla venulosa. It is recommended that, as part of the settlement represented by the proposed suppression of the nomina dubia, Rana venulosa Laurenti and Hyla tibiatrix Laurenti, these two specific names should be placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology. 8. “‘ Hyla venulosa’’ is the type species of the genus Acrodytes Fitzinger, 1843 (< 30). The suppression of the type species of this genus creates another nomenclatorial problem. However, the cir- cumstances are such that Fitzinger solved the problem himself. In his Systema Reptilium published in 1843 he listed eleven genera of hylid frogs, the third of which is Phrynohyas (: 30), under which he listed four subgenera : Phrynohyas— Cephalophractus Fitz. Cephalo. galeatus Fitz. Trachycephalus Tschud. Trachycephalus nigromaculatus Tschud Phrynohyas Hyla zonata Spix Acrodytes Hyla venulosa Daudin 9. The type species (by monotypy) of Phrynohyas Fitzinger is thus Hyla zonata Spix. The specific name zonata is the oldest available specific name for the group of hylid frogs with paired lateral vocal sacs behind the angle of the jaws and without the skin co-ossified with the skull. The subgeneric name Acrodytes Fitzinger was not accompanied by a description or a figure and rests solely upon the single included species Hyla venulosa, which is the type species by monotypy of the taxon so named. That species, as already noted, is not identifiable, but if it had clearly been a species congeneric with Hyla zonata Spix, the name Acrodytes would have fallen as a junior synonym of Phrynohyas Fitzinger, for the latter was introduced as the name of a genus, while Acrodytes was proposed only as the name for one of the units accepted by Fitzinger as subgenera of that genus. Since Hyla venulosa is unidentifiable, the genus Acrodytes of which it is the type species is also unidentifiable. The name Acrodytes Fitzinger should therefore _ be suppressed by the Commission under its Plenary Powers. For those 176 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS who consider the hylid frogs from Mexico and Central and South America to be a generically distinct group, the generic name which must be used is Phrynohyas Fitzinger. 10. In order to prevent further taxonomic confusion as to the concept of *“* Hyla venulosa’’, | ask the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature :— (1) to use its Plenary Powers to suppress the under-mentioned names for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy :— (a) the generic name Acrodytes Fitzinger, 1843 ; (b) the under-mentioned specific names :— (i) venulosa Laurenti, 1768, as published in the com- bination Rana venulosa ; (ii) tibiatrix Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combina- _ tion Ayla tibiatrix ; (2) to place the under-mentioned generic name on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology :—Phrynohyas Fitzinger, 1843 (gender : feminine) (type species, by monotypy : Hyla zonata Spix, 1824) ; (3) to place the under-mentioned specific names on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology :— (a) zonata Spix, 1824, as published in the combination Hyla zonata (specific name of type species of Phrynohyas Fitzinger, 1843) ; (b) spilomma Cope, 1877, as published in the combination Hyla spilomma ; (4) to place the under-mentioned generic name on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology :—Acrodytes Fitzinger, 1843, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers under (1) above ; (5) to place on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology the specific names specified in (1)(b) above, as there suppressed under the Plenary Powers. References Cope, Edward D., 1877. Tenth Contribution to the Herpetology of Tropical America, Proc. Amer. phil. Soc., 17(100) : 85—98 OPINION 520 9g Daudin, Francois M., 1802. Histoire Naturelle des Rainettes, des Grenouilles, et des Crapauds. Paris, pp. 1—71, pls. 1—38 (Folio) Daudin, Francois M., 1803. Histoire Naturelle, General et Particuliere des Reptiles. Paris, VIII : 1—439, pls. 1—8 Fitzinger, Leopoldo, 1843. Systema Reptilium. Vienna, pp. i—ix, 1—106 Laurenti, Josephi N., 1768. Specimen medicum exhibens synopsin reptilium emendatum cum experimentis cerca venema et antidota reptilium austriacorum. Vienna, pp. 1—224, pls. I—V Seba, Albertus, 1734. Locupletissimi rerum naturalium thesauri accurata descriptio, et inconibus artificissimus expressio, per universam physices historiam. Amsterdam, I : pp. i—xxxiv, 1—178, Pls. I—CX! Spix, J. B. de, 1824. Animalia Nova Sive Species Novae Testudinum et Ranarum. Monachi, pp. 1—53, Pls. I—XXII Il. THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt of Mr. Duellman’s preliminary communication the question of the suppression under the Plenary Powers of the specific name venulosa Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combination Rana venulosa (Class Amphibia) was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 771. 3. Publication of Mr. Duellman’s application : Mr. Duellman’s application was sent to the printer on 20th April 1956 and was published on 20th July of that year in Part 5 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Duellman, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 143—146). 4. Issue of Public Notices regarding Mr. Duellman’s application : Under the revised procedure prescribed by the Thirteenth Inter- national 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 regard to Mr. Duellman’s application was given on 20th July 1956 (a) in Part 5 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin 178 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which the application in question was published) and (b) to the other prescribed serial publications. In addition such Notice was given to four general zoological serial publications and to two specialist serials in Europe and America. 5. Receipt in August 1956 of a counter-proposal from Robert Mertens (Senckenbergische Naturforschende Gesellschaft, Frank- furt a.M., Germany): On 11th August 1956 Professor Robert Mertens (Senckenbergische Naturforschende Gesellschaft, Frank- furt a.M., Germany) addressed a communication to the Office of the Commission, in which, while supporting the greater part of the application submitted by Mr. Duellman, he took strong objection to the proposal that the specific name venu/osa Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combination Rana venulosa, should be suppressed under the Plenary Powers. On this subject Professor Mertens took the view that so well-known a name ought to be preserved and that for this purpose the nominal taxon so named should be interpreted by the Commission by the issue of a direc- tion under the Plenary Powers that the nominal species so named be interpreted by reference to the type specimen of a clearly recognisable nominal species of later date. He suggested that the type specimen of the nominal species Hyla zonata Spix, 1824 would be suitable for this purpose. The counter-proposal so submitted by Professor Mertens was as follows :— Proposed use of the Plenary Powers to identify the nominal species ‘* Hyla venulosa’’ Laurentus, 1768, with the nominal species ‘* Hyla zonata ’’ Spix, 1824. (Supplement to application by W. E. Duellman) (Class Amphibia) By ROBERT MERTENS (Senckenbergische Naturforschende Gessellchaft, Frankfurt a.M., Germany) On the proposal by Duellman for the suppression of the name Hyla venulosa Laurentus, 1768 (1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 143—146) I have the following observations to make. OPINION 520 179 2. The name Hyla venulosa Laurentus is so well known to every herpetologist as the name for a neotropical species of tree-frog that I should regret to see its disappearance from the literature and its replacement by the completely unknown name Hyla zonata Spix, 1824. It is, in my opinion, one of the most important duties of the International Commission to preserve names which are in common use in cases where there is agreement among specialists as to the species to which those names are applied. Such names should not be rejected by too rigorous an interpretation of the Rules. 3. In the present case I recommend that the specific name venulosa Laurentus, 1768, should be preserved by the Commission for use in its accustomed sense, that is, in the sense of zonata Spix, 1824, as published in the combination Hyla zonata, as cited in Duellman’s application. Under this proposal the name Hyla zonata Spix would become a junior objective synonym of Hyla venulosa Laurentus. The latter name would become also the oldest name objectively applicable to the species which is the type species of Phrynohyas Fitzinger, 1843. I agree with Duell- man that the name Phrynohyas Fitzinger, 1843, should be given prefer- ence over Acrodytes Fitzinger, 1843, if Hyla ventulosa Laurentus is separated from the genus Hy/a Laurentus. 6. Receipt in August 1956 of a counter-proposal from Hobart M. Smith (University of Illinois, Department of Zoology, Urbana, Illinois, U.S.A.) : A few days subsequent to the receipt of the counter-proposal submitted by Professor Mertens reproduced in the immediately preceding paragraph a letter dated 8th August 1956 was received from Professor Hobart M. Smith (University of Illinois, Department of Zoology, Urbana, Illinois, U.S.A.) in which a counter-proposal very similar to that submitted by Professor Mertens was put forward for consideration. Upon receipt of this letter the Secretary informed Professor Smith of the counter- proposal already received from Professor Mertens and suggested that from a procedural point of view it would be convenient if these two counter-proposals could be consolidated. Professor Smith accepted this suggestion and in a letter dated 16th October 1956 (reproduced in paragraph 12 below) withdrew his counter- proposal in favour of that already submitted by Professor Mertens with which he fully associated himself. 7. Communication to William E. Duellman of the counter- proposal received from Robert Mertens and Hobart M. Smith : 180 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS On 22nd August 1956 the Secretary notified Mr. William E. Duellman of the counter-proposals received from Professor Robert Mertens and Professor Hobart M. Smith respectively, and invited him to furnish his comments thereon. The statement later furnished by Mr. Duellman in response to the foregoing request is reproduced in paragraph 18 below. 8. Publication in October 1956 of the counter-proposal sub- mitted by Robert Mertens : The counter-proposal submitted by Professor Robert Mertens (paragraph 5 above) was sent to the printer on 3rd October 1956 and on 31st of the same month it was published in Part 10 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Mertens, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 287). 9. Issue of Public Notices in relation to the counter-proposal submitted by Robert Mertens: Under the revised procedure prescribed by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 51—58), Public Notice of the possible use of the Plenary Powers in relation to the counter- proposal submitted by Professor Robert Mertens was given on 31st October 1956 (a) in Part 10 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Professor Mertens’ counter-proposal was published) and (b) to the other prescribed serial publications. In addition, such Notice was given also to the general zoological serials and to the specialist serials to which Notice of Mr. Duellman’s original application had been given at the time of its publication in July 1956 (paragraph 4 above). 10. Extension to Ist May 1957 of the Prescribed Waiting Period in respect of the present case : On 31st October 1956 Mr. Hemming executed a Minute directing the Prescribed Waiting Period be extended from 20th January 1957, the date of the expiry of the six months from the date of publication of Mr. Duellman’s original application to 1st May 1957, the date on which would close the period of six months following the publication of Professor Mertens’ counter-proposal. 11. Comments received subsequent to the publication in October 1956 of Robert Mertens’ counter-proposal: In the six-month period following the publication in October 1956 of Professor Robert Mertens’ counter-proposal comments were received from OPINION 520 181 six specialists (all in the United States), of whom four supported Professor Mertens’ counter-proposal and two, the original proposal by Mr. William E. Duellman. After the close of the Prescribed Six-Month Period (as extended in the manner described in paragraph 10 above) and after the Voting Paper relating to the present case (paragraph 21 below) had been issued to the Com- mission one of the specialists (James A. Peters) who had previously notified his support for the Mertens counter-proposal intimated his desire to withdraw his previous communication and to substitute for it a note in opposition to that counter-proposal. The communications so received (other than the original statement later withdrawn by Dr. James A. Peters) are reproduced in the immediately following paragraphs. 12. Support for the Mertens counter-proposal received from Hobart M. Smith (University of Illinois, Department of Zoology, Urbana, Illinois, U.S.A.): On 16th October 1956 Professor Hobart M. Smith (University of Illinois, Department of Zoology, Urbana, Illinois, U.S.A.) addressed the following letter to the Office of the Commission in which (as explained in paragraph 6 above) he withdrew the counter-proposal which he had himself submitted in August 1956 in favour of the counter-proposal in the same sense (paragraph 5 above) previously received from Professor Mertens (Smith, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12: 307—308) :— In my opinion all of the requests embodied in the application Z.N.(S.) 771 submitted by William E. Duellman (1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 143—146) merit approval by the International Com- mission with the exception of Proposal (1)(b)(i) in paragraph 10 where he recommends that the specific name venulosa Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combination Hyla venulosa be suppressed under the Plenary Powers. In connection with this proposed exception, I think it right to draw the attention of the Commission to the following facts namely : (a) that the name venulosa in the combination Hyla venulosa has been almost universally applied to this species-group (up until recently thought to represent but one species) for over 150 years ; (b) that the name is particularly appropriate for some member of this species-group, which possesses a powerful integumentary poison ; (c) that in view of these facts preservation of the name for some member of this group would seem appropriate especially since such preservation would in no way disturb the established nomenclature but would on 182 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS the contrary maintain it ; (d) that the name may, as a nomen dubium, arbitrarily be restricted to the species that most appropriately might bear the name, in lieu of a later but less familiar and less appropriate nomen indubium. With these considerations in mind I wrote a letter to the Office of the Commission in which I suggested that, instead of suppressing the specific name venulosa Spix, as proposed by Duellman, the Commission should use its Plenary Powers definitely to attach that name either to the specimen upon which Spix in 1824 based his nominal species Hyla zonata or to the specimen upon which in 1877 Cope based his nominal species Hyla spilomma. In making this suggestion, I expressed a preference for the adoption of the first of these alternatives rather than the second (a) because the nominal species Hyla venulosa Laurenti has been commonly interpreted as representing a species having a South American center of distribution and (b) because the specific name zonata Spix has enjoyed scarcely any usage at all, whereas the name spilomma Cope has been in common use since 1945 for a Mexican and Central American species. | I have since been informed by the Secretary that a formal application for the use by the Commission of its Plenary Powers for the purpose of linking the names venulosa Laurenti and zonata Spix (thus making the two names objective synonyms of one another) has been received from Professor Robert Mertens of Frankfurt a.M. This is exactly the solution which I myself favor and in the circumstances I have pleasure in withdrawing my proposal and in submitting in its place the present note of support for the proposal recommended by Professor Mertens. 13. Support for the Mertens counter-proposal received from A. Loveridge (Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College, Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A.) : On 12th December 1956 Dr. A. Loveridge (Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College, Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A.) addressed the following note to the Office of the Commission in support of Dr. Mertens’ counter-proposal :— I think Professor Mertens’ proposal to make zonata Spix serve also as the type for venulosa a practical solution. i4. Support for the Mertens counter-proposal received from Karl P. Schmidt (Chicago Natural History Museum, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.) : During the six-month period following the publication of Professor Robert Mertens’ counter-proposal, two _letters in regard to this case were received from Dr. Karl P. Schmidt (Chicago Natural History Museum, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.) in regard to the present case. In the first of these letters, which was =e. ee OPINION 520 183 written before Dr. Schmidt had seen Professor Mertens’ counter- proposal, strong opposition to the proposal submitted by Mr. William E. Duellman was expressed ; in the second letter, which was written after Dr. Schmidt had seen Professor Mertens’ paper, equally strong support was given to the action there recommended. The letters so received are reproduced below:— (a) Letter dated 17th December 1956 from Karl P. Schmidt expressing objection to the proposal submitted by William E. Duellman The proposal by William E. Duellman, reference number Z.N.(S.) 771 to suppress the specific names venulosa Laurenti, 1768 and tibiatrix Laurenti, 1768, together with the generic name Acrodytes Fitzinger, 1843 is hereby strongly protested. Duellman’s statement of the facts concerning the Seba figure, reference to which serves as the description of Rana venulosa Laurenti, are Startlingly false. In particular, he states that ‘‘ Seba’s illustration most certainly is not a hylid frog, and it is completely unrecognizable as any known member of that large group of frogs.” In his paper reviewing the frogs in question (not cited in the application to the Commission) he states ‘“‘ There are no webs or toe discs”’ and (2) “furthermore, there is a dorsolateral fold !”’ Contrary to these statements I affirm that the digital pads are recognisable on the Seba figure. I can affirm further, from the examination of specimens that had been examined by Duellman himself, that most museum specimens do have dorso-lateral folds, and that these may be more pronounced than in any frog in which they normally occur. The folds are unques- tionably produced by shrinkage in preservation, and thus are not invariable ; but they do appear as dorso-lateral folds rather than haphazardly on the frog’s body. The fact that the figure in question does not exhibit palmation of the digits, whereas all of the forms related to Hyla venulosa have both fingers and toes webbed, remains as the principle discrepancy between figure and frog ; this discrepancy may be set down to bad preservation and to bad drawing. Mr. Duellman does not seem to know that many of the Seba specimens are dried mummies, or are otherwise badly preserved, and he seems to demand of the artist a quality of animal drawing all but unknown in his age. Finally, the profile of the head is definitely that of a hylid frog, reasonably like that of Hyla venulosa auct. It is accordingly urged that the application of Mr. Duellman be rejected. If the name venulosa be preserved, it may most adequately be restricted to the species of the group found in northern South 184 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS America, its type locality fixed as Surinam by the reference in Duméril and Bibron to Madam Merian’s figure of 1705. (b) Letter dated 15th January 1957 from Karl P. Schmidt supporting the counter-proposal submitted by Robert Mertens (Schmidt, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 101) It is very gratifying to learn that Dr. Mertens has an alternative proposal to that of Duellman with respect to Hyla venulosa, and that it is supported by my valued colleagues, Hobart Smith and Arthur Loveridge. I strongly support Dr. Mertens’ plan for the preservation and fixation of this name. 15. Support for the Duellman proposal received from Edward H. Taylor (University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, U.S.A.) : On 16th February 1957 Dr. Edward H. Taylor (University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, U.S.A.) addressed the following letter to the Office of the Commission in support of Mr. Duellman’s proposal :— Concerning Hyla venulosa, I think it very unfortunate that an attempt should have been made to conserve the trivial name venulosa, much as J agree to the general principle of conserving old names. It is true, the name appears frequently in literature, largely because many writers of small experience and knowledge with these frogs have applied the name to a series of populations of the genus Phrynohyas that they have either not been able to identify—or because they have regarded all as belonging to a single species. Actually, these populations represent six or seven species. It would appear that Doctor Mertens and Doctor Smith, concerned primarily with the principle of conservation, have overlooked the facts or have not concerned themselves with the effect of the plan on the general taxonomy of the genus as a whole. I would urge that Duellman’s proposal regarding this name be accepted as a whole. 16. Support for the Duellman proposal received from Jay M. Savage (University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, U.S.A.) : On 15th April 1957 there was received in the Office of the Commission a letter dated 11th April 1957 from Dr. W. I. Follett (California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco, California, OPINION 520 185 U.S.A.), who, as Chairman of the Committee on Zoological Nomenclature of the American Society of Ichthyologists and Herpetologists, then communicated the views on the present case expressed by the herpetological members of the Committee. Of these, two members (Hobart M. Smith ; Edward H. Taylor) had already communicated statements of their views on this case to the Commission (paragraphs 6 and 15 above respectively). A third member (James A. Peters) on this occasion supported the Mertens counter-proposal (paragraph 11 above) but later withdrew that support (see paragraph 17 below). The fourth member whose views were communicated by Dr. Follett was Dr. Jay M. Savage (University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, U.S.A.) who supported the Duellman proposal and was opposed. to the Mertens counter-proposal. The statement by Dr. Savage so communicated was as follows :— I am completely in favor of the application submitted to the Com- mission by William E. Duellman (Z.N.(S.) 771). I cannot agree with either Mertens or Smith in their attempt to substitute the long confused, misidentified and composite name Hyla venulosaauctorum (nec Laurenti) for the clearly identifiable name Hyla zonata. The name venulosa has been misused for so many different species, as so firmly indicated by Duellman, that absolutely no grounds are available for fixing it to one population or another. No stability could result where a name has been used for six or so different species populations. I regard Duellman’s request as the only logical solution to the problem. He sweeps all the confusion by the simple expedient of getting rid of a name (venulosa) based on an Asian Frog of the Family RANIDAE. Mertens and Smith actually are contributing to confusion not to stability by attempting to attach the name venulosa erroneously applied by many authors to various species of frogs of the Family HYLIDAE occurring from Mexico to Argentina, to a single Amazonian form. I thus vote to support Duellman’s proposal and reject the arguments of Mertens and Smith. 17. Support for the Duellman proposal received from James A. Peters (Brown University, Department of Biology, Providence, Rhode Island, U.S.A.) : On 26th July 1957 Dr. James A. Peters (Brown University, Department of Biology, Providence, Rhode Island, U.S.A.) addressed a letter to the Office of the Commission in which he withdrew his previous support for the Mertens counter-proposal (paragraphs 11 and 16 above) and intimated as follows his adherence to the original Duellman proposal :— 186 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS In view of the fact that the name Rana venulosa Laurenti, 1768 has not been applied consistently to any single biological entity, and has existed in a state of confusion for many years, it appears that it would be much more satisfactory to utilize the name Ayla zonata Spix, 1824, for the taxon to which Duellman has applied it (1956, Misc. Publ. Mus. Zool. Univ. Mich., No. 96 : 35). I am not in agreement with the counter-proposal by Dr. Mertens to validate Hyla venulosa through use of the Plenary Powers. 18. Comment by William E. Duellman (the applicant in the present case) on the Mertens counter-proposal : On 11th January 1957 Mr. William E. Duellman, the applicant in the present case, communicated to the Office of the Commission the following statement of his views on the Mertens counter-proposal which he had prepared in response to the invitation addressed to him by the Secretary on 22nd August 1956 (paragraph 7 above) (Duellman, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 99—100) :— Mertens and Smith have supported my proposals dealing with the use of the Plenary Powers to suppress certain specific names and one generic name of Neotropical Hylidae, except for the suppression of the specific name venulosa Laurenti. Each stated that the name venulosa is so well known and has been so widely used that it should not be suppressed. The above authors have proposed that the Com- mission use its Plenary Powers to link the specific name venulosa Laurenti with the specific name zonata Spix, making the name Zonata Spix a junior objective synonym of venulosa Laurenti. Mertens and Smith believe zonata Spix to be the least known of the other species concerned. Their proposal may be nomenclaturally acceptable, but I believe it to be both nomenclaturally and biologically impractical for the reasons given below. 2. The name venulosa Laurenti is well known and has been widely used only as a name, not as a specific name in reference to any known population of hylid frogs. The name venulosa has been applied to a group of hylid frogs now known to be a generic assemblage of seven species. The literature references are, for the most part, concerned with this combination of seven species. Consequently, the name has been widely used, but not in reference to some given species of frog, and the fact that it has been widely used can hardly be used in support of the proposals of Mertens and Smith that would link the name with a given population of frogs. 3. There is no biological or nomenclatural basis for linking the name venulosa Laurenti with the name zonata Spix. The name zonata Spix is based upon a specimen of hylid frog from the Upper Amazon Basin OPINION 520 187 in Brazil and is applicable to a population of frogs inhabiting the Amazon Basin. The name venulosa Laurenti is based upon a plate in Seba that is unidentifiable with any known hylid frog. Each of the seven species in this assemblage, now known as the genus Phrynohyas, is well defined with a definite range and a type locality that is known to be exact or approximate. Therefore, there is no just reason for using the name venulosa for the population now called zonata, nor is there any just reason for applying the name venulosa to any of the other populations. 4. There is no evidence for the fact that the Hyla venulosa of Laurenti originated from South America, possibly not even the western hemis- phere. Wholesale restriction of type localities has served no practical purpose, and in many cases these restrictions are unwarranted to the extent that the type locality is not within the natural range of the species or subspecies. Such unmerited restriction of type localities, as would be involved in the case of the name venulosa Laurenti, can only lead to confusion, not only as regards the nomenclature, but as regards the biology of the species. They should be discouraged by the Commission. 5. The name zonata Spix is the type species of the genus Phrynohyas Fitzinger. The name venulosa Laurenti is the type species of the genus Acrodytes Fitzinger. (Both of these genera were proposed on the same page as subgenera of the genus Phrynohyas, also proposed by Fitzinger on the same page. The genus and subgenus Phrynohyas have line priority over Acrodytes.) The use of the Plenary Powers to link the name venulosa Laurenti to the name zonata Spix, thereby reducing zonata to a junior objective synonym of venulosa, would place the generic name Phrynohyas as a synonym of Acrodytes. Since neither generic name was accompanied by a description, but only a named type species, the characteristics of the genus rest upon the description of the type species. Phrynohyas is based upon a well-described and figured specimen, whereas Acrodytes is based upon the non-informative description of Laurenti, which, in turn is based upon a weird plate in Seba. The linking of the name venulosa Laurenti with the name zonata Spix would thereby bring about great confusion of the genera and synonymize the one genus that is truly applicable. 6. I believe that the principles of nomina conservanda, although applicable, should not be exercised in the present case, for the results will be more confusing than the present state of affairs. On the basis of the reasons given above I cannot agree with the proposals submitted by Mertens and Smith. I feel that the only way to correct the existing state of confusion is for the Commission to use its Plenary Powers to suppress the specific name venulosa Laurenti. 7. Few workers have become involved with this nomenclatural problem ; expressions of the confusion may be found in Cochran 188 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (1955 : 55) and Taylor (1944 : 63—64 and 67, and 1952 : 799—800). The generic and specific status has been discussed at length in the systematic revision of the group by Duellman (1956 : 57—58 and 36—37). References Cochran, Doris M., 1955. ‘“‘ Frogs of Southeastern Brazil ’’ Bull. U.S. nat. Mus. 206 : 1—423 Duellman, William E., 1956. ‘‘ The Frogs of the Hylid Genus Phrynohyas Fitzinger, 1843” Misc. Publ. Mus. Zool. Univ. Mich. 96 : 1—47 Taylor, Edward H., 1944. ‘“‘ The Hylid Genus Acrodytes with Com- ments on Mexican Forms” Kans. Univ. Sci. Bull. 30(1) (No. 6) : 63—68 Taylor, Edward H., 1952. “‘ A Review of the Frogs and Toads of Costa Rica” Kans. Univ. Sci. Bull. 35(5) : 577—942 19. Consideration in April 1957 of the procedural problems involved in the present case: In April 1957 consideration was given by the Secretary to the question of the procedure to be adopted at the close of the Prescribed Six-Month Waiting Period for obtaining a decision from the Commission on the issues involved in the present case. The survey then undertaken showed that, while specialists in the group concerned were sharply divided on the question whether the specific name venu/osa Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combination Rana venulosa, should be sup- pressed under the Plenary Powers (the Duellman proposal) or alternatively should be retained after having been interpreted under the same Powers (the Mertens counter-proposal), there was substantial agreement as regards all the remaining parts of the Duellman proposal. Mr. Hemming accordingly took the view that the most convenient course would be for the Commission to take two separate votes on the present case. Under the first of these it would be asked to vote on all parts of the Duellman proposal, other than that relating to the specific name venulosa Laurenti, 1768 (Rana), thus clearing the ground for a decision on the major issue involved. In the second vote the Commission would be invited to vote affirmatively on one or other of the alternative courses which had been submitted, namely (1) for the use of the Plenary Powers for the purpose of interpreting the OPINION 520 189 nominal species Rana venulosa Laurenti, 1768 (Mertens plan) (Alternative ““A’’) or (ii) for the use of the above Powers to suppress the specific name venulosa Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combination Rana venulosa, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy (Duellman plan) (Alternative “‘ B”’). 20. Submission to the Commission by the Secretary in May 1957 of a Report on the present case with particulars of the procedure proposed to be adopted for reaching a decision on the issues involved : On Ist May 1957 Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, prepared for the consideration of the Commission the following Report on the present case in which also were given particulars of the procedure proposed to be adopted for reaching a decision on the issues involved :— Mr. W. E. Duellman’s application for the suppression under the Plenary Powers of the specific name ‘‘ venulosa’’ Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combination ‘‘ Rana venulosa ’’ and Professor R. Mertens’ counter-proposal in regard thereto (Class Amphibia) By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. (Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature) The present note, which is being submitted concurrently with Voting Paper V.P.(57)40, is concerned with a proposal relating to the specific name venulosa Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combination Rana venulosa (Class Amphibia), submitted by Mr. William E. Duellman (Museum of Zoology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A.) and with a counter-proposal on one aspect of that application later submitted by Professor Robert Mertens (Senckenbergische Naturforschende Gesellschaft, Frankfurt a.M., Germany). 2. In his application (Duellman, July 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 193196) Mr. Duellman drew attention to the fact that the well- known name venulosa Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combination Rana yenulosa, could not be interpreted with certainty, pointed out that recent work had shown that several species of Hylid frogs had been confused by later authors under this name and recommended - that, in order to place the nomenclature of this group on a firm basis the specific name venulosa Laurenti, 1768, as published in the com- bination Rana venulosa, together with the specific name fibiatrix Laurenti, 1768, published in combination with the generic name 190 . OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Hyla and also judged to be unrecognisable, should be suppressed under the Plenary Powers. Mr. Duellman recommended also that the generic name Acrodytes Fitzinger, 1843, should be suppressed, since, as Rana venulosa Laurenti was the type species of the genus so named, that genus would become indeterminate and valueless if (as proposed) the specific name venulosa Laurenti were to be suppressed under the Plenary Powers. 3. Public Notice of the possible use of the Plenary Powers in the present case was given in the prescribed manner at the time of the publication of Mr. Duellman’s application in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature. In addition, such Notice was given also to four general zoological serial publications and to two specialist serials in Europe and America respectively. The counter-proposal subsequently sub- mitted by Professor R. Mertens (paragraph 4) also involved the possible use of the Plenary Powers and accordingly on the publication of Professor Mertens’ paper in the Bulletin a fresh Public Notice was issued in like manner to that described above in relation to Mr. Duellman’s original proposal. 4. Following the publication of Mr. Duellman’s application letters were received both from Professor Mertens and from Professor Hobart M. Smith (University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois, U.S.A.) objecting to the proposed suppression of the specific name venulosa Laurenti on the ground that such a well-known name ought not to be discarded, the proper course, in their view, being for the Commis- sion to give a ruling as to how the species so named should be inter- preted, thus making possible its continued use. This led to the sub- mission by Professor Mertens of a counter-proposal on this portion of Mr. Duellman’s application. The concrete recommendation sub- mitted by Professor Mertens to this end was that the Commission should use its Plenary Powers to direct that the nominal species Rana venulosa Laurenti be interpreted by reference to the type specimen of the later-established nominal species Hyla zonata Spix, 1824. This nominal species, all the specialists concerned agree, is clearly identifiable and the action proposed would thus provide a secure basis for the interpretation of the name venulosa Laurenti. As pointed out in Mr. Duellman’s original application the name zonata Spix has commonly been cited in the synonymy of venulosa Laurenti. It is stated that, apart from being cited in synonymies of venulosa Laurenti, the name zonata Spix has not been widely used and therefore that its disappear- ance as a junior objective synonym of venulosa Laurenti would cause no confusion or inconvenience. Professor Mertens’ counter-proposal was published in October 1956 (Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 287). 5. I communicated Professor Mertens’ counter-proposal to Mr. Duellman for observations and on 11th January 1957 he furnished me with a statement in which he re-affirmed his request for the suppression — a? ee ee Seg 5 ee ee en ae ; OPINION 520 191 of the specific name venulosa Laurenti. The note so furnished was published in March 1957 (Duellman, 1957 Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 99—100). 6. Six specialists have furnished comments on this case. Of these four support Professor Mertens’ counter-proposal and two support Mr. Duellman’s original proposal for the suppression of the specific name venulosa Laurenti. The specialists concerned are the following:— (a) Specialists who support Professor Mertens’ counter-proposal (conservation of the specific name “ venulosa”’ Laurenti, 1768 (Rana) subject to the linking of the nominal species so named with the nominal species ‘“‘ Hyla zonata”’ Spix, 1824) Hobart M. Smith (University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois, U.S.A.) (Bull. 12 : 307—308) Arthur J. Loveridge (Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College, Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A.) Karl P. Schmidt (Chicago Natural History Museum, Chicago, Illinois, U.S.A.) (Bull. 132101) - James A. Peters (Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, U.S.A.) (b) Specialists who support Dr. Duellman’s proposal for the suppression of the specific name ‘‘venulosa’’ Laurenti, 1768 (Rana) Edward H. Taylor (University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, U.S.A.) Jay. M. Savage (University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, U.S.A.) 7. | have given careful consideration to the question of the procedure to be adopted for the presentation of this case for vote by the Com- mission, for it differs from most cases in which there is a difference of opinion among specialists by reason of the fact that all the specialists who have furnished comments give their support to the whole of Mr. Duellman’s application with the single exception of the portion relating to the question whether the specific name venulosa Laurenti, 1 As explained in paragraph 16 of the present Opinion Professor James A. Peters in July 1957—that is, nearly three months after the preparation of this Report— withdrew the support which he had previously given to Professor Mertens’ counter-proposal. 192 _OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 1768, as published in the combination Rana venulosa, should be conserved and interpreted or whether that name should be suppressed for nomenclatorial purposes. I have come to the conclusion that the most convenient course will be for the Commission to take its decision in two stages. At the first stage it would take a decision on the whole of the agreed portion of Mr. Duellman’s application (i.e. the whole of the application, exclusive of the portion relating to the action to be taken in regard to the name venulosa Laurenti, 1768 (Rana)). At the second stage it would take a choice as between Professor Mertens’ counter-proposal on the one hand and Mr. Duellman’s original proposal (suppression of venulosa) on the other hand. I show in the Annexe attached to the present paper in Part I the effect of an affirma- tive vote on the non-controversial portion of Mr. Duellman’s applica- tion, coupled with the acceptance of Professor Mertens’ counter- proposal as regards the name venulosa Laurenti, while in Part 2 I show the effect of an affirmative vote on all parts of Mr. Duellman’s proposal (i.e. an affirmative vote on the non-controversial portion, coupled with the rejection of Professor Mertens’ proposal). ANNEXE TO THE REPORT BY THE SECRETARY DATED Ist MAY 1957 , Effect of affirmative votes on the Alternatives now submitted PART 1 OF ANNEXE TO THE SECRETARY’S REPORT Acceptance of Professor Mertens’ counter-proposal as regards the species name ‘‘ venulosa ’’ Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combination ‘‘ Rana venulosa’’, together with the non- controversial portions of Mr. Duellman’s application. (1) Rejection of the proposal that the specific name venulosa Laurenti, 1768 as published in the combination Rana venulosa, be suppressed under the Plenary Powers ; (2) Use of the Plenary Powers :— (a) to suppress the under-mentioned names for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy :— (i) the generic name Acrodytes Fitzinger, 1843 ; (ii) the specific name tibiatrix Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combination Ayla tibiatrix ; (b) to direct that the nominal species Rana venulosa Laurenti, 1768, be interpreted by reference to the type specimen of Hyla zonata Spix, 1824 ; OPINION 520 193 (3) Addition of the following name to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology :— Phrynohyas Fitzinger, 1843 (gender : feminine) (type species, by monotypy and through Declaration 21: Rana venulosa Laurenti, 1768, as interpreted under the Plenary Powers in (2)(b) above) Note : At present the type species of Phrynohyas Fitzinger, 1843, is Hyla zonata Spix, 1824 (by monotypy) but if the action specified in (2)(b) above were to be taken under the Plenary Powers, the names Hyla zonata Spix, 1824, and Rana _ venulosa Laurenti, 1768, would become objective syno- nyms of one another and under Declaration 21 the genus Phrynohyas Fitzinger would be cited as having the older of the two objectively identical nominal species (Rana venulosa Laurenti) as its type species. (4) Addition to the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology of :— (a) venulosa Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combination Rana venulosa and as interpreted under the Plenary Powers in (2)(b) above (specific name of type species of Phrynohyas Fitzinger, 1843) ; (b) spilomma Cope, 1877, as published in the combination Hyla spilomma ; (5) Addition to the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology of :— Acrodytes Fitzinger, 1843, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers in (2)(a)(i) above ; (6) Addition to the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology of :— (a) tibiatrix Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combination Hyla tibiatrix, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers in (2)(a)(ii) above ; (b) zonata Spix, 1824, as published in the combination Hyla zonata (a junior objective synonym of venulosa Laurenti, 194 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 1768, as published in the combination Rana venulosa, through the action under the Plenary Powers in (2)(b) above). PART 2 OF ANNEXE TO THE SECRETARY’S REPORT Rejection of Professor Mertens’ counter-proposal as regards the specific name ‘‘ yenulosa ’’ Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combination ‘* Rana venulosa’’, and acceptance of all the proposals submitted by Mr. Duellman (1) Rejection of the proposal that the specific name venulosa Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combination Rana venulosa, be interpreted under the Plenary Powers by reference to the type specimen of the nominal species Hyla zonata Spix, 1824 ; (2) Use of the Plenary Powers to suppress the under-mentioned names for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy :— (a) the generic name Acrodytes Fitzinger, 1843 ; (b) the following specific names :-— (i) tibiatrix Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combina- tion Hyla tibiatrix (ii) venulosa Laurenti, 1768, as published in the com- bination Rana venulosa ; (3) Addition of the following name to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology of :— Phrynohyas Fitzinger, 1843 (gender : feminine) (type species, by monotypy : Hyla zonata Spix, 1824) ; (4) Addition to the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology of :— (a) zonata Spix, 1824, as published in the combination Hyla zonata (specific name of type species of Phrynohyas Fitzinger, 1843) ; (b) spilomma Cope, 1877, as published in the combination Hyla spilomma ; OPINION 520 195 (5) Addition to the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology of :— Acrodytes Fitzinger, 1843, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers in (2)(a) above ; (6) Addition to the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology of :— (a) tibiatrix Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combination Hyla tibiatrix and as suppressed under the Plenary Powers in (2)(b)(i) above ; (b) venulosa Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combination Rana venulosa and as suppressed under the Plenary Powers in (2)(b)(i1) above. Ill. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 21. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(57)40 : On 15th May 1957 a Voting Paper (V.P.(57)40) was issued to the Members of the Commission in which for the reasons explained in paragraph 19 above the Members of the Commission were invited to vote on each of two separate Parts as follows :— PART 1 OF VOTING PAPER The portion of Mr. Duellman’s application on which all the specialists who have furnished comments are in agreement with one another foro e* I vote < the portion of Mr. William E. Duellman’s appli- | against . cation on which all the specialists who have furnished comments are 196 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS in agreement with one another, i.e. the portions relating to the suppres- sion of the generic name Acrodytes Fitzinger, 1843, and the specific name tibiatrix Laurenti, 1768, (Hyla), the addition of the above names to the appropriate Official Indexes and the addition to the appropriate Official Lists of the generic name Phrynohyas Fitzinger, 1843, and the specific name spilomma Cope, 1877 (Ayla). * Delete whichever alternative is inappropriate. PART 2 OF VOTING PAPER The ‘‘ Rana venulosa ’”’ portion of Mr. Duellman’s application I vote for the use of the Plenary Powers for the purpose of securing the adoption of one or other of the following Alternatives* :— ALTERNATIVE “A” (Professor Mertens’ counter-proposal for the interpretation of the nominal species Rana venulosa Laurenti, 1768, by reference to the type specimen of Hyla zonata Spix, 1824) or ALTERNATIVE “ B ”’ (Mr. Duellman’s proposal for the suppression of the specific name venulosa Laurenti, 1768 (Rana) for nomenclatorial purposes). * Delete whichever Alternative is inappropriate. 22. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 15th August 1957. 23. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)40: At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)40 was as follows :— OPINION 520 197 (1) Particulars of the voting on Part 1 of Voting Paper V.P.(57)40 :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following twenty- three (23) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Hering ; Vokes ; Lemche ; Holthuis ; Riley ; Jaczewski ; Dymond ; do Amaral ; Esaki ; Hanko ; Stoll ; Mertens ; Bodenheimer ; Boschma; Key; Bonnet; Hemming ; Sylvester-Bradley ; Cabrera ; Bradley (J.C.) ; Tortonese ; Miller ; Prantl ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) On Leave of Absence, two (2) : Mayr ; Kiuhnelt ; (d) Voting Papers not returned : None. (2) Particulars of the voting on Part 2 of Voting Paper V.P.(57)40 :— (a) In favour of Alternative “‘A’’ (Mertens plan), nineteen (19) votes : Hering; Vokes; Holthuis; Riley; Jaczewski; Dymond; do Amaral; Esaki; Hank6o; Mertens ; Bodenheimer ; Boschma ; Bonnet ; Hemming ; Sylvester-Bradley ; Cabrera ; Bradley (J.C.); Tortonese ; Miller ; 198 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (b) In favour of Alternative “ B”’’ (Duellman plan), four (A) votes : Lemche ; Stoll ; Key ; Prantl ; (c) On leave of Absence, two (2) : Mayr ; Kihnelt ; (d) Voting Papers not returned : None. 24. Declaration of Result of Vote : On 16th August 1957, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)40, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 23 above and declaring that the proposals submitted (i) in Part 1 of the above Voting Paper and (ii) in Part 2 thereof as Alternative “A” had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. 25. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘* Opinion ”’ : On 19th February 1958 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.(57)40. 26. Original References for Generic and Specific Names : The following are the original references for the generic and specific —_— ee ee ee a ea OPINION 520 199 names placed on Official Lists and Official Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— Acrodytes Fitzinger, 1843, Syst. Rept. : 30 Phrynohyas Fitzinger, 1843, Syst. Rept. : 30 spilomma, Hyla, Cope, 1877, Proc. amer. phil. Soc. 17 (100) : 86 tibiatrix, Hyla, Laurenti, 1768, Specimen medic. exhib. Synops. Rept. : 34 venulosa, Rana, Laurenti, 1768, Specimen medic. exhib. Synops. Rept. : 31 zonata, Hyla, Spix, 1824, Anim. nov... . Testud. Ran. ... Brasil.: Al 27. Family-Group-Name Aspects : Dr. Robert Mertens (one of the applicants) has reported (in Jitt.) that no family-group-name problem arises in the present case, as the only nominal genus involved in the present case—Phrynohyas Fitzinger, 1843—has not been taken as the type genus of a family-group taxon and is currently referred to the family HYLIDAE. 28. Compliance with Prescribed Procedures : The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Com- mission 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. 200 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 29. ** Opinion ’’ Number : The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Five Hundred and Twenty (520) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Nineteenth day of February, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Eight. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING © 1958. THE INTERNATIONAL TRUST FOR ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Printed in England by METCALFE & Cooper LIMITED, 10-24 Scrutton St., London E C 2 _ e a saw’ hla Py ae» . > , eh Nai Whee - ae . : $ Sekt. Slay Fa bene de teeth - rc os NOTICE TO ALL SUBSCRIBERS dance with the wishes expressed at the recent al Congress of Zoology, the International Trust for ee is ee as a matter of Mngeney OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. as Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 19. Part 8. Pp. 201—208 OPINION 521 Addition to the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Works in Zoological Nomenclature of the title of the paper by Otto Fabricius issued in Copenhagen in 1823 as Fortegnelse over afgangne Biskop Fabriciusses efterladte Naturalier 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 1958 Price Five Shillings and-Srxpenee AWS (All rights gederved) Ricued 8th August, 1958 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 521 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President: Dr. Karl JorRDAN (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 CaBreErRA (La Plata, Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) Dr. Sareea coe (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. Vokes (University of Tulane, Department of Geology, New Orleans, Louisiana, 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. Hottruuis (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (12th August 1953) f 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. Ferninand PRANTL (Ndrodni Museum V Praze, Prague, Czechoslovakia) (30th October 1954) Professor Dr. Wilhelm KUHNELT (Zoologisches Institut der Universitat, Vienna, Austria) (6th November 1954) ve een 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) OPINION 521 ADDITION TO THE ‘“ OFFICIAL INDEX OF REJECTED AND INVALID WORKS IN ZOOLOGICAL NOMEN- CLATURE”’ OF THE TITLE OF THE PAPER BY OTTO FABRICIUS ISSUED IN COPENHAGEN IN 1823 AS *“* FORTEGNELSE OVER AFGANGNE BISKOP FABRICIUSSES EFTERLADTE NATURALIER ”’ RULING :—(1) It is hereby ruled that the paper by Otto Fabricius entitled “ Fortegnelse over afgangne Biskop Fabriciusses efterladte Naturalier’’ printed in Copenhagen in 1823 is to be rejected for nomenclatorial purposes as not having been duly published within the meaning of Article 25 of the Régles, it not being a document “issued for purposes of record and therefore of consultation by interested persons ”’ as prescribed by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948, but being “a document issued for exclusive consideration by special persons only ’’, “‘ for particular purposes ” and “for a limited time” (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 217—221). (2) The title of the paper specified in (1) above is hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Works in Zoological Nomenclature with the Title Number 59. I. THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 30 June 1956 Dr. Henning Lemche (Universitetets Zoolo- giske Museum, Copénhagen) submitted the following application for the rejection by the Commission as not having been duly SM HTHS ONIA Nea oe nr 204 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS published for the purposes of Article 25 of the Régles of the paper by Otto Fabricius issued in Copenhagen in 1823 under the title ‘“‘ Fortegnelse over afgangne Biskop Fabriciusses efterladte Naturalier’”’ :— Proposed addition to the ‘‘ Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Works in Zoological Nomenclature ”’’ of the title of the work ‘‘ Fortegnelse over Afgangne Biskop Fabriciusses Efterladte Naturalier ’’, 1823 By HENNING LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) In Opinion 393 (1956, Ops. Decls. int. Comm. zool. Nomencl 12 : 305—314), the International Commission on Zoological Nomen- clature suppressed the name Mellita Fabricius (O.), 1823, in order to validate a later name in general use (Mellita Agassiz (J.L.R.), 1841). The Honorary Secretary has now asked me, as the Danish member of the Commission, for my views on the question whether this old Danish work ought now to be rejected once and for all, or alternatively whether the names published in it should be deemed available. In the present application, the results of my investigations are now presented. 2. The “‘ Fortegnelse over afgangne Biskop Fabriciusses! efterladte Naturalier ’’ (“‘ List of the late Bishop Fabricius’ Natural History specimens ’’) is the concluding part (: 51—114) of a mere sale catalogue prepared by (or under the direction of) the procurator Thorbioernsen who was in charge of the auction. The title of the whole publication runs ‘‘ Fortegnelse over en god og velkonditioneert Bogsamling . . . tilligemed en betydelig Deel Naturalier, hvoriblandt en Conchyliesam- ling, afgangne Biskop Fabricius’s! og efterlevende Enkes Bo tilhgrende, som ved Auction Mandagen d. 13de Oktober . . . 8° Kjobenhavn, 1823 ” (“‘ List of a good and well kept library . . . and also of a con- siderable number of Natural History specimens, including a shell collection, belonging to the property of the late Bishop Fabricius and his ee widow, which is to be sold by auction on Monday the 13th Oct. Gal) 1 Jn reply to an enquiry by the Office of the Commission Dr. Henning Lemche (the applicant in the present case) has reported (in litt., 27th January 1958) that the genitive ‘“‘ Fabriciusses ’’ which appears in the title and in the opening portion of paragraph 2 of the application and the genitive “ Fabricius’s ” which also appears in paragraph 2 are both correct in the sense that neither is a misprint. Dr. Lemche added that the first of these forms, which was formerly in general use and is still widely employed, looks unsuitable to modern Danish readers. OPINION 521 205 3. There cannot be the slightest doubt that this publication was not intended in any sense to be a scientific paper. However, the last item offered for sale in the Catalogue is (: 114) ‘“‘ Den afdgdes Fortegnelse over de i dette Catalog naevnte Naturalier, 8 Dele i Quart” (‘ List prepared by the Deceased, of the Natural History specimens enum- erated in this Catalogue. 8 parts in quarto”’). The mentioning of this item makes it possible to maintain the view that the whole list is a posthumously published work prepared by Otto Fabricius. 4. In order to show the way in which the paper is presented, two examples of the text are given here, viz. : page 51 page 91 A VERMES TESTACEA — 692 Trochus scalaris indiae occidentalis I. Multivalvea 93 Ditto var. ! 1. Chiton squamosus 94 ditto 2da var. 2. undatus 95 calcar majus a. marmoratus 96 diaphanus 4. marmoreus 5. Thus, as the list is a mere enumeration of names without the slightest definition, every new specific name mentioned in it is to be regarded as a nomen nudum. ‘The same applies to all new generic names included for which no previously described nominal species is cited. But, the case of Mellita as referred to in paragraph 1 above shows that there may be other cases where generic names introduced in this paper have acquired availability by having been cited in con- nection with the name of some validly established nominal species of older date. 6. I have tried to ascertain whether any of the generic names intro- duced in the above work has come into actual use but, so far, it has not been possible to trace any case of that sort. 7. Accordingly, in order to put an end to any uncertainty regarding the status of names in this book, I ask the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature :— (1) to give a Ruling that the paper by Otto Fabricius entitled “* Fortegnelse over afgangne Biskop Fabriciusses efterladte 206 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Naturalier ’’ printed in Copenhagen in 1823 is to be rejected as not having been duly published within the meaning of Article 25 of the Régles, as clarified by the Thirteenth Inter- national Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 :217—221), this paper not being a document “issued for purposes of record and therefore of consultation by interested persons” but being “‘a document issued for 99 «66 exclusive consideration by special persons only ’’, “‘ for particu- lar purposes ” and “‘ for a limited time ” ; (2) to place the title of the above paper on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Works in Zoological Nomenclature. Il. THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt of Dr. Lemche’s application the question of the possible rejection of the paper by Otto Fabricius printed in Copenhagen in 1823 under the title ““ Fortegnelse over afgange Biskop Fabriciusses efterladte Naturalier’’ was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 1137. 3. Publication of the present application : The present appli- cation was sent to the printer on 2lst August 1956 and was published on 31st October of that year in Part 10 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Lemche, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 277—278). 4. No Objection Received : No objection to the action proposed in the present application was received from any source. Ill. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 5. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(57)38 : On 15th May 1957 a Voting Paper (V.P.(57)38) was issued in which the Members of OPINION 521 207 the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “‘ the proposal relating to the paper by Otto Fabricius entitled ““Fortegnelse over afgangne Biskop Fabriciusses efterladte Naturalier ’’, 1823, as set out in Points (1) to (2) in paragraph 7 on page 278 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomen- clature’’ [i.e. in the paragraph numbered as above in the paper 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 15th August 1957. 7. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)38 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)38 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following twenty- three (23) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Hering ; Vokes; Prantl; Lemche; Holthuis; Riley ; Dymond ; do Amaral; Esaki; Hanko; Stoll; Key; Jaczewski ; Mertens ; Bodenheimer ; Boschma ; Bonnet ; Hemming ; Sylvester-Bradley ; Cabrera ; Bradley (J.C.) ; Tortonese ; Miller ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) On Leave of Absence, two (2) : Mayr ; Kiihnelt ; (d) Voting Papers not returned : None. 208 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 8. Declaration of Result of Vote : On 16th August 1957, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)38, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 7 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. 9. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 19th February 1958 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.(57)38. 10. Title of a work : The full title for the work placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Works in Zoological Nomenclature by the Ruling given in the present Opinion is given - in Section (1) of the said Ruling. 11. Compliance with Prescribed Procedures: The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Com- mission 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 Com- mission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 12. ** Opinion ’”’ Number : The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Five Hundred and Twenty-One (521) of the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this- Nineteenth day of February, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Eight. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING © 1958. THE INTERNATIONAL TRUST FOR ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Printed in England by METCALFE & COOPER LIMITED, 10-24 Scrutton St., London E C 2 e a, els ie aa Be CL SAMOS dd BOE PS ccna die AS ie Re F ‘way 4 tel AeA eo 1 Meo morclature 4 is considering as a matter of urgency t ntial economies can best be effected in its ae ASO: OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. as Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 19. Part 9. Pp. 209—248 OPINION 522 Suppression under the Plenary Powers (i) of certain names published by C. S. Rafinesque for genera and species of the Orders Decapoda and Stomatopoda (Class Crustacea) in the period 1814—1818 and (ii) of certain specific names currently regarded as senior subjective synonyms of the names of the type species of Homola Leach, 1815, and Lissa Leach, 1815 respectively both being genera assigned to the first of the foregoing Orders 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 1958 Price One Pound an Sis Shillings , AN (All rights reserved) | SEP 10 1958 Issued 8th August, 1958 X18 IRA RY INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE AC OPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 522 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) (ist January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (La Plata, Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEmmiInG (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) Dr. aay ayaa (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 RILeEy (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.) (12th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. Voxes (University of Tulane, Department of Geology, New Orleans, Louisiana, 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. 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 (Nérodni Museum V Praze, Prague, Czechoslovakia) (0th October 1954) Professor Dr. Wilhelm KiHNELT (Zoologisches Institut der Universitat, Vienna, Austria) (6th November 1954) Frolessot 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) OPINION 522 SUPPRESSION UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS (i) OF CERTAIN NAMES PUBLISHED BY C. S. RAFINESQUE FOR GENERA AND SPECIES OF THE ORDERS DECAPODA AND STOMATOPODA (CLASS CRUSTACEA) IN THE PERIOD 1814—1818 AND (ii) OF CERTAIN SPECIFIC NAMES CURRENTLY REGARDED AS SENIOR SUBJECTIVE SYNO- NYMS OF THE NAMES OF THE TYPE SPECIES OF ‘* HOMOLA”? LEACH, 1815, AND “LISSA” LEACH, 1815, RES- PECTIVELY, BOTH BEING GENERA ASSIGNED TO THE FIRST OF THE FOREGOING ORDERS RULING :—(1) The following action is hereby taken under the Plenary Powers :— (a) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby suppressed for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy :— (1) Acilius Rafinesque, 1815 ; (ii) Alciope Rafinesque, 1814 ; (iii) Byzenus Rafinesque, 1814 ; (iv) Mesapus Rafinesque, 1814 ; (v) Nectoceras Rafinesque, 1817 ; (vi) Niphea Rafinesque, 1815 ; (vii) Symethus Rafinesque, 1814 ; (viii) Thelxiope Rafinesque, 1814 ; SMITLICOANIIAN Die OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (b) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby suppressed for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy :— (i) achiria Rafinesque, 1817, as published in the combination Hippa achiria ; (ii) crocea Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Squilla crocea ; (iii) cruentatus Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the combination Cancer cruentatus ; (iv) cubicus Forskal, 1775, as published in the combination Cancer cubicus ; (v) fasciatus Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Mesapus fasciatus ; (vi) fluviatilis Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Symethus fluviatilis ; (vii) fossor Rafinesque, 1817, as published in the combination Astacus fossor ; (viii) heterochelus Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Alciope heterochelus ; (ix) /evigatus Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Jnachus levigatus ; (x) novemdecos Sulzer, 1776, as published in the combination Cancer novemdecos ; (xi) pelagica Rafinesque, 1817, as published in the combination Nectoceras pelagica ; (xii) portunoides Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Cancer portunoides ; (xiii) pusilla Rafinesque, 1817, as published in the combination Ocypoda pusilla ; (xiv) quadricolor Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Peneus quadricolor ; (xv) rugosus Rafinesque, 1817, as published in the combination Nectylus rugosus ; OPINION 522 213 (xvi) scaber Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Byzenus scaber ; (xvii) striata Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Aglaope striata ; (xviil) tomentosus Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Inachus tomentosus ; (xix) triodona Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Squilla triodona ; (xx) truncatulus Rafinesque, 1817, as published in the combination Pagurus truncatulus. (2) The under-mentioned generic names in the Order Decapoda (Class Crustacea) are hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) Albunea Weber, 1795 (gender: feminine) (type species, by selection by Holthuis (L.B.) (1956) : Cancer symmysta Linnaeus, 1758) (Name No. 1299) ; (b) Atyaephyra de Brito Capello, 1867 (gender: fem- inine) (type species, by monotypy: Atyaephyra rosiana de Brito Capello, 1867) (Name No. 1300) ; (c) Homola Leach, 1815 (gender: feminine) (type species, by monotypy : Homola spinifrons Leach, 1815) (Name No. 1301) ; (d) Lissa Leach, 1815 (gender : feminine) (type species, by monotypy : Cancer chiragra Fabricius (J.C.), 1775) (Name No. 1302) ; (ec) Lysmata Risso, 1816 (gender: feminine) (a sub- stitute name for Melicerta Risso, 1816, a junior homonym of Melicerta Schrank, 1803) (type species, by selection by Milne Edwards (H.), 214 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (1837) : Melicerta seticaudata Risso, 1816) (Name No. 1303) ; (f) Pontophilus Leach, [1817] (gender: masculine) (type species, by monotypy : Crangon spinosus Leach, 1815) (Name No. 1304) ; (g) Stenopus Latreille, 1819 (gender : masculine) (type species, by monotypy : Palaemon hispidus Olivier, 1811) (Name No. 1305). (3) The name of the under-mentioned genus in the Class Rotifera is hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Number 1306 :— Melicerta Schrank, 1803 (gender : masculine) (type species, by monotypy : Sabella ringens Linnaeus, SD). (4) The under-mentioned specific names of species in the Order Decapoda (Class Crustacea) are hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :-— (a) barbatus Fabricius, 1793, as published in the com- bination Cancer barbatus (Name No. 1551) ; (b) chiragra Fabricius, 1775, as published in the com- bination Cancer chiragra (specific name of type species of Lissa Leach, 1815) (Name No. 1552) ; (c) desmarestii Millet, 1831, as published in the com- bination Hippolyte desmarestii (Name No. 1553) ; (d) diogenes Girard, 1852, as published in the combina- tion Cambarus diogenes (Name No. 1554) ; OPINION 522 DS) (e) fasciatus Risso, 1816, as published in the combina- tion Crangon fasciatus (Name No. 1555) ; (f) flavomaculata Heller, 1864, as published in the com- bination Pontonia flavomaculata (Name No. 1556); (g) Jongicarpus Say, 1817, as published in the combina- tion Pagurus longicarpus (Name No. 1557) ; (h) Jimosus Rafinesque, 1817, as published in the combination Astacus limosus (Name No. 1558) ; (i) longipes Risso, 1816, as published in the combination Portunus longipes (Name No. 1559) ; (j) lunulata Risso, 1816, as published in the combina- tion Maia lunulata (Name No. 1560) ; (k) pugnax Smith, 1870, as published in the combination Gelasimus pugnax (Name No. 1561) ; (1) seticaudata Risso, 1816, as published in the com- bination Melicerta Seti Caudata [sic] (specific name of type species of Lysmata Risso, 1816) (Name No. 1562) ; (m) spinosus Leach, 1815, as published in the combina- tion Crangon spinosus (specific name of type species of Pontophilus Leach, [1817]) (Name No. 1563) ; (n) spinosus Risso, 1827, as published in the combina- tion Stenopus spinosus (Name No. 1564) ; (0) symmysta Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the com- bination Cancer symmysta (specific name of type species of Albunea Weber, 1795) (Name No. 1565) ; (p) talpoida Say, 1817, as published in the combination Hippa talpoida (Name No. 1566) ; 216 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (5) It is hereby directed that the words “ specific name of type species of Stenopus Latreille, 1819 ” be inserted in the entry relating to the specific name hispidus Olivier, 1811, as published in the combination Palaemon hispidus (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), made on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology as Name Number 614 by the Ruling given in Opinion 381. (6) The under-mentioned specific names in the Order Stomatopoda (Class Crustacea) are hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) eusebia Risso, 1816, as published in the combination Squilla eusebia (Name No. 1567) ; (b) ferussaci Roux, 1830, as published in the combina- tion Squilla ferussaci (Name No. 1568). (7) The under-mentioned specific name of a species of the Class Rotifera is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Number 1569 : ringens Linnaeus, 1767, as published in the combina- tion Sabella ringens (specific name of type species of Melicerta Schrank, 1803). (8) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) The under-mentioned generic names, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers under (1)(a) above :— (i) Acilius Rafinesque, 1815 (Name No. 1183) ; (ii) Alciope Rafinesque, 1814 (Name No. 1184) ; OPINION 522 217 (iii). Byzenus Rafinesque, 1814 (Name No. 1185); (iv) Mesapus Rafinesque, 1814 (Name No. 1186); (v) Nectoceras Rafinesque, 1817 (Name No. 2 (vi) Niphea Rafinesque, 1815 (Name No. 1188) ; (vii) Symethus Rafinesque, 1814 (Name No. 1189) ; (vill) Thelxiope Rafinesque, 1814 (Name No. 1190) ; b) (b) Aglaope Rafinesque, 1814 (a junior homonym of | Aglaope Latreille, 1809) (Name No. 1191) ; (c) Crangonus Rafinesque, 1815 (a junior objective synonym of Crangon Fabricius, 1798) (Name No. OD) (d) Lissula Rafinesque, 1818 (a junior objective syno- nym of Lissa Leach, 1815) (Name No. 1193) ; (e) Lupania Rafinesque, 1818 (a junior objective syno- nym of Portunus Weber, 1795) (Name No. 1194) ; (f) Syllarus Rafinesque, 1815 (a junior objective synonym of Scyllarus Fabricius, 1775) (Name Noz iOS)": (g) Symathus Rafinesque, 1815 (an Erroneous Subse- quent Spelling for Symethus Rafinesque, 1814) (Name No. 1196) ; (h) Symnista Rafinesque, 1815 (a junior objective synonym of Albunea Weber, 1795) (Name No. OTe (i) The under-mentioned generic names, each of which is a junior homonym of Melicerta Schrank, 1803 :— (i) Melicerta Péron & Lesuer, 1810 (Name No. 1 e 9 218 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (ii) Melicerta Risso, 1816 (Name No. 1199) ; (ii) Melicerta Tilesius, 1831 (Name No. 1200) ; (iv) Melicerta Stephens, 1833 (Name No. 1201). (9) The under-mentioned specific names, each of which is suppressed under the Plenary Powers under (1)(b) above, are hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :-— (a) achiria Rafinesque, 1817, as published in the com- bination Hippa achiria (Name No. 540) ; (b) crocea Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the com- bination Squilla crocea (Name No. 541) ; (c) cruentatus Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the com- bination Cancer cruentatus (Name No. 542) ; (d) cubicus Forskal, 1775, as published in the combina- tion Cancer cubicus (Name No. 543) ; (e) fasciatus Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Mesapus fasciatus (Name No. 544) ; (f) fluviatilis Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the com- bination Symethus fluviatilis (Name No. 545) ; (g) fossor Rafinesque, 1817, as published in the com- bination Astacus fossor (Name No. 546) ; (h) heterochelus Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Alciope heterochelus (Name No. 547) ; (i) /evigatus Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the com- bination Jnachus levigatus (Name No, 548) ; OPINION 522 219 (j) novemdecos Sulzer, 1776, as published in the com- bination Cancer novemdecos (Name No. 549) ; (k) pelagica Rafinesque, 1817, as published in the com- bination Nectoceras pelagica (Name No. 550) ; (1) portunoides Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Cancer portunoides (Name No. 551) ; (m) pusilla Rafinesque, 1817, as published in the com- bination Ocypoda pusilla (Name No. 552) ; (n) guadricolor Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Peneus quadricolor (Name No. 553) ; (0) rugosus Rafinesque, 1817, as published in the com- bination Nectylus rugosus (Name No. 554) ; (p) scaber Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the com- bination Byzenus scaber (Name No. 555) ; (q) striata Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the com- bination Aglaope striata (Name No. 556) ; (r) tomentosus Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Jnachus tomentosus (Name No. 557); (s) triodona Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the com- bination Squilla triodona (Name No. 558) ; (t) truncatulus Rafinesque, 1817, as published in the combination Pagurus truncatulus (Name No. 559): (10) The under-mentioned family-group names are hereby placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) ALBUNEIDAE (correction of ALBUNIDAE) Stimpson, 1858 (type genus: Albunea Weber, 1795) (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda) (Name No. 242) ; 220 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (b) HOMOLIDAE White, 1847 (type genus: Homola Leach, 1815) (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda) (Name No. 243) ; (c) STENOPODIDAE (correction of STENOPIDAE) Huxley, [1879] (type genus: Stenopus Latreille, 1819) (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda) (Name No. 244) ; (d) MELICERTIDAE (correction of MELICERTADAE) Hudson & Gosse, 1886 (type genus: Melicerta Schrank, 1803) (Class Rotifera) (Name No. 245). (11) The under-mentioned family-group names are hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) ALBUNIDAE Stimpson, 1858 (type genus: Albunea Weber, 1795) (an Invalid Original Spelling for ALBUNEIDAE) (Name No. 276) ; (b) STENOPIDAE Huxley, [1879] (type genus: Stenopus Latreille, 1819) (an Invalid Original Spelling for STENOPODIDAE) (Name No. 277) ; (c) THELXIOPEIDAE Rathbun, 1937 (type genus: Thelxiope Rafinesque, 1814) (invalid under Declaration 20 because name of type genus suppressed under the Plenary Powers in (1)(a) above) (Name No. 278) ; (d) MELICERTADAE Hudson & Gosse, 1886 (type genus Melicerta Schrank, 1803) (an Invalid Original Spelling for MELICERTIDAE) (Name No. 279). I. THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 26th October 1948 Dr. L. B. Holthuis (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) addressed a pre- liminary communication to the Office of the Commission on the OPINION 522 221 question of the need for taking action in the interests of nomen- clatorial stability in regard to a considerable number of names for genera and species of the Orders Decapoda and Stomatopoda (Class Crustacea) published by Rafinesque between 1814 and 1818, none of which were in current use, although many were senior synonyms of well-established names. A few months earlier the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948, had supplemented the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology by establishing both an Official List for the names of species and also Official Indexes for rejected and invalid specific names. The rules governing these Lists and Indexes were published in 1950 and this made it possible to form a view as to the scope of the action needed in this and other cases then pending. On Ist May 1954 Dr. Holthuis submitted a formal application for the suppression under the Plenary Powers of the Rafinesque names referred to above. Even at that date there were however certain matters involved in the present case that were still outstanding and it was not until 11th July 1956 that the last of these questions was finally cleared up and the following application submitted to the Commission :— Proposed suppression under the Plenary Powers (a) of certain names given by C. S. Rafinesque to genera and species of the Orders Decapoda and Stomatopoda (Class Crustacea) and (b) of certain names currently regarded as senior subjective syno- nyms of the names of the type species of the genera ** Homola ”’ and ‘‘ Lissa ’’, both of Leach, 1815, belonging to the foregoing Class By L. B. HOLTHUIS (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, Holland) New Decapoda and Stomatopoda are described or mentioned by C. S. Rafinesque in four of his numerous publications. These four papers are : 1814. Précis des découvertes et travaux somiologiques de Mr. C. S. Rafinesque-Schmaltz. entre 1800 et 1814. Ou choix raisonné de ses principales Découyertes en Zoologie et en Botanique, pour servir d’introduction a ses ouvrages futurs : 1—55. 1815. Analyse de la Nature ou Tableau de I’Univers et des Corps organisés : 1—224. 222 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 1817. “‘ Synopsis of four New Genera and ten new Species of Crustacea, found in the United States. Museum of Natural Sciences. 9,.”? Amer. mon. Mag. crit. Rev. 2: 40—43. 1818. “* Journal of the Academy of Natural Sciences of Philadelphia. Vol. i, Part I. Philadelphia. 8vo. pp. 220, and 9 plates. May to December, 1817.” Amer. mon. Mag. crit. Rev. 3 : 269—274 2. The first of these papers contains the description of seventeen new species and eight new genera of Decapoda and two new species of Stomatopoda, all from Sicily. The second publication gives a classi- fication of the Animal and Plant Kingdoms down to genera. Most of the new generic names given here by Rafinesque are nomina nuda, the exceptions being a few names, which he proposed to replace already published names. In the third paper ten new species of Decapod Crustacea from the United States are described, while two new generic names of Decapoda are mentioned. In the fourth publication two new names are proposed for Brachyuran genera. The carcinological names of Rafinesque generally have been overlooked and as far as I know only one generic and one specific name given by this author to Decapod Crustacea are used in modern carcinological literature. The following table gives the names of species and new genera of Decapod and Stomatopod Crustacea, used by Rafinesque in the four publications mentioned above, with the names, which in recent literature currently are employed for those species and genera. Names of Rafinesque Current modern names Acilius Rafinesque, 1815 : 221 Atyaephyra De Brito Capello, 1867 (substit. pro Symethus Rafinesque, 1814) Aglaope Rafinesque, 1814 : 24 Lysmata Risso, 1816 (non Latreille, 1809) Aglaope striata Rafinesque, 1814: Lysmata seticaudata (Risso, 1816) 24 Albunea symnista (Linnaeus, 1758) Albunea carabus (Linnaeus, 1758) Rafinesque, 1814 : 20 Alciope Rafinesque, 1814 : 24 Pontonia Latreille, 1829 Alciope heterochelus Rafinesque, Pontonia flavomaculata Heller, 1814 : 24 1864 Astacus ciliaris Rafinesque, 1817 : Cambarus bartonii (Fabricius, 1798) Astacus fossor Rafinesque, 1817: Cambarus diogenes Girard, 1852 42 Astacus limosus Rafinesque, Orconectes affinis (Say, December, November, 1817 : 42 1817) j OPINION 522 Names of Rafinesque Astacus pusillus Rafinesque, 1817 : 42 Astacus rugosus Rafinesque, 1814 : 22 Byzenus Rafinesque, 1814 : 23 Byzenus scaber Rafinesque, 1814 : 23 Cancer levifrons Rafinesque, 1814 : 20 Cancer portunoides Rafinesque, 1814 : 20 Cancer villosissimus Rafinesque, 1814 : 20 Crangonus Rafinesque, 1815 : 98 (substit. pro Crangon Fabricius, 1798) Cryptophthalmus Rafinesque, 1814 : 23 Cryptophthalmus ruber Rafinesque, 1814 : 23 Everne Rafinesque, 1815 : 98 (substit. pro Melicertus Rafinesque, 1814) Grapsus fluviatilis (Herbst, 1785) Rafinesque, 1814 : 21 Grapsus limosus Rafinesque, November 1817 : 42 Hippa achiria (Mitchill MSS) Rafinesque, November, 1817 : 41 (by typographical error prin- ted as Hippaachiria) Inachus levigatus Rafinesque, 1814 : 21 Inachus tomentosus Rafinesque, 1814: 21 223 Current modern names Cambarus bartonii (Fabricius, 1798) Nephrops norvegicus (Linnaeus, 1758) Stenopus Latreille, 1819 Stenopus spinosus Risso, 1827 Xantho poressa (Olivi, 1792) Bathynectes longipes (Risso, 1816) Pilumnus hirtellus (Linnaeus, 1758) Crangon Fabricius, 1798 Alpheus Fabricius, 1798 Alpheus glaber (Olivi, 1792) Penaeus Fabricius, 1798 Potamon edulis (Latreille, 1818) Sesarma (Sesarma) reticulatum (Say, September, 1817) Emerita talpoida (Say, November, 1817 Acanthonyx lunulatus (Risso, 1816) Pisa prob. tetraodon (Pennant 1777) 224 Names of Rafinesque Lissula Rafinesque, 1818 : 272 Lupania Rafinesque, 1818 : 272 Melicertus Rafinesque, 1814 : 22 Melicertus tigrinus Rafinesque, 1814 : 22 Mesapus Rafinesque, 1814 : 22 Mesapus fasciatus Rafinesque, 1814 : 23 Nectoceras Rafinesque, 1817 : 41 Nectoceras pelagica Rafinesque, 1817 : 41 Nectylus Rafinesque, 1817 : 41 Nectylus rugosus Rafinesque, November, 1817 : 41 Niphea Rafinesque, 1815 : 98 (substit. pro Aglaope Rafinesque 1814) Ocypoda fluviatilis (Herbst, 1785) Rafinesque, 1814 : 21 Ocypoda pusilla Rafinesque, 1817 : 42 Ocypoda unispinosa Rafinesque, 1814 : 21 Pagurus granulatus Rafinesque, 1814 : 22 (non Olivier, 1812) Pagurus truncatulus Rafinesque, November, 1817 : 42 Peneus quadricolor Rafinesque, 1814 : 22 Portunus menoides Rafinesque, 1817 : 42 Squilla crocea Rafinesque, 1814 : 25 . Squilla triodona Rafinesque, 1814 : 24 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Current modern names Lissa Leach, 1815 Portunus Weber, 1795 Penaeus Fabricius, 1798 Penaeus kerathurus (Forskal, 1775) Pontophilus Leach, 1817 Pontophilus fasciatus (Risso, 1816) [?] Hippolyte Leach, 1815 [?] Hippolyte coerulescens (Fabricius, 1775) Emerita Meuschen, 1778 Emerita talpoida (Say, November, 1817) Lysmata Risso, 1816 Potamon edulis (Latreille, 1818) [?] Uca pugnax Smith, 1870 Goneplax rhomboides (Linnaeus, 1758) Pagurus alatus Fabricius, 1775 Pagurus longicarpus Say, December, 1817 Gnathophyllum elegans (Risso, 1816) Carcinus maenas (Linnaeus, 1758) Lysiosquilla eusebia (Risso, 1816) Pseudosquilla ferussaci (Roux, OPINION 522 Do Names of Rafinesque Current modern names Syllarus Rafinesque, 1815 : 98 Scyllarus Fabricius, 1775 (substit. pro Scyllarus Fabricius, 1775) Symethus Rafinesque, 1814 : 23 Atyaephyra De Brito Capello, 1867 Symethus fluviatilis Rafinesque, Atyaephyra desmarestii (Millet, 1814 : 23 1831) Symnista Rafinesque, 1815 : 98 Albunea Weber, 1795 (substit. pro Albunea Fabricius, 1798) Thelxiope Rafinesque, 1814 : 21 Homola Leach, 1815 Thelxiope palpigera Rafinesque, Homola barbata (Fabricius, 1793) 1814 ;: 21 3. If Rafinesque’s names were to be accepted, the following generic names would have to be changed : Atyaephyra De Brito Capello, 1867, to Symethus Rafinesque, 1814; Homola Leach, 1815, to Thelxiope Rafinesque, 1814 ; Lysmata Risso, 1816, to Niphea Rafinesque, 1815 ; Pontonia Latreille, 1829, to Alciope Rafinesque, 1814; Pontophilus Leach, 1817, to Mesapus Rafinesque, 1814; Stenopus Latreille, 1819, to Byzenus Rafinesque, 1814. This is the more serious since Homola and Stenopus are the type genera of the families HOMOLIDAE and STENOPODIDAE respectively. In addition, a special problem would arise in connection with the generic name Alciope Rafinesque, 1814, which would replace the name Pontonia Latreille, 1829, a name which has already been placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology by the Ruling given in Opinion 378 (1956, Ops. Decls. int. Comm. zool. Nomencl. 11 : 411—420) and is moreover the name of the type genus of the family-group taxon PONTONIINAE (correction of PONTONINAE) Kingsley, 1878, the name of which has been placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology by the Ruling given in Direction 41 (1956, Ops. Decls. int. Comm. zool. Nomencl. 11 : 431—452). 4. In addition to the problems in connection with generic names discussed above, the acceptance of Rafinesque’s names would involve the following changes at the specific-name level :—Acanthonyx lunulatus (Risso, 1816) would become Acanthonyx levigatus (Rafinesque, 1814) ; Atyaephyra desmarestii (Millet, 1831) would become Symethus fluviatilis Rafinesque, 1814 ; Bathynectes longipes (Risso, 1816) would become Bathynectes portunoides (Rafinesque, 1814); Cambarus diogenes Girard, 1852, would become Cambarus fossor (Rafinesque, 1817); | Gnathophyllum elegans (Risso, 1816) would become Gnathophyllum quadricolor (Rafinesque, 1814); Lysiosquilla eusebia (Risso, 1816) would become Lysiosquilla crocea (Rafinesque, 1814) ; 226 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Lysmata seticaudata (Risso, 1816) would become WNiphea striata (Rafinesque, 1814); Orconectes affinis (Say, 1817) would become Orconectes limosus (Rafinesque, 1817) ; Pagurus longicarpus Say, 1817, would become Pagurus truncatulus Rafinesque, 1817; Pontonia flavomaculata Heller, 1864, would become Alciope heterochelus Rafinesque, 1814; Pontophilus fasciatus (Risso, 1816) would become Mesapus fasciatus Rafinesque, 1814; Pseudosquilla ferussaci (Roux, 1830) would become Pseudosquilla triodona (Rafinesque, 1814) ; Stenopus spinosus Risso, 1827, would become Byzenus scaber Rafinesque, 1814 ; Uca pugnax Smith, 1870, would become Uca pusilla (Rafinesque, 1817). Thus six generic and fourteen specific names would have to be changed if the scientific names proposed by Rafinesque were to be accepted. The changing of all these names would greatly upset car- cinological nomenclature, the more so as the species involved generally are common taxa from thoroughly explored regions such as the Mediterranean and the American East Coast. I find that more than one hundred authors have used the generic name Pontophilus, eighty the name Stenopus, about the same number have used Lysmata, about seventy have used Pontonia, and fifty the name Atyaephyra. The specific name desmarestii for the species at present best known as Atyaephyra desmarestii has been used by about eighty authors, the name seticaudata of Lysmata seticaudata by about seventy authors, the name elegans of Gnathophyllum elegans by more than fifty authors, the name spinosus of Stenopus spinosus by about thirty authors, the name eusebia of Lysiosquilla eusebia by over twenty authors, and the names flavomaculata of Pontonia flavomaculata, and ferussaci of Pseudosquilla ferussaci each by about fifteen authors. Not enough data are at my disposal to give an approximate number of authors using the current names of the Brachyura and Anomura, but the number involved is also considerable. Only two of Rafinesque’s names for Decapods are used by part of the modern authors. One of these names is the generic name Thelxiope Rafinesque, which Rathbun (1937, Bull. U.S. nat. Mus. 166 : 63) showed to be the oldest name for the genus Homola Leach, 1815 ; she has been followed by a few modern authors (Chace, 1940, Torreia 4:8; Gordon, 1950, Sci. Rep. John Murray Exped. 9(3): 221; Barnard, 1950, Ann. S. Afr. Mus. 38 : 338), while Dr. Th. Monod of Dakar informs me that in his as yet unpublished monograph of the West African Crabs he also proposes to use the name Thelxiope. In the recent monographic account by Bouvier (1940, Faune de France 37 : 192) of the Decapoda Reptantia of the French coasts, the name Homola is still used, while several other authors do not accept Rafinesque’s name. The specific compound Jimosus of Astacus limosus Rafinesque, is used by a number of authors for the species Orconectes affinis (Say). Ortmann (1905, Proc. Amer. phil. Soc. 44: 107, 112, 131) was the first to point to the identity of Say’s and Rafinesque’s species and showed that Rafinesque’s name was published one month before that of Say, so that the name /imosus has priority and should be used. Most American authors at present follow Ortmann. None of the other generic or specific names proposed by Rafinesque for eee OPINION 522 227 Decapoda and Stomatopoda has ever been accepted. They have been mentioned in a footnote or in a short remark in some of the more or less monographic works of the first half of the last century, e.g. by Desmarest (1825, Consid. gén. Class. Crust. 134, 214—216) and by H. Milne Edwards (1837, Hist. nat. Crust. 2 : 49, 408, 420, 430, 431) ; but they have not been adopted by those, or by any subsequent, authors. 5. In my opinion it is desirable, in order to avoid very serious confusion in carcinological nomenclature, to suppress all the overlooked names of Crustacea Decapoda and Stomatopoda proposed in the works of Rafinesque. Since the generic name Thelxiope Rafinesque is used by several American authors and generally is neglected by European workers, I asked Dr. Fenner A. Chace, Jr., Curator of the Division of Marine Invertebrates of the U.S. National Museum at Washington, D.C., for his opinion on this question. Dr. Chace answered as follows : —“‘As far as your suggestion to apply to the Commission for suppression of this name is concerned, I have no objections. After all, Thelxiope has been resurrected fairly recently and has not yet become firmly entrenched in the literature.” Dr. Isobel Gordon concerning the name Thelxiope wrote me as follows :—‘“‘I reluctantly used Thelxiope in my “John Murray” Report. I favour suppressing that with the other Rafinesque names.”’ Dr. Th. Monod, on the other hand, favours the retention of Thelxiope :—‘‘Jai suivi Rathbun dans mes crabes ouest- africains et utilisé Thelxiope. Je serais donc, en principe, en faveur d’une nouvelle exception en sa faveur, a la demande de suppression générale des noms de Rafinesque.’” M. J. Forest (Muséum National d Histoire naturelle, Paris) has also expressed himself (in /itt.) as being, opposed to the suppression of Thelxiope :—“‘ Je crois que la majorité des carcinologistes ont repris Thelxiope Rafinesque. Suivons les... mais je regrette que Rathbun ait ressuscité ce nom.” Dr. R. Zariquiey Alvarez of Barcelona has informed me (in Jitt.) that he prefers to use the name Homola, though he would not oppose its substitution by Thelxiope if most other carcinologists are in favour of validating the latter name. Dr. H. Balss, of Miinich, has informed me (in Jitt.) :— ““auch ich verwende den Namen Thelxiope nicht, sondern bleibe bei Homola.” Personally, I believe that the suppression of the name Thelxiope is to be preferred, Homola being a widely used name, while Thelxiope has only recently been reintroduced. Furthermore, if in connection with the name Thelxiope the Priority Principle is strictly adhered to, this course will have to be followed also with the specific name of the type species of that genus, which is at present currently known as Homola barbata (Fabricius, 1793), but which possesses two senior synonyms, which until now have always been overlooked by carcinologists and the suppression of which is here requested. Since the specific compound limosus of the name Orconectes limosus (Rafinesque) is at present widely accepted in American literature and is even used in European publications, there would seem to be no advantage in suppressing this name. Consequently I ask here for the 228 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS suppression of all generic and specific names for Decapod and Stoma- topod Crustacea proposed by Rafinesque with the sole exception of the just mentioned specific name /imosus. 6. It may be emphasised here that the suppression of Rafinesque’s names is not asked because of the poor quality of his work, but because fo the fact that, contrary to the Régles, these names have never been accepted by contemporary and later carcinologists. Doing justice to this too little appreciated author would involve so many changes in carcinological nomenclature that it seems best to continue the practice of not using his names. The fact that so many of the descriptions make it possible to identify Rafinesque’s species is sufficient evidence that he was not as poor a systematist as he has often said to have been. 7. Only one of Rafinesque’s Decapod genera has been made the type genus of a family. This genus is Thelxiope Rafinesque, 1814. The rather complicated synonymy of this family group name is the following :— THELXIOPEDES Leach, 1819, Dict. Sci. nat. 13 : 512 THELXIOPEDEES Desmarest, 1823, Dict. Sci. nat. 28 : 252 HOMOLIENS H. Milne Edwards, 1837, Hist. nat. Crust. 2 : 167, 180 HOMOLIDAE White, 1847, List Crust. Brit. Mus. : 55 THELXIOPEIDEA Rathbun, 1937, Bull. U.S. nat. Mus. 166 : 61 THELXIOPEIDAE Rathbun, 1937, Bull. U.S. nat. Mus. 166 : 62 The first three names are vernacular names and thus have no nomen- clatorial standing. The name HOMOLIDAE White, 1847, is the first available name for the family group to which the genus Homola belongs, and the currently accepted family name HOMOLIDAE thus is a valid name. 8. Two more questions have to be considered before the status of the Rafinesque names can be finally settled by the Commission. These questions concern the names of the type species of the genera Homola Leach, 1815, and Lissa Leach, 1815, the insertion of which in the Official List is requested here. 9. The type species of the genus Homola Leach, 1815, is Homola spinifrons Leach (1815, Trans. linn. Soc. Lond. 11 : 324), a species which is currently known by the name Homola barbata (Fabricius, 1793), Cancer barbatus Fabricius being a senior subjective synonym of Homola spinifrons Leach. A study of the literature reveals, however, that Cancer barbatus Fabricius, 1793 (Ent. syst. 2 : 460) is not the oldest available name for this species. Both the names Cancer cubicus OPINION 522 229 Forskal, 1775 (Descript. Anim. : 89) and Cancer novemdecos Sulzer, 1776 (Abgektirzte Gesch. Ins. : 265, pl. 31. fig. 4) prove to be senior subjective synonyms of Cancer barbatus Fabricius. As far as is known to me neither the specific name cubicus Forskal nor the name novemdecos Sulzer has ever been used for the species in question during the last 150 years. During that period the species has been indicated by most authors either as Homola barbata or as Homola spinifrons. The latter name gradually disappeared, and barbata is the specific name which is used in all modern handbooks. The replacement of this well-known and widely-used name by the long-forgotten name cubicus Forskal would badly upset the nomenclatorial stability of the group and would cause serious confusion. This could, however, be prevented by the suppression under the Plenary Powers of the names cubicus and novemdecos. 10. The problem concerning the name for the type species of the genus Lissa Leach is very similar. The type species of this genus is Cancer chiragra Fabricius, 1775 (Syst. Ent. : 409). The specific name chiragra Fabricius is widely used to denote the species and as far as I can ascertain, it is the only name that has been used for it since the introduction of the generic name Lissa. There can be little doubt, however, that the name Cancer chiragra Fabricius, 1775, is a junior Subjective synonym of Cancer cruentatus Linnaeus, 1758 (Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1: 630). The name cruentatus Linnaeus was used by one or two authors in the eighteenth century but has since been entirely over- looked. There seems to be little sense in resurrecting this long-forgotten name, even though it was introduced by Linnaeus for a species which was described in such a way by this great Swedish author that it still is recognisable from the original description. 11. Both Dr. Isobel Gordon of the British Museum (Natural History), London, and Dr. R. Zariquiey Alvarez of Barcelona, have informed me that they are in favour of the use of the Plenary Powers to save the names barbata (in the case dealt with in paragraph 9 above) and chiragra Fabricius (in the case dealt with in paragraph 10). On the other hand Dr. Th. Monod of Dakar and M. J. Forest of Paris favour here the strict application of the normal provisions of the Régles. Concerning the name chiragra Fabricius Dr. Monod (in litt.) has remarked “‘ L’avantage du retour 4 un nom linnéen est que l’on attaint un terminus ad quem qui garanti contre tout danger ultérieur de modification nouvelle’. Though I agree with the principle underlying Dr. Monod’s remark, I believe that by being placed on the Official List under the Plenary Powers of the Commission, the name chiragra Fabricius would be even better safe-guarded against change than would the above Linnean name. Personally, therefore, I am in favour of the use of the Plenary Powers both in the case of Cancer barbatus Fabricius and of Cancer chiragra Fabricius. 230 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 12. The concrete proposals which I now submit for consideration are that the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature should :— (1) use its Plenary Powers :— (a) to suppress the undermentioned generic names for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy :— (i) Acilius Rafinesque, 1815, Anal. Nat. : 221 (sub- stitute name for Symethus Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découy. somiol.: 23) (type species, by monotypy through Symethus Rafinesque : Symethus fluviatilis Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découy. somiol. : 23) ; (ii) Alciope Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découy. somiol. : 24 (type species, by monotypy : Alciope heterochelus Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découy. somiol. : 24) ; (iii) Byzenus Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découy. somiol. : 23 (type species, by monotypy : Byzenus scaber Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découv. somiol. : 23) ; (iv) Mesapus Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découv. somiol. : 22 (type species, by monotypy: Mesapus fasciatus Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découv. somiol. : 23). (v) Nectoceras Rafinesque, 1817, Amer. monthly Mag. crit. Rev. 2:41 (type species, by monotypy : Nectoceras pelagica Rafinesque, 1817, Amer. monthly Mag. crit. Rey. 2: 41) ; (vi) Niphea Rafinesque, 1815, Analyse Nature : 98 (sub- stitute name for Aglaope Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découy. somiol. : 24) (type species, by monotypy through Aglaope Rafinesque: Aglaope striata Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découy. somiol. : 24) ; (vil) Symethus Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découv. somiol. : 23 (type species by monotypy: Symethus fluviatilis Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découy. somiol. ; 23) ; (viii) Thelxiope Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découv. somiol.: 21 (type species, by monotypy: Thelxiope palpigera Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découv. somiol. . 21 . ) Poa OPINION 522 231 (b) to suppress the under-mentioned specific names for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy :— (i) achiria Rafinesque, 1817, Amer. monthly Mag. crit. Rev. 2:41, as published in the combination Hippa achiria ; (11) crocea Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découv. somiol. : 25, as published in the combination Squilla crocea ; (11) cruentatus Linnaeus, 1758, Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1: 630, as published in the combination Cancer cruentatus ; (iv) cubicus Forskal, 1775, Descrip. Anim. : 89, as published in the combination Cancer cubicus ; (v) fasciatus Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découv. somiol. : 23, as published in the combination Mesapus fasciatus ; (vi) fluviatilis Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découv. somiol. : 23, as published in the combination Symethus fluviatilis ; (vii) fossor Rafinesque, 1817, Amer. monthly Mag. crit. Rey. 2:42, as published in the combination Astacus fossor ; (viii) heterochelus Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découv. somiol. : 24, as published in the combination Alciope heterochelus ; (ix) /evigatus Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découv. somiol. : 21, as published in the combination IJnachus levigatus ; (x) novemdecos Sulzer, 1776, Abgekiirtze Gesch. Ins. : 265, as published in the combination Cancer novemdecos ; (xi) pelagica Rafinesque, 1817, Amer. monthly Mag. crit. Rev. 2:41, as published in the combination Nectoceras pelagica ; (xii) portunoides Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découy. somiol. : 20, as published in the combination Cancer portunoides ; (xii) pusilla Rafinesque, 1817, Amer. monthly Mag. crit. Rey. 2:42, as published in the combination Ocypoda pusilla ; 232 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (xiv) quadricolor Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découy. somiol.: 22, as published in the combination Peneus quadricolor ; (xv) rugosus Rafinesque, 1817, Amer. monthly Mag. crit. Rev. 2:41, as published in the combination Nectylus rugosus ; (xvi) scaber Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découv. somiol. : 23, as published in the combination Byzenus scaber ; (xvii) striata Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découy. somiol. : 24, as published in the combination Aglaope striata ; (xviii) tomentosus Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découy. somiol. : 21, as published in the combination Inachus tomentosus ; (xix) triodona Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découy. somiol. : 24, as published in the combination Squilla triodona ; (xx) truncatulus Rafinesque, 1817, Amer. monthly Mag. crit. Rev. 2:42, as published in the combination Pagurus truncatulus ; (2) to place the under-mentioned generic names on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology :— (a) Atyaephyra de Brito Capello, 1867, Mem. Acad. Sci. Lisboa, Sci. mat. phys. nat. (n. ser.) 4(1)(7) : 5 (gender : feminine) (type species, by monotypy: Atyaephyra rosiana de Brito Capello, 1867, Mem. Acad. Sci. Lisboa, Sci. mat. phys. nat. (n. ser.) 4(1)(7) : 6 (a junior subjective synonym of Hippolyte desmarestii Millet, 1831, Mém. Soc. Agric. Sci. Angers 1 : 56) ; (b) Homola Leach, 1815, Trans. linn. Soc. Lond. 11 : 324 (gender : feminine) (type species, by monotypy : Homola spinifrons Leach, 1815, Trans. linn. Soc. Lond. 11 : 324 (a junior subjective synonym of Cancer barbatus Fabricius, 1793, Ent. syst. 2 : 460)! ; (c) Lysmata Risso, 1816, Hist. nat. Crust. Nice : 175 (substitute name for Melicerta Risso, 1816, Hist. nat. Crust. Nice : 109, an invalid junior homonym of Melicerta Schrank, 1803) (gender : feminine) (type species, by selection by 1 See paragraph 9 of the present application on the question of the oldest available name for the type species of this genus. — OPINION 522 233 Milne Edwards (H.), 1837 (Cuvier’s Régne Anim. (ed. 4, Disciples ed.) 18: pl. 54, fig. 3): Melicerta seticaudata Risso, 1816, Hist. nat. Crust. Nice : 110) ; (d) Pontophilus Leach, 1817, Malac. Podophth. Brit. (15) : expl. of Pl. 37A (gender : masculine) (type species, by mono- typy : Crangon spinosus Leach, 1815, Trans. linn. Soc. Lond. 11 : 346) ; (e) Stenopus Latreille, 1819, Nouv. Dict. Hist. nat. (ed. 2) 30 : 71 (gender : masculine) (type species, by monotypy : Palaemon hispidus Olivier, 1811, Ency. méth. Hist. nat. 8 : 666)? ; (f) Albunea Weber, 1795, Nomencl. ent. Fabr. : 94 (gender : feminine) (type species, by present selection by Holthuis (L.B.) : Cancer symmysta Linnaeus, 1758, Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1 : 630) ; (g) Lissa Leach, 1815, Zool. Miscell. 2 : 69 (gender : feminine) type species, by monotypy : Cancer chiragra Fabricius (J.C.), 1775, Syst. Ent. : 409). (3) to place the under-mentioned specific names on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology :— (a) barbatus Fabricius, 1793, Ent. syst. 2 : 460, as published in the combination Cancer barbatus ; (b) chiragra Fabricius, 1775, Syst. Ent. : 409, as published in the combination Cancer chiragra ; (c) desmarestii Millet, 1831, Mém. Soc. Agric. Sci. Angers 1: 56, as published in the combination Hippolyte desmarestii; (d) diogenes Girard, 1852, Proc. Acad. nat. Sci. Phila. 6 : 88, as published in the combination Cambarus diogenes ; (e) elegans Risso, 1816, Hist. nat. Crust. Nice : 92, as published in the combination Alpheus elegans ; (f) eusebia Risso, 1816, Hist. nat. Crust. Nice : 115, as pub- lished in the combination Squilla eusebia ; (g) fasciatus Risso, 1816, Hist. nat. Crust. Nice : 82, as published in the combination Crangon fasciatus ; 2 The specific name of the type species of this genus has already been placed on the Official List by the Ruling given in Opinion 381. 3 See paragraph 10 of the present application on the question of the oldest available name for the type species of this genus. 234 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (h) ferussaci Roux, 1830, Crust. Méditerr. : pl. 28, as published in the combination Squilla ferussaci ; (i) flavomaculata Heller, 1864, Verh. zool.-bot. Ges. Wien 14 : 51, as published in the combination Pontonia flavomaculata ; (j) longicarpus Say, 1817, Journ. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad. 1(8) : 163, as published in the combination Pagurus longicarpus ; (k) Jongipes Risso, 1816, Hist. nat. Crust. Nice : 30, as pub- lished in the combination Portunus longipes ; (1) Junulata Risso, 1816, Hist. nat. Crust. Nice : 49, as pub- lished in the combination Maia lunulata ; (m) pugnax Smith, 1870, Trans. Connect. Acad. Arts Sci. 2: 131, as published in the combination Gelasimus pugnax ; (n) seticaudata Risso, 1816, Hist. nat. Crust. Nice: 110, as published in the combination Melicerta Seti Caudata [sic.] ; (0) spinosus Leach, 1815, Trans. linn. Soc. Lond. 11 : 346, as published in the combination Crangon spinosus (specific name of type species of Pontophilus Leach, 1817) ; (p) spinosus Risso, 1827, Hist. nat. Europ. mérid. 5 : 66, as published in the combination Stenopus spinosus ; (q) symmysta Linnaeus, 1758, Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1 : 630, as published in the combination Cancer symmysta (specific name of type species of Albunea Weber, 1795) ; (r) talpoida Say, 1817, J. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad. 1(7) : 160, as published in the combination Hippa talpoida ; (4) to piace the under-mentioned generic names on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Names in Zoology :— (a) the eight generic names suppressed under (1)(a)G) to (1)(a)(viii) inclusive, above ; (b) Aglaope Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découv. somiol. : 24 (type species, by monotypy : Aglaope striata Rafinesque, 1814, Préc. Découy. somiol. : 24), a junior homonym of Aglaope Latreille, 1809, Gen. Crust. Ins. 4: 214; (c) Crangonus Rafinesque, 1815, Analyse Nature : 98 (a junior objective synonym of Crangon Fabricius, 1798) ; (d) Lissula Rafinesque, 1818, Amer. mon. Mag. crit. Rev. 2: 272 .(a junior objective synonym of Lissa Leach, 1815) ; (e) Lupania Rafinesque, 1818, Amer. mon. Mag. crit. Rey. 2: 272 (a junior objective synonym of Portunus Weber, 1795, a a OPINION 522 235 the name of a genus placed on the Official List by the Ruling given in Opinion 394) ; (f) Syllarus Rafinesque, 1815, Analyse Nature : 98 (a junior objective synonym of Scyllarus Fabricius, 1775) ; (g) Symathus Rafinesque, 1815, Analyse Nature: 98 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling for Symethus Rafinesque, 1814) ; (h) Symnista Rafinesque, 1815, Analyse Nature : 98 (a junior objective synonym of Albunea Weber, 1795) ; (5) to place on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology the twenty specific names suppressed under (1)(b)@) to (1)(b)(xx) (inclusive) above ; (6) to place on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology the following names :— (a) ALBUNEIDAE (correction by Miers (1878, J. linn. Soc. Lond., Zool. 14: 315) of ALBUNIDAE) Stimpson, 1858, Proc. Acad. nat. Sci. Philad. 1858 : 230 (type genus : Albunea Weber, 1795) ; (b) HOMOLIDAE White, 1847, List Crust. Brit. Mus. : 55 (type genus : Homola Leach, 1815) ; (c) STENOPODIDAE (correction by Smith & Weldon (1909, in Harmer & Shipley, Cambridge nat. Hist. 4: 162) of STENOPIDAE) Huxley, 1879, Proc. zool. Soc. Lond. 1878 : 785 (type genus : Stenopus Latreille, 1819). (7) to place on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology the following names :— (a) STENOPIDAE Huxley, [1879], Proc. zool. Soc. Lond. 1878 : 785 (an Invalid Original Spelling for STENOPODIDAE) ; (b) THELXIOPEIDAE Rathbun, 1937, Bull. U.S. nat. Mus. 166: 62 (suppressed under the Plenary Powers automatically under Declaration 20 through the suppression under those Powers of the name of its type genus Thelxiope Rafinesque, 1814, as proposed in (1)(a)(viil) above). Il. THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt in 1948 of Dr. Holthuis’s preliminary communication in regard 236 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS to the present case, the problems so involved were allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 374. 3. Comments received prior to publication: Particulars were given by Dr. Holthuis in paragraph 11 of his application of comments received from certain specialists in regard to two of the names covered by his proposals. The names concerned were :—(a) barbatus Fabricius, 1793, as published in the com- bination Cancer barbatus, which it was desired to validate by the suppression under the Plenary Powers of the specific names cubicus Forskal, 1775, as published in the combination Cancer cubicus, and novemdecos Sulzer, 1776, as published in the com- bination Cancer novemdecos ; (b) chiragra Fabricius, 1775, as published in the combination Cancer chiragra, which it was desired to validate by the suppression under the Plenary Powers of cruentatus Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the combination Cancer cruentatus. As regards these names Dr. Holthuis ex- plained that the action recommended in his application was supported by Dr. Isobel Gordon (British Museum (Natural History), London), and by R. Zariquiey Alvarez (Barcelona, Spain), but was objected to by M. J. Forest Muséum National ad’ Histoire Naturelle, Paris) and by Dr. Th. Monod (nstitut Frangais d’ Afrique Noire, Dakar, West Africa). 4. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 13th July 1956 and was published on 28th September of that year in Part 9 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Holthuis, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 227—239). 5. 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 28th September 1956 (a) in Part 9 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Dr. Holthuis’s application was published) and (b) to the other prescribed serial OPINION 522 237 publications. In addition, such Notice was given to four general zoological serial publications. 6. No Objection Received : No objection to the action proposed in the present case was received from any source. 7. Report by the Secretary on certain supplementary matters arising in the present case : On 28th March 1957 Mr. Hemming as Secretary executed the following Minute containing a Report on certain matters arising on the present case on which supplemen- tary recommendations would, in his opinion, need to be placed before the Commission at the time when the Voting Paper on Dr. Holthuis’s application was issued for decision :— Report on certain supplementary matters on which recommendations require to be submitted to the Commission with the Voting Paper on Dr. L. B. Holthuis’s application relating to the suppression under the Plenary Powers of certain names for genera and species of the Class Crustacea published by Rafinesque in the period 1814—1818 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 place on record certain matters which arise in connection with, but were not dealt with in Dr. L. B. Holthuis’s application for the suppression under the Plenary Powers of certain names for genera and species of the Class Crustacea published by Rafinesque in the period 1814—1818, on which therefore it will be necessary to submit supplementary recommendations to the International Commission at the time of the issue of the Voting Paper on Dr. Holthuis’s application. Particulars of the names in question are given below. 2. The generic name Lysmata Risso, 1816, recommended by Dr. Holthuis for addition to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology is, as stated in the application, a substitute name for the name Melicerta Risso, 1816 (Hist. nat. Crust. Nice : 109), which is invalid as a junior homonym of Melicerta Schrank, 1803 (Fauna boica 3(2) : 302, 310), the name of a well-known genus of the Class Rotifera. The point bearing directly on Dr. Holthuis’s application which calls for attention 238 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS is that by some oversight the invalid name Melicerta Risso, 1816, was not there included in the list of names recommended for addition to the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology. 3. The next point to be noted is that in addition to the name Melicerta Risso, 1816, there are three other junior homonyms of the name Melicerta Schrank, 1803, which under the ‘‘ Completeness-of-Opinions ”’ Rule should now be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology. The names concerned are the following :— (a) Melicerta Péron & Lesueur, 1810, Ann. Mus. Hist. nat., Paris 14(83) : 352 (Coelenterata) (b) Melicerta Tilesius, 1831, Nova. Acta Acad. Caes. Leop. Carol. 15(2) : 257 (Coelenterata) (c) Melicerta Stephens, 1833, Nom. Brit. Ins. (ed. 2) : 129 (Hymen- optera) [also id., 1835, Ill. Brit. Ent. (Mand. 7) :94] 4. The next name to be considered is the name Melicerta Schrank, 1803, which under the “‘ Completeness-of-Opinions ”’ Rule should, as the name of an important genus involved in the present case, now be placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology. The word Melicerta is a classical word, being the name of the son of Ino and Athamas and there is therefore a strong initial presumption that the generic name Melicerta Schrank should be treated as being masculine in gender. Professor L. W. Grensted, the Commission’s Consulting Classical Adviser, has been consulted on this matter and has confirmed (in litt., 28th March 1957) that the masculine gender is the correct gender for this generic name. His report on this subjectis as follows :— ** Yes, as you say, the gender of Melicerta Schrank must be masculine. It is one of a whole group of masculine names (and other nouns) in *““-a”’ based on Greek words in “7s”, in this case the word MeXtxéptns which are of masculine gender in the Greek.” It is evident therefore that, when this name is placed on the Official List, the gender to be attributed to it must be the masculine gender. 5. The type species of the genus Melicerta Schrank, 1803, is by monotypy the nominal species Sabella ringens Linnaeus, 1767 (Syst. Nat. (ed. 12) 1(2) : 1268). The specific name ringens Linnaeus, 1767, as published in the above combination, will need therefore to be placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology, when the name Melicerta Schrank, 1803, is placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology. 6. Finally, it must be noted that the genus Melicerta Schrank is the type genus of the family MELICERTIDAE. This name is one of many years’ standing but the date when it was first published has not yet been finally established. At the present time therefore all that it is OPINION 522 239 possible to do is to take note that the above family-group name will need to be placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology at the same time that the generic name Melicerta Schrank is placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology. 7. In the light of the particulars set out above it is now possible to summarise as follows the supplementary recommendations which will need to be submitted to the Commission at the time of the issue of the Voting Paper on Dr. Holthuis’s Application Z.N.(S.) 374 :— (1) The under-mentioned generic names, each of which is a junior homonym of Melicerta Schrank, 1803, to be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology :— (a) Melicerta Péron & Lesueur, 1810 (b) Melicerta Risso, 1816 ; (c) Melicerta Tilesius, 1831 ; (d) Melicerta Stephens, 1833 ; (2) The under-mentioned generic name in the Class Rotifera to be placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology :— Melicerta Schrank, 1803 (gender : masculine) (type species, by monotypy : Sabella ringens Linnaeus, 1767) (3) The under-mentioned specific name to be placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology :— ringens Linnaeus, 1767, as published in the combination Sabella ringens (specific name of type species of Melicerta Schrank, 1803) (4) The under-mentioned family-group name to be placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology :— MELICERTIDAE [author and date now being investigated] (type genus: Melicerta Schrank, 1803). Ill. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 8. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(57)34: On 4th April 1957 a Voting Paper (V.P.(57)34) was issued in which the Members of 240 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “ the proposal relating to certain names for Decapod and Stomatopod Crustacea published by Rafinesque (C.S.), as set out in Points (1) to (7) on pages 234—239 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature [i.e. in the Points numbered as above in paragraph 12 of the application reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion], subject to the minor adjustments specified in Note 4 overleaf ”’ [in which were summarised the supplementary recommendations set out in paragraph 7 of the Minute by the Secretary dated 28th March 1957 reproduced in paragraph 6 of the present Opinion]. 9. Withdrawal from the scope of Voting Paper V.P.(57)34 of the proposal for the addition to the ‘‘ Official List of Specific Names in Zoology ’’ of the specific name ‘‘ elegans ’’ Risso, 1816, as published in the combination “ Alpheus elegans *? : On 20th June 1957 Mr. Hemming as Secretary executed the following Minute giving directions for the withdrawal from the scope of Voting Paper V.P.(57)34 of the proposal for the addition to the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology of the specific name elegans Risso, 1816, as published in the combination Alpheus elegans :— Withdrawal from the scope of the proposals submitted with Voting Paper V.P.(57)34 of the proposal for the addition to the ‘‘ Official List of Specific Names in Zoology ’’ of the specific name ** elegans ’’ Risso, 1816, as published in the combination ‘“Alpheus elegans ’? (Class Crustacea) By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. (Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature) In anticipation of the action which will be required at the close of the Prescribed Voting Period in respect of the vote on Voting Paper V.P.(57)34 relating to the application by Dr. L. B. Holthuis for the addition of a number of generic names of Macrura Reptantia (Class Crustacea) to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology and matters incidental thereto, a routine check has been carried out of the individual proposals comprised in the foregoing application. This has brought to light the fact that one of the specific names there recommended for addition to the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology has already been placed on that List under a Ruling given in a previous Opinion. The name concerned is elegans Risso, 1816, as published in the com- bination Alpheus elegans. This name, it has now been found, was Fa ee ee ae Pape OPINION 522 241 placed on the above List as Name Number 1186 by the Ruling given in Opinion 470.4 2. In the circumstances, which it is regretted should have arisen, I now, as Secretary, hereby withdraw from the scope of the proposals submitted with Voting Paper V.P.(57)34 the proposal that the specific name elegans Risso, 1816, as published in the combination Alpheus elegans, be placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology. 10. The Prescribed Voting Period : As Voting Paper (V.P.(57)34) in this case was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 4th July 1957. 11. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)34: At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)34 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following twenty-five (25) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Hering; Lemche; Vokes; Prantl; Bonnet; Esaki; Hankoé ; Holthuis; Jaczewski; Boschma; Dymond ; Bodenheimer ; Tortonese; Key; do Amaral; Riley ; Bradley (J.C.) ; Stoll; Hemming; Mertens ; Sylvester- Bradley ; Cabrera®; Mayr; Kiihnelt; Miller ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; > Opinion 470 was published on 14th June 1957 (Ops. Decls. int. Comm. zool. Nomencl. 16 : 129—203). In returning his Voting Paper on this case Commissioner Cabrera said that he agreed very readily with Dr. Holthuis’s views on Rafinesque’s names but was unable to vote for the suppression under the Plenary Powers of the specific name cruentatus Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the combination Cancer cruentatus ; the 10th edition of the Systema Naturae was the cornerstone of zoological nomenclature and every name in it, if clearly recognisable (as was cruentatus in the present case) ought to be respected. a 242 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (c) Voting Papers not returned : None. 12. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 5th July 1957, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)34, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 11 above and declaring that, save as respects the item withdrawn from the scope of the foregoing Voting Paper by the Minute executed by the Secretary on 20th June 1957 (the text of which has been reproduced in paragraph 9 of the present Opinion), the proposals submitted in the said Voting Paper had been duly adopted and that the decision so taken was the decision of the International Commission in the matter aforesaid. 13. Rectification of two minor omissions in the application submitted in the present case : On 5th July 1957 Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, executed the following Minute containing directions for the rectification of two minor omissions in the application submitted in the present case to which attention had been drawn by Members of the Commission during the Prescribed Voting Period for Voting Paper V.P.(57)34 :— Action required on two minor omissions in the Application Z.N.(S.) 374 regarding the proposed suppression of certain names for Decapod and Stomatopod Crustacea published by Rafinesque in 1814— 1818 submitted by Dr. L. B. Helthuis By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. (Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature) During the Prescribed Voting Period on Voting Paper V.P.(57)34 two members of the Commission drew attention to minor omissions in the application submitted by Dr. L. B. Holthuis for the suppression under the Plenary Powers of certain names for Decapod and Stoma- topod Crustacea published by Rafinesque in the period 1814—1818 on which action is required under the “‘ Completeness-of-Opinions ”’ Rule. Particulars of the points so raised are given below. OPINION 522 243 2. In a note dated 19th May 1957 attached to his copy of Voting Paper V.P.(57)34 Commissioner K. H. L. Key (Canberra, Australia) drew attention to the fact that it was stated in the present application (: 231) that the specific name Jimosus Rafinesque, 1817 (Amer. mon. Mag. 2(1) : 42), as published in the combination Astacus limosus, was the oldest available name for the taxon concerned and that it was in use by various authors and that in consequence it was not included in the list of names recommended for suppression under the Plenary Powers, but that this name had not been included among those which it was recommended for addition to the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology. Dr. Key considered that this omission should be made good. This suggestion was communicated by the Secretary to Dr. Holthuis on 29th May 1957, and on 3rd June 1957 Dr. Holthuis replied, agreeing that it was desirable that this inadvertent omission should be rectified. 3. In a note dated 5th June 1957 Commissioner J. Chester Bradley Uthaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) drew attention to the fact that, although it was proposed in this application (: 2397) that the family-group name ALBUNEIDAE (correction of ALBUNIDAE) Stimpson, 1858, should be placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology, by some oversight no corresponding proposal had been made for the addition to the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology of the name ALBUNIDAE Stimpson, 1858, as an Invalid Original Spelling for ALBUNEIDAE. 4. In the circumstances described above I now, as Secretary, hereby direct that in the Ruling to be prepared for the Opinion embodying the decision taken by the Commission by its vote on Voting Paper V.P.(57)34 :— (a) the specific name Jimosus Rafinesque, 1817, as published in the combination Astacus limosus, be placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology ; (b) the family-group name ALBUNIDAE Stimpson, 1858, be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology as an Invalid Original Spelling for ALBUNEIDAE. 14. Determination of the authorship and date to be attributed to the family-group name based on the generic name ‘* Melicerta ”” 6 For the proposal here in question see paragraph 4 of the application reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion (: 226). 7 The proposal here referred to appeared in paragraph 12(6)(a) in the application reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion (: 235). 244 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Schrank, 1803 (Class Rotifera) : On 14th November 1957 Mr. Hemming, as Secretary, executed the following Minute containing a determination of the authorship and date to be attributed to the family-group name Melicerta Schrank, 1803 (Class Rotifera):— Determination of the authorship to be attributed to, and the date of publication of, the family-group name based on the generic name ‘‘ Melicerta ’’ Schrank, 1803 (Class Rotifera) By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. (Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature) By its vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)34 the International Commission agreed that the family-group name based upon the generic name Melicerta Schrank, 1803 (Class Rotifera) should be placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology if the investigations then being carried out by the Secretary should have established the author by whom this family-group name was first published and the date on which it was published before the time came to prepare the Ruling for the Opinion embodying the decisions taken on the above Voting Paper. 2. Before undertaking the foregoing investigation, I held a prelim- inary consultation with Professor Dr. E. M. Hering (Zoologische Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin), as the result of which I then sought the advice of the following specialists in this group :— (i) Dr. J. Hauer (Karlsruhe, Germany) ; (1) Dr. Max Voigt (Schleswig, Germany) ; (iii) Dr. Merzins (Sodra Sveriges Fiskeriforening, Aneboda pa Ugglehult, Sweden). The Commission is much indebted for the valuable information received as the result of these consultations. 3. From the information obtained through the foregoing consul- tations it appears that the genus Melicerta Schrank, 1803, was first taken as the base for a family-group name by Dujardin in 1841. On that occasion, however, the name appeared only in the vernacular (French) form “‘ Mélicertiens ’’ and accordingly possesses no status in zoological nomenclature. It appears that the first time that this name appeared in a duly Latinised form was in 1886 (The Rotifera or Wheel-Animalcules, both British and foreign, 1 : 30) where Hudson (C.T.) & Gosse (P.H.), when dealing with the Order Rhizota, introduced the name MELICERTADAE as the name for the second family of that Order. This name was published in the correct spelling MELICERTIDAE in 1912 when it was so used by Collin (A.), Dieffenbach (H.), Sachse (R.), & Voigt (M.) (in Brauer (A.), Die Suesswasserfauna 14 : 43). OPINION 522 245 4. In the light of the information summarised above, I now, as Secretary, direct that, when in pursuance of the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)34 the Ruling is prepared for the Opinion embodying the decisions taken by the said vote, the name MELICERTIDAE is entered on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology, it be there attributed to Hudson (C.T.) & Gosse (P.H.), the date “1886” be attributed to this name and it be cited as “‘ MELICERTIDAE (correction of MELICERTADAE’’. I further direct that the name MELICERTADAE Hudson & Gosse, 1886, be entered on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology as an Invalid Original Spelling for MELICERTIDAE. 15. Determination of the systematic position within the Class Crustacea of the taxa, the names of which are now being placed on ‘‘ Official Lists ’’ under the vote taken by the Commission on Voting Paper V.P.(57)34: In the application submitted in the present case Dr. Holthuis stated that the names dealt with therein were the names of taxa belonging to the Orders Decapoda and Stomatopoda of the Class Crustacea but did not indicate to which of these Orders each of the taxa concerned belonged. Following the close of the vote on Voting Paper V.P.(57)34—when this minor omission came to light—Mr. Hemming on 12th August 1957 applied to Dr. Holthuis for information on the foregoing matter, this being required because of the practice in the case of names of taxa belonging to the Class Crustacea of citing the name of the Order as well as that of the Class when such names are placed on Official Lists. The required information was furnished by Dr. Holthuis on 15th August 1957 and was thereupon noted for inclusion in the Ruling to be prepared for the Opinion giving effect to the decisions taken by the Commission on the Voting Paper referred to above. 16. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 21st February 1958, 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.(57)34, subject (a) to the clarification in regard to the authorship and date attributable to the family- group name MELICERTIDAE (Class Rotifera) specified in the Minute executed by the Secretary on 14th November 1957 (the text of 246 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS which has been reproduced in paragraph 14 of the present Opinion and (b) to the two minor adjustments specified in the Minute previously executed by the Secretary on Sth July 1957 (the text of which has been reproduced in paragraph 13 of the present Opinion). 17. Original References for Generic and Specific Names : The original references for the generic and specific names placed on Official Lists and Official Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion are given in the under-mentioned places :— (1) The original references for the generic names placed on the Official List are as set out below :— (a) For the seven names specified in Ruling (2) in the present Opinion: in paragraph 12(2) of the application reproduced in the first paragraph of this Opinion ; (b) For the generic name specified in Ruling (3) in the present Opinion: in paragraph 2 of the Minute reproduced in paragraph 7 of this Opinion. (2) The original references for the specific names placed on the Official List are as set out below :— (a) For the sixteen names specified in Ruling (4) in the present Opinion, other than the reference for the specific name /imosus Rafinesque, 1817, as published in the combination Astacus limosus : in paragraph 12(3) of the application reproduced in the first paragraph of this Opinion ; (b) For Jimosus Rafinesque, 1817, as published in the combination Astacus limosus: in paragraph 2 of the Minute reproduced in paragraph 13 of this Opinion ; (c) For the two specific names specified in Ruling (6) in the present Opinion: in paragraph 12(3) of the application reproduced in the first paragraph of this Opinion ; OPINION 522 247 (d) For the specific name specified in Ruling (7) in the present Opinion: in paragraph 5 of the Minute reproduced in paragraph 7 of this Opinion. (3) The original references for the generic names placed on the Official Index in Ruling (7) of the present Opinion are as set out below :— (a) For the eight names specified in Ruling (8)(a): in paragraph 12(1)(a) of the application reproduced in the first paragraph of this Opinion ; | (b) For the seven names specified in Ruling (8)(b) to (8) (h): in paragraph 12(4) of the paper referred to above ; (c) For the four names specified in Ruling (8)(i): in paragraphs 2 and 3 of the Minute reproduced in paragraph 7 of this Opinion. (4) The original references for the twenty specific names placed on the Official Index by Ruling (9) of the present Opinion are as set out in paragraph 12(1)(b) of the paper repro- duced in this Opinion. 18. References for selections of type species for nominal genera : The following are the references for the selections of type species for nominal genera specified in the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— For Albunea Weber, Holthuis (L.B.), 1956, Bull. zool. 1795 Nomencl, 12 : 237 For Lysmata Risso, Milne Edwards (H.), 1837, Cuvier’s 1816 Régne Anim. (ed. 4, Disciples’ ed.) 18 : pl. 54, fig. 3 19. References for Family-Group Names: The references for the family-group names placed by the Ruling given in the present 248 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Opinion on the Official List or, as the case may be, on the Official Index, of names for family-group taxa are given at the under- mentioned places :— (1) The references for the family-group names placed on the Official List are as set out below :— (a) For the three names specified in Ruling (10)(a) to (¢) : in paragraph 12(6) of the application reproduced in the first paragraph of this Opinion ; (b) For the name specified in Ruling (10)(d) : in paragraph 3 of the Minute reproduced in paragraph 14 of this Opinion ; (2) The references for the family-group names placed on the Official Index are as set out below :— (a) For the two names specified in Ruling (11)(b) and (c) : in paragraph 12(7) of the application reproduced in the first paragraph of this Opinion ; (b) For the name specified in Ruling (11)(c): in para- graph 3 of the Minute reproduced in paragraph 14 of this Opinion. 20. Compliance with Prescribed Procedures: The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Com- mission 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 Commis- sion on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 21. ‘* Opinion ’’ Number : The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Five Hundred and Twenty-Two (522) of the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twenty-First day of February, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Eight. . Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING © 1958. THE INTERNATIONAL TRUST FOR ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Printed in England by METCALFE & CoopeER LIMITED, 10-24 Scrutton St., London E C 2 NOTICE TO ALL SUBSCRIBERS h accordance with the wishes expressed at the recent srmational Congress of Zoology, the International Trust for logical Nomenclature is considering as a matter of urgency V substantial economies can best be effected in its publica- is. Opinions and Declarations, Vol. 19, parts 6-10, however, been passed for final printing before the Congress and are y being issued. OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE | Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, cM.G., C.B.E. as Secretary to the Commission VOLUME 19. Part10. Pp. 249—260 OPINION 523 Validation under the Plenary Powers of the emendation to Palaeophonus of the generic name Palaeophoneus Lindstr6m & Thorell, 1884 (Class Arachnida) 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 1958 Price Eigh SES ON. (All ey (ar SEP 10 1958 Issued 8th August, 1958 Lig RA LiBRARXA INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 5323 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) (2th 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) (ist January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (La Plata, Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) Dr. Henning LemcueE (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 (University of Tulane, Department of Geology, New Orleans, Louisiana, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mez@gazdasdgi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) 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. HoLtHurs (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (i2th 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) wa econ 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) oe eel ~ OPINION 523 VALIDATION UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS OF THE EMENDATION TO ‘“‘ PALAEOPHONUS ”’ OF THE GENERIC NAME “ PALAEOPHONEUS ” LINDSTROM & THORELL, 1884 (CLASS ARACHNIDA) RULING :—(1) Under the Plenary Powers the emenda- tion to Palaeophonus of the generic name Palaeophoneus Lindstrém & Thorell, 1884, is hereby validated. (2) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Number 1307 :— Palaeophonus (emend. of Palaeophoneus) Lindstr6m & Thorell, 1884 (gender : masculine) (type species, by monotypy : Palaeophoneus [sic] nuncius Lindstr6m & Thorell, 1884) (Class Arachnida) (3) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Number 1570 :— nuncius Lindstrém & Thorell, 1884, as published in the combination Palaeophoneus [sic] nuncius (specific name of type species of Palaeophonus (emend. of Palaeophoneus) Lindstr6m & Thorell, 1884) (4) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid QAAITIWCMRLA RR: 252 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Number 1202 :— Palaeophoneus Lindstr6m & Thorell, 1884, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers in (1) above (an Invalid Original Spelling for Palaeophonus Lindstrom & Thorell, 1884) (5) The under-mentioned family-group name is hereby placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology with the Name Number 246 :— PALAEOPHONIDAE (correction of PALAEOPHONOIDAE) Thorell & Lindstrém, 1885 (type genus: Palaeophonus (emend. of Palaeophoneus) Lindstr6m & Thorell, 1884) (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 Number 280 :— PALAEOPHONOIDAE Thorell & Lindstrém, 1885 (type genus: Palaeophonus (emend. of Palaeophoneus) Lindstr6m & Thorell, 1884) (an Invalid Original Spelling for PALAEOPHONIDAE). I. THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 23rd September 1955 Professor Alexander Petrunkevitch (Yale University, Osborn Zoological Laboratory, New Haven, Connecticut, U.S.A.) submitted the following application in OPINION 523 253 which he asked that the International Commission should use its Plenary Powers for the purpose of validating the emendation to Palaeophonus of the generic name Palaeophoneus Lindstr6ém & Thorell, 1884 (Class Arachnida) :— Proposed use of the Plenary Powers to validate the universally accepted emendation ‘‘ Palaeophonus”’ of the generic name ‘‘ Palaeophoneus ”’ Lindstrom & Thorell, 1884 (Class Arachnida) By ALEXANDER PETRUNKEVITCH (Emeritus Professor of Zoology, Yale University, Osborn Zoological Laboratory, New Haven, Connecticut, U.S.A.) The purpose of the present application is to ask the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature to use its Plenary Powers to validate the universally used spelling Palaeophonus for the generic name originally published with the spelling Palaeophoneus by Lindstr6m & Thorell in 1884 (C.R. Acad. Sci., Paris 99 : 984) (Class Arachnida.) It would be of great assistance if the present application could be published in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature at a very early date, as it is desired to refer to it in the chapter on fossil Arachnida in the forthcoming international Treatise on Invertebrate Paleontology. The facts of this case are set out below. 2. The present generic name with the spelling Palaeophoneus was published in a letter from Lindstr6m to Milne Edwards (A.) dated ** Stockholm, le 24 novembre, 1884” and entitled “‘ Sur un Scorpion du terrain silurien de Suéde’’. In this letter, which gave particulars of a then forthcoming paper by Thorell and himself, Lindstrém, after giving an account of the new species, wrote :—‘“‘ce Scorpion que nous avons designé sous le nom de Palaeophoneus nuncius ...”’. This preliminary note was published in the C.R. Acad. Sci., Paris, on 1st December 1884. 3. This new species was next referred to in a notice which appeared in the issue of the Glasgow Herald on 19th December 1884. It appeared there with the correct spelling Palaeophonus. 4. In their main paper on this species, which was published in 1885 under the title ‘‘ On a Silurian Scorpion from Gotland” (K. svensk. Vetensk.-Akad. Hand. (n.s.[4]) 219) : 1—33, 1 pl.) Lindstré6m & Thorell explained the circumstances in which they had given an advance 254 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS distribution of news of their discovery and expressly stated that the correct spelling of this name was Paleophonus and not Palaeophoneus. On the first of these points they wrote : “‘ Owing to various hindrances no opportunity was found to make this discovery known before November the 12th 1884, when it was announced at the evening meeting of the Royal Academy of Sciences. A photograph, double the size of the original, was sent abroad to several museums and zoologists, after we had agreed jointly to undertake this memoir and had named the animal Palaeophonus nuncius ”’ (: 7). On page 9 of the same paper the authors stated in a footnote (Footnote 2): “‘ The name of the genus should be written, as it is here, Palaeophonus, not Palaeophoneus”’. On the original label attached to the type specimen of the type species of this genus (now in the Stockholm Museum), this generic name was correctly spelled as Palaeophonus. 5. The incorrect spelling Palaeophoneus has never been used, arachnologists having accepted the statement that the correct spelling is Palaeophonus published by the celebrated and highly respected authors in their paper of 1885. It would clearly create great confusion if an attempt were now to be made to reverse the practice of the last seventy years by bringing the incorrect spelling Palaeophoneus into use. It is for this reason that the Commission is now asked to use its Plenary Powers to validate existing practice by approving the spelling Palaeophonus. This is all the more desirable in the present case, since the emendation to Palaeophonus would have been valid under Article 19 if it had not been for the more rigorous conditions introduced by the Copenhagen Congress of 1953. 6. The genus Palaeophonus was established for the species represented by the single specimen known. This species was given the name Palaeophoneus nuncius at the same time that the generic name was published. No other specimen of this species has ever been found and no other name has ever been given to it. Neither Lindstr6m in his letter nor Thorell & Lindstrém in their Memoir expressly stated that this species was the type species of the genus Palaeophonus but both treated it as such, there being at that time no other known species which could be regarded as congeneric with it. In any case the fact that this was the only nominal species cited on the occasion on which the generic name Palaeophonus was first published makes it auto- matically the type species of the genus so named by monotypy. 7. In the Memoir of 1885, Thorell & Lindstrém established (: 23) the family PALAEOPHONOIDAE for the single genus and species Palaeophonus nuncius. This form of the family name was corrected to PALAEOPHONIDAE by Fritsch (A.) in 1904 (Palaeozoische Arachniden : 63). In its corrected form this family name is now in universal use. OPINION 523 DIS It should be noted that this family name should be attributed to Thorell & Lindstré6m jointly and not to Lindstrém alone, for Lindstr6m stated on page 2 of the Memoir “ The third, fourth and fifth section of this paper are entirely by Prof. Thorell’’ and the family name was first mentioned in the second portion of the Memoir (: 9). The name in its corrected form should now be placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology, the Invalid Original Spelling PALAEOPHONOIDAE being at the same time placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology. 8. The following request is accordingly submitted to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, namely that it should :— (1) use its Plenary Powers to validate the spelling Palaeophonus for the generic name Palaeophoneus Lindstr6m & Thorell, 1884, by suppressing the latter spelling ; (2) place the under-mentioned generic name on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology : Palaeophonus (emendation of Palaeophoneus) Lindstr6m & Thorell, 1884 (gender: mas- culine) (type species, by monotypy: Palaeophoneus nuncius Lindstr6ém & Thorell, 1884) ; (3) place the under-mentioned specific name on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology: nuncius Lindstrom & Thorell, 1884, as published in the combination Palaeophoneus nuncius (specific name of type species of Palaeophonus Lindstrom & Thorell, 1884) ; (4) place the under-mentioned generic name on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology : Palaeophoneus Lindstr6m & Thorell, 1884, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers under (1) above (an Invalid Original Spelling for Palaeophonus) ; (5) place the under-mentioned family-group name on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology: PALAEOPHONIDAE (correction of PALAEOPHONOIDAE) Thorell & Lindstrém, 1885 (type genus : Palaeophonus (emend. of Palaeophoneus) Lind- strom & Thorell, 1884) ; (6) place the under-mentioned family-group name on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family Group-Names in Zoology : PALAEOPHONOIDAE Thorell & Lindstrém, 1885 (type genus : Palaeophonus (emend. of Palaeophoneus) Lindstr6m & Thorell, 1884) (an Invalid Original Spelling for PALAEOPHONIDAE). 256 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Il. THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application: Upon the receipt of Professor Pretrunkevitch’s application the question of the validation to Palaeophonus of the spelling of the generic name Palaeophoneus Lindstr6m & Thorell, 1884 (Class Arachnida) was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 1010. 3. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 20th April 1956 and was published on 20th July of that year in Part 5 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Petrunkevitch, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 153—155). 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 20th July 1956 (a) in Part 5 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Professor Petrunkevitch’s application was published) and (b) to the other prescribed serial publications. In addition, such Notice was given to four general zoological serial publications. 5. Support received from C. J. Stubblefield (Geological Survey and Museum, London) : On 17th August 1950 Dr. C. J. Stubble- field (Geological Survey and Museum, London) addressed the following note to the Office of the Commission in support of the present case (Stubblefield, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 256) :— I support the proposal to validate the generally accepted spelling of the generic name Palaeophonus Lindstr6m and Thorell, 1884, in the interests of stability of nomenclatorial usage. OPINION 523 D5 6. No Objection Received : No objection to the action proposed in the present case was received from any source. Ill. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 7. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(57)18 : On 15th February 1957 a Voting Paper (V.P.(57)18) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “the proposal relating to the emendation to Palaeophonus of the generic name Palaeophoneus Lindstr6m & Thorell, 1884, as set out in Points (1) to (6) in paragraph 8 on page 155 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature ”’ [i.e., in the paragraph numbered as above in the paper 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 15th May 1957. 9. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)18 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)18 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) : Boschma ; Mayr ; Lemche ; Hering ; Prantl ; Holthuis ; Jaczewski; Mertens; Dymond; Bonnet; Vokes ; Bodenheimer ; Bradley (J. C.); Key; Riley; Stoll; Esaki; do Amaral; Hemming; Kiuhnelt; Cabrera ; Tortonese ; Sylvester-Bradley ; Miller ; 258 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) Prevented from voting by interruption of postal communications consequent upon political disturbances, one (1) : Hank6o ; (d) Voting Papers not returned : None. 10. Declaration of Result of Vote : On 16th May 1957, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)18, 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. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 19th March 1958 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.(57)18. OPINION 523 259 12. Original References for Generic and Specific Names : 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 :— nuncius, Palaeophoneus [sic], Lindstr6m & Thorell, 1884, C.R. Acad. Sci., Paris 99 : 984 Palaeophoneus Lindstr6m & Thorell, 1884 (an Invalid Original Spelling for Palaeophonus) Palaeophonus (emend. of Palaeophoneus) Lindstr6m & Thorell, 1884, C.R. Acad. Sci., Paris 99 : 984 13. Original References for Famiiy-Group Names: The fol- lowing are the original references for the family-group names placed by the Ruling given in the present Opinion upon the Official List and Official Index of names for taxa of the family- group category respectively :— PALAEOPHONIDAE (correction of PALAEOPHONOIDAE) Thorell & _Lindstrém, 1885, K. svensk. Vetensk.-Akad. Handl., Stockholm (n.s.[4]) 2109) :9 PALAEOPHONOIDAE Thorell & Lindstrém, 1885 (an Invalid Original Spelling for PALAEOPHONIDAB). 14. Compliance with Prescribed Procedures: The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenciature 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. 260 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 15. ** Opinion ’? Number : The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Five Hundred and Twenty-Three (523) of the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Nineteenth day of March, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Eight. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING © 1958. THE INTERNATIONAL TRUST FOR ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Printed in England by MrTCALFE & COOPER LIMITED, 10-24 Scrutton St., London E C2 NOTICE TO ALL SUBSCRIBERS In accordance with the wishes expressed at the recent ternational Congress of Zoology, the International Trust for oological Nomenclature is considering as a matter of urgency ow substantial economies can best be effected in its publica- ons. Opinions and Declarations, Vol. 19, however, had been assed for final printing before the Congress and parts 11-17 re now being issued. OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, cCM.G., C.B.E. VOLUME 19. Part 11. Pp. 261—276 OPINION 524 Interpretation of the nominal species Coluber ahaetulla Linnaeus, 1758, and addition to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology of the generic name Ahaetulla Link, 1807 with Ahaetulla mycterizans Link, 1807 as type species (Class Reptilia) 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 1958 Price Ten Shillings and Sixpence (All rights reserved) ——= VAS At T THSOA vy Nj > has Issued 15th October, 1958 = ( a A N2 2 & | 195¢ y j Jf wk 1B AN tae INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 524 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) Dr. frig tgeey one (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th uly 194 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 AMaARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice-President) Professor J. R. DyMOND (University of Toronto, Toronto, Canadu) (12th August 1953) Professor J. Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) (President) Professor Harold E. Voxes (University of Tulane, Department of Geology, New Orleans, Louisiana, 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. HottuHuts (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 KiiHNELT (Zoologisches Institut der Universitat, Vienna, Austria) (6th November 1954) Professgs F. S. BODENHEIMER (The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel) (11th November 54) 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) OPINION 524 INTERPRETATION OF THE NOMINAL SPECIES ‘‘COLUBER AHAETULLA” LINNAEUS, 1758, AND ADDITION TO THE “ OFFICIAL LIST OF GENERIC NAMES IN ZOOLOGY ” OF THE GENERIC NAME ‘© AHAETULLA ” LINK, 1807, WITH “ AHAETULLA MYCTERIZANS ” LINK, 1807, AS TYPE SPECIES (CLASS REPTILIA) RULING :—(1) It is hereby directed that the nominal species Coluber ahaetulla Linnaeus, 1758 (Class Reptilia} be interpreted by reference to the lectotype selected by Savage (J.M.) & Oliver (J.A.) (1956), that is, by the second of the South American Linnean specimens discussed by Lonnberg (1896). (2) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) Ahaetulla Link, 1807 (gender: feminine) (type species by selection by Meise & Hennig (1932) : Ahaetulla mycterizans Link, 1807) (Name No. 1308) ; (b) Leptophis Bell, 1825 (gender: masculine) (type species by selection by Fitzinger (1843) : Coluber ahaetulla Linnaeus, 1758, as defined by the lectotype specified in (1) above) (Name No. 1 3OD)e: (c) Dendrelaphis Boulenger, 1890 (gender : masculine) (type species, by monotypy: Ahaetulla caudolineata Gray (J.E.), [1834]) (Name No. 1310). 264 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (3) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) ahaetulla Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the combination Coluber ahaetulla, and as defined in (1) above (specific name of type species of Leptophis Bell, 1825) (Name No. 1571) ; (b) caudolineata Gray (J.E.), [1834], as published in the - combination Ahaetulla caudolineata (specific name of type species of Dendrelaphis Boulenger, 1890) (Name No. 1572) ; (c) nasutus Lacépede, 1789, as published in the combination Coluber nasutus (Name No. 1573). (4) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) Ahaetulla Gray (J.E.), 1825 (a junior homonym of Ahaetulla Link, 1807) (Name No. 1203) ; (b) Dendrophis Boie (H.), 1826 (a junior objective synonym of Leptophis Bell, 1825) (Name No. 1204) ; (c) Tachyophis Mertens, 1934 (a junior homonym of Tachyophis Rochebrune, 1884) (Name No. 1205) ; (d) Dryinus Merrem, 1820 (a junior homonym of Dryinus Latreille, [1804], and a junior objective synonym of Ahaetulla Link, me (Nae No. 1206) ; (e) Dryophis Dalman, 1823 (a junior objective synonym of Ahaetulla Link, 1807) (Name No. 1207) ; OPINION 524 265 (f) Passerita Gray (J.E.), 1825 (a junior objective synonym of Ahaetulla Link, 1807) (Name No. 1208). I. THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 26th May 1953 Dr. Jay M. Savage (then of the Natural History Museum, Stanford University, Stanford, California, U.S.A., and now of the Department of Biology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California) addressed to the Office of the Commission, on his own behalf and on that of Dr. James A. Oliver (New York Zoological Society, New York), a preliminary communication on the subject (a) of the species to be accepted as the type species of the genus Ahaetulla Link, 1807 (Class Reptilia) and (b) the interpretation of the nominal species Coluber ahaetulla Linnaeus, 1758. Following correspondence with the Secretary the following definitive application on the above subjects was submitted by Dr. Savage on 24th March 1956 :— Proposed addition to the ‘‘ Official List of Generic Names in Zoology ”’ of ‘‘ Ahaetulla’’ Link, 1807, with ‘*‘ Ahaetulla mycterizans ”’ Link, 1807, as type species (Class Reptilia) By JAY M. SAVAGE (Department of Biology, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, U.S.A.) and JAMES A. OLIVER (New York Zoological Society, New York City, N.Y., U.S.A.) The principal object of the present application is to ask the International Commission to place the generic name Ahaetulla Link, 1807, on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Ahaetulla mycterizans Link, 1807, as type species. A secondary purpose of the 266 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS present application is to provide an opportunity for the selection of a lectotype for the nominal species Coluber ahaetulla Linnaeus, 1758, and to ask the Commission to place the generic name Leptophis Bell, 1825, on the Official List with the above species as type species. The correct application of the generic name Ahaetulla Link and the name Coluber ahaetulla Linnaeus has been the subject of considerable controversy, and, as we have most recently studied the problem (Oliver, 1948, Bull. Amer. Mus. nat. Hist. 92: 167; Savage, 1952, Bull. Chicago Acad. Sci. 9(11) : 203), it seems appropriate for us to make application to the Commission for rulings stabilising the usage of these and allied names. 2. The snakes primarily involved in this discussion by virtue of their use as type species of genera are Ahaetulla ahaetulla (Linnaeus), Ahaetulla caudolineata (Gray) and Dryophis nasutus (Lacépéde) of south-eastern Asia and Thalerophis richardi (Bory St. Vincent) of South America. These names are those adopted in the recent generic reviews by Malcolm Smith (1943, Fauna Brit. India 3 : 241), and Oliver (loc. cit.), and for the sake of clarity will be used in the following historical summary of the problems. 3. The following are the references for the names discussed in the present paper on which action of one kind or another is asked for from the Commission :— Ahaetulla Link, 1807, Beschr. Nat. Samml. Rostock. (2) : 73 Ahaetulla Gray (J.E.), 1825, Ann. Phil. 26 : 208 ahaetulla, Coluber, Linnaeus, 1758, Syst. Nat. (ed 10) 1 : 225 caudolineata, Ahaetulla, Gray (J.E.), [1834], Zl. Ind. Zool. (2) : pl. 81 Dendrelaphis Boulenger, 1890, Faun. Brit. Ind., Rept. Batr. : 339 Dendrophis Boie, 1826, in Fitzinger, Neue Classif. Rept. : 29, 60 Dryinus Merrem, 1820, Tent. Syst. Amph. : 15, 136 Dryophis Dalman, 1823, Anat. Ent. : 7 Leptophis Bell, 1825, Zool. J. 2(7) : 322 nasutus, Coluber, Lacépede, 1789, Quadr. Ovip. 2 : 100 Passerita Gray (J.E.), 1825, Ann. Phil. 26 : 208 Tachyophis Mertens, 1834, Arch. Naturgesch. (N.F.) 3 : 197 _ 4. In the case of two out of the three genera, the names of which it is proposed should now be placed on the Official List of Generic an OPINION 524 ‘ 267 Names in Zoology the type species was determined by subsequent selection under Rule (g) in Article 30. The following are the references for the type selections so made :— For Ahaetulla Link, 1807 : Meise & Hennig, 1932, Zool. Anz. 99 : 296 For Leptophis Bell, 1825 : Fitzinger, 1853, Syst. Rept. : 26 SUMMARY OF THE PROBLEMS a. The name ‘‘ Coluber ahaetulla ’’ Linnaeus, 1758 5. When Linnaeus (1758, Joc. cit.) described Coluber ahaetulla from ** Asia America ’’, he presented no characters that would unequivocally diagnose the new form. Fortunately Lénnberg (1896, Bihang. K. Svenska Vet.-Akad. Handl. 22(4), 1:6, 26), and Andersson (1899, Bihang. K. Svenska Vet.-Akad. Handl. 24(4), 1 : 22) have shown that the Linnean material consisted of four examples of Thalerophis richardi from South America and one example of the Asiatic species which has been interpreted as Ahaetulla ahaetulla (Linnaeus). This material was mentioned under the name C. ahaetulla several times previous to the publication of the 10th Edition of the Systema Naturae (Linnaeus, 1745, 1748 and 1754). However, in the 10th Edition of the Systema Naturae Linnaeus gave the counts of only a single specimen, one of his examples of Thalerophis richardi. This appears to us to constitute a definite designation of a type specimen by Linnaeus as the original author, with the consequence of attaching the name Coluber ahaetulla to the South American species. All other workers have overlooked this virtual selection of a holotype by Linnaeus and as a result the name Coluber ahaetulla has been applied to both the South American snake later known as Thalerophis richardi and to the Asiatic species later known as Ahaetulla ahaetulla (Linnaeus). In order definitely to establish the name Coluber ahaetulla Linnaeus as applicable to the South American species, we herewith select as the lectotype of this nominal species the specimen mentioned by Lénnberg in 1896 (Bihang K. Svenska Vet.-Akad. Handl. 22 (Afd. 4 (No. 1) : 5—6) as from Donatio Caroli Gyllenborg, 1744. This specimen is listed as Number 2 and has 162 ventrals and 152 subcaudals. The example is a member of the South American species. 6. The confusion regarding the correct application of the specific name C. ahaetulla is reflected by the number of generic names which have been used for it. b. Generic names 7. As a result of the conclusion now submitted regarding the identity of Coluber ahaetulla Linnaeus, the following synonymy — 268 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS summarizes the effects that the allocation has on the application of the effected generic names : (1) South American (A) Leptophis Bell, 1825 (type species by selection by Fitzinger (1843) : Coluber ahaetulla Linnaeus, 1758). Synonyms of Leptophis would be: Ahaetulla Gray, 1825 (type species by absolute tautonymy: Coluber ahaetulla Linnaeus, 1758) ; Dendrophis H. Boie, 1826 (type species, by original designa- tion : Coluber ahaetulla Linnaeus, 1758); Ahoetulla Gray, 1831 (substitute name for Leptophis Bell; takes same type species) ; Thalerophis Oliver, 1947 (type species by original designation : Coluber richardi Bory St. Vincent, 1823 = Coluber ahaetulla Linnaeus, 1758). (I) Asian (A) Dendrelaphis Boulenger, 1890 (type species by monotypy : Ahaetulla caudolineata Gray, 1834). Tachyophis Mertens, 1934 (type species by original designation : Coluber pictus Gmelin, 1789 = Coluber boiga Lacépéde, 1789) is a synonym of Dendrelaphis. Tachyophis Rochebrune, 1884, has already been used for a genus of fossil snakes and Mertens’ name is therefore a junior homonym and unavailable. (B) Ahaetulla Link, 1807 (type species by selection by Meise & Hennig (1932): Ahaetulla mycterizans Link, 1807 = Coluber nasutus Lacépéde, 1789). Synonyms are: Dryinus Merrem, 1820, type species, by selection by Gray (1825) Coluber mycterizans Linné, 1758 (a junior homonym of Dryinus Latreille, [1804], a name in the Class Insecta already placed on the Official List; Dryophis Dalman, 1823, and Passerita Gray, 1825, are both substitute names for Dryinus Merrem and consequently take the same type species. As listed above, Leptophis would now apply to those snakes called Thalerophis by Oliver (1948, loc. cit.), Dendrelaphis must refer to those snakes included in Ahaetulla by Smith (1943, loc. cit.) and Ahaetulla now includes the forms placed in Dryophis by Smith (1943). 8. The availability of the name Coluber boiga Lacépéde, 1789 (Quadr. Ovip. 2 : 102) has, however, been questioned and there has been discussion also regarding the interpretation of this name. Malcolm Smith (1943, Joc. cit.) argued that it was not a valid binominal name. Further, he argued that the reference of ‘‘ Le Boiga ’’ to Coluber ahaetulla Linnaeus by Lacépéde in a footnote should be interpreted a OPINION 524 269 as meaning that Link’s Ahaetulla fasciata is the same as the Coluber ahaetulla of Linnaeus. On the basis of this argument Smith concluded that Coluber ahaetulla Linnaeus, 1758, was the type species of the genus Ahaetulla Link, 1807, by absolute tautonymy. These contentions have recently been examined by Savage (1952, Joc. cit.) who has shown that both are incorrect. On the first of these questions Savage has shown (: 204) that, in introducing the boiga, Lacépéde followed the practice commonly adopted by French zoologists until well into the XIXth century of introducing new names simultaneously in two forms, the word selected for the name being printed first in Roman characters and second initalics. The first of these words represented the actual or proposed vernacular (French) name for the species in question, the second the Latin specific name proposed for it. In accordance with the same practice Lacépéde, after having once used the generic name which he adopted for a group, did not always repeat that name when citing the names of species. This method of citing names would not be regarded as satisfactory today but it was widely used by French zoologists at the end of the XVIIIth and the beginning of the XIXth centuries and has always been accepted as constituting a valid publication of the names concerned. Any other view, if adopted, would cause the utmost confusion and widespread name-changing. The contention advanced by Smith in this matter must therefore be unquestioningly rejected. His second contention is equally unfounded, for it is not the case that Lacépéede regarded his Coluber boiga as a mere substitute for Coluber ahaetulla Linnaeus. On the contrary, he made it clear that, in his view, he was describing a new species based upon material examined personally by himself, for which he gave particulars of the number of ventrals and caudals, total length, tail length, and notes on the teeth, head and dorsal scales, and coloration. These matters are referred to here because it is essential to demonstrate the fallacy of Smith’s argument that the type species of Ahaetulla Link, 1807, is Coluber ahaetulla Linnaeus, 1758, by absolute tautonymy as a preliminary to the acceptance of the selection by Meise & Hennig (1932) of Ahaetulla mycterizans Link, 1807, as the type species of this genus. 9. None of the genera discussed in the present application has been taken as the type genus of a family-group taxon and in consequence no family-group-name problems arise for consideration. Recommendations 10. The interpretations presented in the foregoing paragraphs appear to be the ones in closest agreement with the International Rules of Zoological Nomenclature. However, some technical arguments might be mustered against some of the points involved. It is for this reason that the International Commission is now asked to close this long controversy by giving an authoritative Ruling as to the manner in 270 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS which the names concerned are to be used. The proposal now submitted to the Commission is that it should :— (1) direct that the nominal species Coluber ahaetulla Linnaeus, 1758, be interpreted by reference to the lectotype selected in the present paper, namely the second of the South American Linnean specimens discussed by Lonnberg (1896) ; (2) place the under-mentioned generic names on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology :— (a) Ahaetulla Link, 1807 (gender : feminine) (type species, by selection by Meise & Hennig (1932): Ahaetulla mycterizans Link, 1807) ; (b) Leptophis Bell, 1825 (gender : masculine) (type species, by selection by Fitzinger (1843): Coluber ahaetulla Lin- neus, 1758, as defined by the lectotype specified in (1) above) ; (c) Dendrelaphis Boulenger, 1890 (gender: masculine) (type species, by monotypy: Ahaetulla caudolineata Gray (J.E.), [1834]) ; (3) place the under-mentioned specific names on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology :— (a) ahaetulla Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the combination Coluber ahaetulla and as interpreted in (1) above (specific name of type species of Leptophis Bell, 1825) ; (b) caudolineata Gray (J.E.), [1834], as published in the combination Ahaetulla caudolineata (specific name of type species ‘of Dendrelaphis Boulenger, 1890) ; (c) nasutus Lacépéde, 1789, as published in the combination Coluber nasutus ; (4) place the under-mentioned generic names on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology :— (a) Ahaetulla Gray (J.E.), 1825 (a junior homonym of Ahaetulla Link, 1807) ; (b) Dendrophis Boie (H.), 1826 (a junior objective synonym of Leptophis Bell, 1825) ; (c) Tachyophis Mertens, 1934 (a junior homonym of Tachyophis Rochebrune, 1884) ; (d) Dryinus Merrem, 1820 (a junior homonym of Dryinus Latreille, [1804], and a junior objective synonym of Ahaetulla Link, 1807) ; OPINION 524 271 (e) Dryophis Dalman, 1823 (a junior objective synonym of Ahaetulla Link, 1807) ; (f) Passerita Gray (J.E.), 1825 (a junior objective synonym of Ahaetulla Link, 1807). Il. THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application: Upon the receipt of Dr. Savage’s preliminary communication, the question of the species to be accepted as the type species of the genus Ahaetulla Link, 1807 (Class Reptilia), was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 772. 3. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 28th April 1956 and was published on 20th July of that year in Part 5 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Savage & Oliver, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 147—152). 4. Support Received : Following the publication of the present application in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature comments were received from two specialists (Germany, one ; U.S.A., one), both of whom supported the action recommended in the present application. The communications so received are reproduced in the immediately following paragraphs. 5. Support received from Robert Mertens (Senckenbergische Naturforschende Gesellschaft, Frankfurt a. M., Germany): On llth August 1956 Professor Robert Mertens (Senckenbergische Naturforschende Gesellschaft, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) addressed the following letter to the Office of the Commission in support of the communication! submitted by Dr. Savage and Dr. Oliver. The 1 In the same letter Professor Mertens raised also the separate issue of the relative status to be accorded to the names Coluber pictus Gmelin (J.F.), [1789], and Coluber boiga Lacépéde, 1789. For the reasons explained in paragraph 7 of the present Opinion this latter subject was later treated as forming the subject of a separate application. 27D OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS following is an extract from that letter (Mertens, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 275) :— The proposals brought before the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature by Savage & Oliver (1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 147152) regarding the selection of a lectotype for Coluber ahaetulla Linnaeus, 1758, and the admission of the generic names Ahaetulla Link, 1807, Leptophis Bell, 1825, and Dendrelaphis Boulenger, 1890, to the Official List have my support, as well as the other proposals set out in paragraph 10 (pp. 151—152) of the paper referred to above. 6. Support received from Hobart M. Smith (University of Illinois, Urbana, Tilinois, U.S.A.) : On 8th August 1956 Professor Hobart M. Smith (University of Illinois, Urbana, Illinois, U.S.A.) addressed the following note to the Office of the Commission in support of the present case (Smith, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 317) :-— In my opinion all the requests embodied in this application merit approval by the Commission. 7. The question of the relative precedence to be accorded to the names ‘* Coluber boiga ’’ Lacépéde, 1789, and ‘* Coluber pictus ”’ Gmelin, [1789] : In the communication dated 11th August 1956 in which Professor Mertens supported the proposals submitted in this case by Dr. Savage and Dr. Oliver (an extract from which has been published in paragraph 5 of the present Opinion) Professor Mertens raised also the question of the relative precedence to be accorded to the names Coluber boiga Lacépéde, 1789, and Coluber pictus Gmelin, [1789], a problem which did not arise directly on the application submitted in the present case but to which a passing reference had been made by Dr. Savage and Dr. Oliver in their paper. In the passage in question those authors had given preference to the name boiga Lacépéde and it was this treatment of that name to which Professor Mertens raised strong exception in the second part of his communication of 11th August 1956. At that stage the consideration of this related—though independent—problem was conducted simul- taneously with that of the proposals submitted in the present OPINION 524 273 case. Accordingly, the whole of Professor Merten’s communica- tion was treated as a comment on the Savage/Oliver proposals and it was published as such on 31st October 1956 (Mertens, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 275—276). Later, it was judged to be both more logical and more convenient to treat Professor Mertens’ communication (other than the first paragraph) as constituting a separate and independent application concerned only with the problem raised by the names boiga Lacépéde and pictus Gmelin. The documents relating to this subject were thereupon detached from those concerned with the Savage/Oliver proposals regarding the generic name Ahaetulla Link, 1807, and the interpretation of the nominal species Coluber ahaetulla Linnaeus, 1758. The case so raised by Professor Mertens was then allotted the new Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 1220.2 The adoption of this procedure cleared the ground for the submission of a Voting Paper to the Commission dealing with the Savage/ Oliver proposals, unencumbered by the separate problem raised by Professor Mertens. A brief explanation of the procedure so adopted was, however, added (as Note 4) to the Voting Paper (V.P.(57)41) submitted in the present case. 8. Extension of the Prescribed Waiting Period for a period of six months as from the date of the publication of Professor Mertens’ Supplementary Application in October 1956 : Upon the publica- tion on 31st October 1956 of Professor Mertens’ Supplementary Application referred to in paragraph 7 above, the Secretary on Ist November 1956 executed a Minute directing that the Prescribed Waiting Period in the present case be extended by a period of six months as from that date, i.e., that instead of closing on 26th January 1957, it should close on Ist May 1957. 9. No Objection Received: No objection to the action recommended in the present case was received from any source during the Prescribed Six-Month Waiting Period as extended on Ist November 1956 to Ist May 1957 by the Minute executed by the Secretary on Ist November 1956 (paragraph 8 above). 2 For the decision taken by the Commission on this subject see Opinion 525, which is being published in the next following Part of the present volume. 274 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Ij]. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 10. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(57)41 : On 15th May 1957 a Voting Paper (V.P.(57)41) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “the proposal relating to the generic name Ahaetulla Link, 1807 (Class Reptilia,) as set out in Points (1) to (4) in paragraph 10 on pages 151 and 152 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature ” [1.e., in the paragraph numbered as above in the paper reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion]. 11. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 15th August 1957. 12. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)41 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)41 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following twenty-two (22) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Hering; Vokes; Prantl; Lemche > ~ Hoelthuise Dymond; do Amaral; Esaki; Hanko; Stoll; Jaczewski ; Mertens ; Bodenheimer ; Boschma ; Bonnet ; Hemming; Sylvester-Bradley; Cabrera; Bradley (J.C.) ; Tortonese ; Miller ; Riley ; (b) Negative Votes, one (1): Key ; (c) On Leave of Absence, two (2) : Mayr ; Kihnelt ; (c) Voting Papers not returned : None. OPINION 524 2IS 13. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 16th August 1957, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)41, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 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 Commission in the matter aforesaid. 14. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 20th March 1958 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.(57)41). 15. Original References for Generic and Specific Names : 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 :— Ahaetulla Link, 1807, Beschr. Nat. Samml. Rostock. (2) : 73 Ahaetulla Gray (J.E.), 1825, Ann. Phil. 26 : 208 ahaetulla, Coluber, Linnaeus, 1758, Syst. Nat. (ed. 10) 1 : 225 caudolineata, Ahaetulla, Gray (J.E.), [1834], I/l. Ind. Zool. (2) : pl. 81 Dendrelaphis Boulenger, 1890, Faun. Brit. Ind., Rept. Batr. : 339 Dendrophis Boie, 1826, in Fitzinger, Neue Classif. Rept. : 29, 60 Dryinus Merrem, 1820, Tent. Syst. Amph. : 15, 136 Dryophis Dalman, 1823, Anat. Ent. : 7 Leptophis Bell, 1825, Zool. J. 2(7) : 322 nasutus, Coluber, Lacépéde, 1789, Quadr. Ovip. 2 : 100 Passerita Gray (J.E.), 1825, Ann. Phil. 26 : 208 Tachyophis Mertens, 1834, Arch. Naturgesch. (N.F.) 3 : 197 16. References for the selection of type species for nominal genera: The following are the references for the selection of 276 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS type species for nominal genera specified in the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— For Ahaetulla Link, 1807 Meise & Hennig, 1932, Zool. Anz. 99 : 296 For Leptophis Bell, 1825 Fitzinger, 1843, Syst. Rept. : 26 17. Reference for the selection of a lectotype for a nominal species : The following is the reference for the selection of a lectotype for a nominal species specified in the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— For Coluber ahaetulla Savage (J.M.) & Oliver (J.A.), Linnaeus, 1758 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 148—149, paragraph 5 18. Family-Group-Name Aspects: No _ family-group-name problem arises in the present case, the applicants having stated (paragraph 9 of their paper) that none of the generic names placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology by the Ruling given in the present Opinion has been taken as the basis for a family-group name. 19. Compliance with Prescribed Procedures : 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. 20. ‘* Opinion ’? Number : The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Five Hundred and Twenty-Four (524) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twentieth day of March, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Eight. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING © 1958. THE INTERNATIONAL TRUST FOR ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Printed in England by METCALFE & CoopER LiMiTED, 10-24 Scrutton St., London E C2 . NOTICE TO ALL SUBSCRIBERS In accordance with the wishes expressed at the recent nternational Congress of Zoology, the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature is considering as a matter of urgency 10w substantial economies can best be effected in its publica- ions. Opinions and Declarations, Vol. 19, however, had been gassed for final printing before the Congress and parts 11-17 re now being issued. OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, c.M.G., C.B.E. VOLUME 19. Part 12. Pp. 277—290 OPINION 525 Determination of the relative precedence to be accorded to the names Coluber pictus Gmelin (J.F.), [1789], and Coluber boiga Lacépéde, 1789 (Class Reptilia) 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 1958 Price Nine Shillings and Si aS (All rights st aN => NL Aa» Issued 15th October, 1958 “ ; INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 525 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) 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 i950) Mr. Norman Denbigh RILEy (British Museum (Natural History), London) (9th June 1950) Professor Tadeusz JACZEWSK1 (/nstitute of Zoology, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw,; Poland) (15th June 1950) : Professor Robert MERTENS (Natur-MMuseum 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 (University of Tulane, Department of Geology, New Orleans, Louisiana, 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. 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) (45th October 1954) Dr. Alden H. MILLER (Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California, U.S.A.) (29th October 1954) Doc. Dr. Ferdinand PRANTL (Narodni Museum vy Praze, Prague, Czechoslovakia) (30th © October 1954) Professor Dr. Wilhelm KUHNELT (Zoologisches Institut der Universitat, Vienna, Austria) (6th November 1954) Professor F. S. BODENHEIMER (The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel) (11th November 1954) 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, (16th December 1954) cy) Genova, Italy) OPINION 525 DETERMINATION OF THE RELATIVE PRECEDENCE TO BE ACCORDED TO THE NAMES ‘“ COLUBER PICTUS ” GMELIN (J.F.), [1789], AND ‘*‘ COLUBER BOIGA ”? LACEPEDE, 1789 (CLASS REPTILIA) RULING :—(1) It is hereby directed that precedence be accorded to the specific name pictus Gmelin (J.F.), [1789], as published in the combination Coluber pictus, over the specific name boiga Lacépéde, 1789, as published in the combination Coluber boiga, these being names published in different works on unknown dates in the same year (1789), and each therefore ranking for priority as from 31st December of that year. (2) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Number 1574 :— pictus Gmelin (J.F.), [1789], as published in the combination Coluber pictus, a name taking precedence under (1) above over the specific name Jboiga Lacépede, 1789, as published in the combination Coluber boiga. I. THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE In an application regarding the generic name Ahaetulla Link, 1807 (Class Reptilia) and other associated names submitted in March 1956 by Dr. J. M. Savage (then of Stanford University, California, U.S.A. and now of the University of Southern California, Los Angeles) and Dr. J. A, Oliver (New York 280 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Zoological Society, New York) reference was made in connection with the generic name Dendrelaphis Boulenger, 1890, to the specific name boiga Lacépéde, 1789, as published in the combina- tion Coluber boiga, which was there treated as having priority over the specific name pictus Gmelin (J.F.), [1789], as published in the combination Coluber pictus. Professor Dr. Robert Mertens (Senckenbergische Naturforschende Gesellschaft, Forschungs- Institut und Natur-Museum Senckenberg, Frankfurt a. Main, Germany), while supporting the actual proposals submitted by the foregoing specialists, strongly dissented from the view expressed in their application on the question of the relative precedence which should be accorded to the names Coluber boiga Lacépéde, 1789, and Coluber pictus Gmelin, [1789]. After setting out his grounds for considering that preference should be given to the specific name pictus Gmelin, Professor Mertens submitted a definite request to the Commission that it should give a Ruling in that sense. The communication so received from Professor Mertens, which was dated 11th August 1956, was as follows :— Proposal that as between the names ‘‘ pictus ’’ Gmelin (‘‘ Coluber ”’) and ‘‘ boiga’’ Lacépéde (‘‘ Coluber ’’), published in 1789 on the same date, preference should be given to the former name. (Supplement to application by J. M. Savage and J. A. Oliver in regard to the generic name ‘‘ Ahaetulla’’ Link, 1807.) (Class Reptilia) By ROBERT MERTENS! (Senckenbergische Naturforschende Gesellschaft, Frankfurt a. M., Germany) 2. I am in agreement with the opinion expressed by Savage and Oliver in regard to the availability of the name Coluber boiga Lacépéde, 1789 (Quadr. Ovip. 2 : 102). Nevertheless, I adhere to the view that the specific name boiga Lacépéde, 1789, is not taxonomically valid—a 1 The first paragraph of the communication received from Professor Mertens was concerned only to record his support for the proposals regarding the generic name Ahaetulia Link, 1807, and associated questions submitted by Dr. Savage and Dr. Oliver. That paragraph has already been reproduced in Opinion 524 as one of the comments received in regard to that case and is accordingly here omitted. OPINION 525 281 point not discussed in Savage & Oliver’s paper. The best known name for the snake to which the name boiga Lacépéde applies is the name pictus Gmelin, [1789] (im Linnaeus, Syst. Nat. (ed. 13) 1(3) : 1116) as published in the combination Coluber pictus. This is the species currently known as Dendrelaphis pictus (Gmelin). This species is referred to under the name pictus Gmelin in numerous papers, e.g., by Boulenger in 1890 (Fauna Brit. Ind., Rept. : 337) and again in 1894 (Cat. Snakes Brit. Mus. 2:78). There would not have been any doubt today as to the taxonomic validity of the name pictus Gmelin if Stejneger had not slipped into the error of stating that the name Coluber boiga Lacépéde was published as early as 1788 and therefore that it had priority over the name Coluber pictus Gmelin. Misled by this mistake of Stejneger’s, Schmidt (K.P. (1927, Bull. Amer. Mus. nat. Hist. 54 : 445) rejected the name pictus and introduced in its place the name boiga. Later Stejneger (Copeia 1933 : 201) himself corrected the mistake which he had made in this matter. Up to the time of Schmidt’s paper this species had almost always been known by the name pictus Gmelin and it is necessary to examine the validity of the action which he then took. He cannot, in my opinion, be regarded as having acted in this matter as a First Reviser, since the name boiga and pictus were published in different books and Article 28 of the Régles (which embodies the First Reviser Principle) applies only to names published in the same book. Moreover, he did not proceed from the supposition that the above names were published on the same date. I am convinced indeed that Schmidt would never have given boiga precedence over the name pictus if at that time he had known that both names were published in the same year (1789). 3. The exact date of publication in 1789 is not known either for the name Coluber pictus Gmelin or for the name Coluber boiga Lacépéde. Accordingly both names rank, under a decision by the Thirteenth International Congress of Zoology, Paris, 1948 (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 223—225), as from 3lst December. of the above year, that being the earliest date on which it is definitely known that they were published. In the absence of a decision by the International Commission there is therefore no means by which to determine to which of the above names preference should be given. I accordingly ask the International Commission to resolve this difficulty by giving a Ruling that preference is to be given to the pictus Gmelin, the name most commonly used for the species concerned. 4. In addition to indicating my support for the proposals submitted by Savage & Oliver, I therefore ask the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature :— (1) to give a Ruling that preference is to be given to the specific name pictus Gmelin, [1789], as published in the combination Coluber pictus, over the specific name boiga Lacépéde, 1789, 282 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS as published in the combination Coluber boiga, these names being names published in different books on unknown dates in the same year ; (2) to place on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology the specific name pictus Gmelin, [1789], as published in the combination Coluber pictus, the entry so made to be endorsed in the manner recommended in (1) above. Il. THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE PRESENT CASE 2. Registration of the present application: In the period immediately following the emergence of the problem arising in connection with the relative precedence to be accorded to the names Coluber pictus Gmelin, [1789], and Coluber boiga Lacépéde, that problem was dealt with on the Commission’s Registered File Number Z.N.(S.) 772, the File concerned with the application regarding the generic name Afaetulla Link, 1807, and associated matters submitted jointly by Dr. Savage and Dr. Oliver, that being the application in the consideration of which the present problem was first brought to the notice of the Commission. Later, it was judged desirable to separate these two problems by treating each as a separate case. The Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 772 was retained for the consideration of the Ahaetulla case, the problem arising in connection with the specific names pictus Gmelin and boiga Lacépéde raised by Professor Mertens being allotted the new Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 1220. 3. Objection received from Jay M. Savage (University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, U.S.A.): On receiving from Professor Mertens his request (paragraph 1 aboye) for a Ruling from the Commission granting precedence to the name Coluber pictus Gmelin, [1789], over the name Coluber boiga Lacépéde, 1789, the Secretary at once notified Dr. Jay M. Savage (University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, U.S.A.) as one of the specialists who in the application relating a s OPINION 525 283 to the name Ahaetulla Link, 1807, had expressed an opposite view on the relative precedence attributable to the foregoing names, and invited him to furnish a statement setting out his views on the proposal submitted by Professor Mertens. In response to the foregoing invitation Dr. Savage on 9th September 1956 addressed the following letter to the Office of the Commission in which he reaffirmed his view that preference should be accorded to the specific name boiga Lacépéde over the specific name pictus Gmelin (Savage, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 32) :— The two names in question both apply to the same species of Asian snake and Schmidt (1927) as the first reviser selected boiga over pictus. This selection, although not recognized under the Copenhagen decisions, must be retroactively changed if Mertens’s proposal is accepted and his arguments do not seem to warrant such a change. In particular Dr. Mertens’s statement that this snake is most generally known as pictus is questionable. Since Schmidt’s publication the animal in question has been mentioned under the names boiga, pictus, and ahaetulla, most commonly under the last mentioned name. The name pictus was widely used for this species previous to 1927, although even then some authors favored ahaetulla. If frequency of usage is Dr. Mertens’s only argument for using pictus, I must emphatically recommend the selection of Coluber boiga Lacépéde, 1789, over Coluber pictus Gmelin, [1789]. This recommendation is in line with the proposal submitted to the Commission by Savage and Oliver (1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 147—152). 4. Publication of the present application: For the reasons already explained the communication from Professor Mertens which constitutes the application to the Commission in the present case was treated initially as a comment on the Savage/Oliver application regarding the generic name Ahaetulla Link, 1807. As such it was sent to the printer on Sth September 1956 and was published in Part 10 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature on 31st October of the same year (Mertens, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 275—276). 5. No comments elicited by the publication of the application in the present case: The publication of Professor Mertens’s application in October 1956 elicited no comments from any source. 284 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 6. Report submitted to the Commission by the Secretary at the close of the Prescribed Six-Month Waiting Period following the publication of the present case in the ‘‘ Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature ’’ : At the close on Ist May 1957 of the Prescribed Six-Month Waiting Period following the publication of the present application in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature, Mr. Hemming prepared the following Report for the consideration of the Commission in which he set out the form of the Rulings which would be required, (a) if the Commission were to approve the proposal submitted by Professor Mertens, and (b) if, following the advice submitted by Dr. Savage, it were to reject that proposal :— On the relative precedence to be accorded to the names ‘* Coluber pictus ’’ Gmelin and ‘‘ Coluber boiga ’’ Lacépéde, names published in different works in the year 1789 By FRANCIS HEMMING, C.M.G., C.B.E. (Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature) The present note is designed to place before the International Commission in a connected form, the proposals which have been advanced by certain specialists as to the relative precedence to be assigned to two names published in different works in 1789 for an Asiatic snake to which reference was made incidentally in an application relating to the generic name Ahaetulla Link, 1807, by Jay M. Savage and James A. Oliver (1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 147—152), and on which later a proposal was submitted by Professor Robert Mertens (Senckenbergische Naturforschende Gesellschaft). The two names in question are: (a) Coluber pictus Gmelin (J.F.), [1789], in Linnaeus, Syst. Nat. (ed. 13) 1(3): 1116; (b) Coluber boiga Lacépéde, 1789 (Quadr. Ovip. 2:102). The circumstances of this case are set out in the following paragraphs. 2. The first reference to the above names in the present connection was made in paragraphs 7 (II) (A) and 8 of the application submitted by Savage and Oliver referred to above. In paragraph 7 those specialists gave a synonymic review of the genera involved in the Ahaetulla case in which they cited (: 149) the generic name Dendrelaphis Boulenger, 1890, as the valid name for the first of the two Asiatic genera with which they were concerned and added that the name Tachyophis Mertens, 1934 (type genus : Coluber pictus Gmelin, [1789]) was a junior synonym of Dendrelaphis Boulenger. In the same OPINION 525 285 paragraph Savage & Oliver stated that Coluber pictus Gmelin, [1789] was a junior synonym of Coluber boiga Lacépéde, 1789. In the immediately following paragraph (paragraph 8) Savage & Oliver rebutted (: 150) a contention which had been advanced by Malcolm Smith in 1943 that the name boiga Lacépéde was not a valid binominal name. (Savage & Oliver explained that the foregoing question was relevant to their application only through the need for disposing of an erroneous argument also advanced in 1943 by Malcolm Smith on the subject of the species to be accepted as the type species of Ahaetulla Link.) 3. The present matter was next raised in a note communicated to the Office of the Commission by Professor Robert Mertens on 11th August 1956 (1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 275—276). In this note Mertens gave his support for the whole of the proposals advanced by Savage & Oliver in the Ahaetulla case, including the sinking of Tachyophis Mertens, 1934, as a junior synonym of Dendrelaphis Boulenger, 1890. He accepted also the view of Savage & Oliver that the name Coluber boiga, as published by Lacépéde in 1789, was a duly published name, but he strongly resisted the argument advanced by those specialists that that name should be given precedence over the name Coluber pictus Gmelin, [1789]. Mertens pointed out that this name had almost always been used for this snake up to 1927, and expressed the view that there would never have been any doubt as to its taxonomic validity if it had not been for an unfortunate mistake on the part of Stejneger when he assigned the date “* 1788 ” to Lacépéde, for this had (incorrectly) implied that the name Coluber boiga Lacépéde had a yeat’s priority over the name Coluber pictus Gmelin. Later (in 1933) Stejneger corrected the mistake which he had made in this matter, but unfortunately in the meantime Schmidt (K.P.) had been misled (1927) into the use of the specific name boiga Lacépéde in place of the name pictus Gmelin. 4. In a letter dated 9th September 1956 (1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 32) Savage questioned Mertens’s statement that the species of snake concerned was most generally known as pictus and stated that subse- quent to the publication of Schmidt’s (1927) paper this species had been known by the names boiga, pictus and ahateulla, most commonly —though incorrectly—by the last-mentioned name. Prior to 1927 the name pictus had been widely used for this species, though some authors had used the (incorrect) name ahaetulla for it. 5. Professor Mertens, to whom I had communicated a copy of Dr, Savage’s letter of 9th September 1956 for observation, sent me on 286 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 29th September 1956 a further statement from which the following is an extract (Mertens, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 32) — . . even since 1927 the specific name pictus is to be found very frequently in the literature up to most recent times ; for example, in the synopsis of the COLUBRIDAE by Werner (1930); in the taxonomically very essential papers on the genus of Dendrelaphis (or Dendrophis) by Meise & Hennig (1932, 1935) and by Mertens (1934) ; in all the papers by Bourret, Brongersma and Kopstein ; in the very important Checklist of Snakes of the Indo-Australian Archipelago by de Haas (1950); in the biometrical study of Bergmann (1955), etc. On the other hand the specific name boiga appears in only a few papers since 1927. In the literature of most recent times (since about 1943, when Malcolm Smith replaced pictus by ahaetulla) it is hardly found except in a paper of Savage (1952): 6. Three questions are involved in this case, namely: (1) Where does the balance of usage lie as between the specific names pictus Gmelin and boiga Lacépéde respectively? (2) Has the relative precedence of the foregoing names already been determined under the Régles and if so, in what sense? (3) If the relative precedence of these names has not as yet been determined how should it be determined, and to which of these names should precedence be given ? 7. The question of the relative weight of usage of the specific name pictus Gmelin as compared with boiga Lacépéde (or other names) has been discussed in the letters received from Professor Mertens and Dr. Savage respectively. These letters have been summarised in paragraphs 3, 4 and 5 above and, as already explained, have been published in full in the Bulletin. 8. On the question whether the relative precedence of the specific names pictus Gmelin and boiga Lacépéde has already been determined it is important to keep clearly in mind the distinction between the provisions in the Régles relating to the determination of the relative precedence of any two names published in the same work and on the same date and the provisions relating to the determination of the precedence to be accorded to any two names published in different works on unknown dates in the same year. The relative precedence of names falling in the first of these classes is. subject to the First Reviser Rule (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 66—67, Decision 123). On the other hand, any names published in different works in a given year but on some unknown day and month rank for priority as from 31st December of the year in question (1950, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 4 : 223—225). The First Reviser Rule does not apply as between names published in separate works and, as correctly stated by Mertens (Joc, cit, 12 : 276), the only means by which the relative OPINION 525 287 precedence to be accorded to any two such names can be determined is by means of a Ruling by the International Commission. No such Ruling has ever been given by the Commission in the present case and accordingly the position is that the relative precedence of the specific names pictus Gmelin and boiga Lacépéde is at present indeterminate. 9. Professor Mertens has asked (Joc. cit. 12 : 276) that (a) on the grounds of usage the Commission should give a Ruling according precedence to the name pictus Gmelin over the name boiga Lacépéde, and (b) that, having done so, it should place the name pictus Gmelin on the Official List, endorsed as having been given precedence over the name boiga Lacépéde. A corresponding application in the opposite sense has been made by Dr. Savage (loc. cit. 13:32) There is therefore a straight choice before the Commission to be made in the light of the evidence on the question of usage adduced by the specialists concerned. 10. Accordingly in the Voting Paper (V.P.(57)42) now submitted the Commission is being invited to vote for one or other of the following alternatives :— (1) Alternative ‘‘ A” (Professor Mertens’s proposal) : (a) that a Ruling be given that precedence be accorded to the specific name pictus Gmelin, [1789], as published in the combination Coluber pictus, over the specific name boiga Lacépéde, 1789, as published in the combination Coluber boiga, these names being names published in different works on unknown dates in the same year (1789), and each therefore ranking for priority as from 3lst December of that year. (b) that the under-mentioned specific name be piaced on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology :— pictus Gmelin, [1789], as published in the combination Coluber pictus, the entry so made to be endorsed in the manner specified in (a) above. (2) Alternative ‘‘ B”’ (Dr. Savage’s proposal) : (a) that a Ruling be given that precedence be accorded to the specific name boiga Lacépéde, 1789, as published in the combination Coluber boiga, over the specific name pictus Gmelin, [1789], as published in the combination Co/uber pictus, these names being names published in different works on unknown dates in the same year (1789), and each therefore ranking for priority as from 31st December of that year. 288 OPINIONS AND, DECLARATIONS (b) that the under-mentioned specific name be placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology :— boiga Lacépéde, 1789, as published in the combination Coluber boiga, the entry so made to be endorsed in the manner specified in (a) above. Ill. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 7. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(57)42: On 15th May 1957 a Voting Paper (V.P.(57)42) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote for one or other of the following ‘“‘alternatives set out in paragraph 10 of the Report bearing the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 1220 submitted by the Secretary simultaneously with the present Voting Paper [i.e. in the para- graph numbered as above in the paper reproduced in paragraph 6 of the present Opinion] in regard to the question of the relative precedence to be accorded to the specific name pictus Gmelin, [1789], as published in the combination Coluber pictus, and the specific name boiga Lacépéde, 1789, as published in the combination Coluber boiga :— Alternative “A” (Professor Mertens’ proposal) (grant of precedence to pictus over boiga) or Alternative “ B” (Dr. Savage’s proposal) (grant of precedence to boiga over pictus)” 8. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 15th August 1957. Tee Te a ee 2 OPINION 525 289 9. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)42 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)42 was as follows :— (a) In favour of Alternative ““ A”, twenty-two (22) : Hering ; Vokes; Prantl; Lemche; Holthuis; Riley ; Jaczewski; Dymond; do Amaral; Esaki; Stoll; Mertens ; Bodenheimer; Boschma; Key; Bonnet ; Hemming; Sylvester-Bradley; Cabrera; Bradley (J.C.) ; Tortonese ; Miller ; (b) In favour of Alternative “ B”’, one (1) : Hanko ; (c) On Leave of Absence, two (2): Kiuhnelt ; Mayr ; (d) Voting Papers not returned : None. 10. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 16th August 1957, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)42, 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 as Alternative “A” 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 20th March 1958 Mr. Hemming prepared the Ruling given 290 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 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.(57)42. 12. Original Reference for a Specific Name : 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 :— pictus, Coluber, Gmelin (J.F.), [1789], in Linnaeus, Syst. Nat. (ed. 13) 1(3) : 1116. 13. Compliance with Prescribed Procedures : 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. 14. ** Opinion ’’ Number: The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Five Hundred and Twenty-Five (525) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. DonE in London, this Twentieth day of March, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Eight. . Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING © 1958. THE INTERNATIONAL TRUST FOR ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Printed in England by METCALFE & COOPER LIMITED, 10-24 Scrutton St., London E C 2 NOTICE TO ALL SUBSCRIBERS In accordance with the wishes expressed at the recent ternational Congress of Zoology, the International Trust for oological Nomenclature is considering as a matter of urgency ow substantial economies can best be effected in its publica- ons. Opinions and Declarations, Vol. 19, however, had been assed for final printing before the Congress and parts 11-17 re now being issued. 3 ~ OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, c.™.G., C.B.E. | VOLUME 19. Part 13. Pp. 291—300 OPINION 526 Direction that Lestodiplosis be treated as the Valid Original Spelling for the generic name published by Kieffer in 1894 both with the above spelling and with the spelling Leptodiplosis (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 1958 ° ° 2Whe. e a Price Six Shillings and int ZAG SONS © Y &5* tly \\ (All rights reserved \ | 3 i ? 8 BAG Issued 15th October, 1958 cas. H INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 526 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 HEmMMING (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) (ist January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (La Plata, Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) Dr. Benin ecu (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. DyMOoND (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 (University of Tulane, Department of Geology, New Orleans, Louisiana, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezégazdasdgi 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. HoLtuHuis (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 KiiHNELT (Zoologisches Institut der Universitat, Vienna, Austria) (6th November 1954) Hk oh tl 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) OPINION 526 DIRECTION THAT ‘ LESTODIPLOSIS ” BE TREATED AS THE VALID ORIGINAL SPELLING FOR THE GENERIC NAME PUBLISHED BY KIEFFER IN 1894 BOTH WITH THE ABOVE SPELLING AND WITH THE SPELLING ‘* LEPTODIPLOSIS ” (CLASS INSECTA, ORDER DIPTERA) RULING :—(1) It is hereby directed that of the two Original Spellings Lestodiplosis and Leptodiplosis Kieffer, 1894 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) the spelling Lestodiplosis be treated as the Valid Original Spelling. (2) The under-mentioned generic name is_ hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Number 1311 :— Lestodiplosis Kieffer, 1894 (gender : feminine) (type species, by original designation: Lestodiplosis septemguitata Kieffer, 1894). (3) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Number 1575 :— septemguttata Kieffer, 1894, as published in the combination Lestodiplosis septemguttata (specific 294 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS name of type species of Lestodiplosis Kieffer, 1894). (4) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Number 1209 :— Leptodiplosis Kieffer, 1894 (ruled under (1) above to be an Invalid Original Spelling for Lestodiplosis). I. THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 5th March, 1956 Dr. D. Elmo Hardy (University of Hawaii, College of Agriculture, Honolulu, Hawaii) addressed to the Office of the Commission a preliminary note on the question as to which of the spellings Lestodiplosis and Leptodiplosis Kieffer, 1894 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) should be accepted as the Valid Original Spelling for the name concerned and on 16th April of the same year he submitted the following definitive application on this subject to the International Commission for consideration :— Proposed acceptance of ‘* Lestodiplosis °’ as the Valid Original Spelling for the Generic Name spelled both in this way and as ‘* Leptodiplosis ’’ by Kieffer in 1894 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) By D. ELMO HARDY (Department of Zoology and Entomology, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii) The object of the present application is to ask the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in the interest of stability OPINION 526 295 in nomenclature to give a Ruling as to which of the Original Spellings Lestodiplosis and Leptodiplosis is to be accepted as the Valid Original Spelling for the generic name published with the above spellings by Kieffer in 1894 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera). 2. The foregoing generic name was introduced by Kieffer in the Bulletin de la Société entomologique de France for the year 1894. It appeared in two different sets of notes. In the first it appeared (: 28) with the spelling Leptodiplosis ; in the second (: 280) with the spelling Lestodiplosis. The two sets of notes appeared in the same number of the Bulletin. The type species of this genus is Lestodiplosis septemguttata Kieffer, 1894 (Bull. Soc. ent. France 1894 : 280) by original designation. 3. It is clear that the spelling Lestodiplosis was that intended by Kieffer, for he used this spelling consistently in all his subsequent publications relating to the gall fly midges. This spelling was used by him in several papers published in 1895. The first of these was published in January 1895 (Wien. ent. Z. 15 : 2, 13, 14) and it appears that this was the first use of either spelling subsequent to the original publication of this name in the previous year. 4. The spelling Lepitodiplosis was employed without any reference to the spelling Lestodiplosis by Coquillet in 1910 (Proc. U.S. nat. Mus. 37 : 559). Neave also in 1939 (Nomencl. zool. 2 : 925) cited this name as “ Lestodiplosis “ err. pro Lepto- Kieffer, 1894’”. Subject to these isolated exceptions, the spelling Lestodiplosis has been used consistently throughout the taxonomic literature of the family CECIDOMYIIDAE. 5. Although, as explained in paragraph 3 above, it is likely that the spelling Leptodiplosis was the result of an inadvertent error, there is no clear evidence that this is so, and in consequence, the Valid Original Spelling under the Rules prescribed by the Copenhagen Congress (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. 43—44, Decision 71(1)(a)@i)) is “‘ that one of the Original Spellings used by the First Subsequent User of the name’. As shown above (paragraph 3) Kieffer in his paper of January 1895 was himself the ‘‘ First Subsequent User ” of this generic name. Accordingly, as he then used the spelling Lestodiplosis, that spelling is the Valid Original Spelling. In order to prevent any misconceived usage of the spelling Leptodiplosis by future authors, the Commission is now asked to give a Ruling that for the reasons explained above the spelling Lestodiplosis is the Valid Original Spelling for this generic name. 296 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 6. The genus Lestodiplosis Kieffer which, as stated in paragraph 4 above, belongs to the family CEcIDOMYIIDAE, has not been taken as the base for the name of a family-group taxon below the family level. Accordingly, no family-group-name problem arises for consideration in the present case. 7. The proposal now laid before the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature is that it should :— (1) give a Ruling that of the two Original Spellings Lestodiplosis and Leptodiplosis Kieffer, 1894 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) the Valid Original Spelling is Lestodiplosis, in view of the fact there is no clear evidence that either of the above spellings was the result of an inadvertent error and that the above was the spelling used by the First Subsequent User (Kieffer, January 1895) ; (2) place the under-mentioned generic name Lestodiplosis Kieffer, 1894, on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology (gender : feminine) (type species, by original designation : Lestodiplosis septemguttata Kieffer, 1894) ; (3) place the under-mentioned specific name on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology: septemguttata Kieffer 1894, as published in the combination Lestodiplosis septemguttata (specific name of type species of Lestodiplosis Kieffer, 1894) ; (4) place the under-mentioned generic name on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology :— Leptodiplosis Kieffer, 1894 (an Invalid Original Spelling for Lestodiplosis). Il. THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt of Dr. Hardy’s preliminary enquiry the question of which of the two spellings Lestodiplosis and Leptodiplosis Kieffer, 1894 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) should be accepted as the Valid Original Spelling was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 1078, OPINION 526 297 3. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 20th April 1956 and was published on 24th August of that year in Part 6 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Hardy, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 176—177). 4. No Objection Received : No objection to the action proposed in the present case was received from any source. Ill. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 5. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(57)20 : On 28th February 1957 a Voting Paper (V.P.(57)20) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “‘ the proposal relating to the generic name Lestodiplosis Kieffer, 1894, as set out in Points (1) to (4) in paragraph 7 on page 177 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature”? [i.e. in the paragraph numbered as above in the paper reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion]. 6. Support received from R. L. Coe (British Museum (Natural History), London) during the Prescribed Voting Period: On 2nd April 1957 Mr. R. L. Coe, (British Museum (Natural History) London) addressed the following communication to the Office of the Commission intimating his support for the action proposed in this case :— Regarding the proposal to validate the generic names Campsicnemus Haliday and Lestodiplosis Kieffer in the Order Diptera, I am strongly in favour of acceptance. 7. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 28th May 1957. 298 : OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 8. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)20: At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)20 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) : Lemche ; Holthuis ; Hering; Mayr; Bonnet; Vokes ; Key ; Mertens ; Boschma ; Jaczewski; Riley ; Prantl ; Bodenheimer ; Dymond ; Esaki ; Kiuhnelt ; do Amaral ; Bradley (J.C.) ; Cabrera ; Hemming ; Sylvester-Bradley ; Tortonese ; Stoll ; Miller ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) Voting Papers not returned, one (A): Hanko. 9. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 29th May 1957, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)20, 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. OPINION 526 299 10. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion”? : On 18th April 1958 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.(57)20. 11. Original References for Generic and Specific Names: 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 :— Leptodiplosis Kieffer, 1894, Bull. Soc. ent. France 1894 : 28 Lestodiplosis Kieffer, 1894, Bull. Soc. ent. France 1894 : 280 septemguttata, Lestodiplosis, Kieffer, 1894, Bull. Soc. ent. France 1894 : 280 12. Family-Group-Name Aspect : No family-group-name prob- lem arises in the present case, the applicant having reported (in paragraph 6 of the application submitted) that the generic name Lestodiplosis Kieffer, 1894, has not been taken as the basis for a family-group name and that the genus so named is currently placed in the family CECIDOMYIIDAE. 13. Compliance with Prescribed Procedures : The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Com- mission 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 Com- mission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 300 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 14. ‘* Opinion ’? Number : The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Five Hundred and Twenty-Six (526) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Eighteenth day of April, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Eight. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING © 1958. THe INTERNATIONAL TRUST FOR ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Printed in England by METCALFE & COOPER LIMITED, 10-24 Scrutton St., London E € 2 NOTICE TO ALL SUBSCRIBERS In accordance with the wishes expressed at the recent mternational Congress of Zoology, the International Trust for Loological Nomenclature is considering as a matter of urgency low substantial economies can best be effected in its publica- fons. Opinions and Declarations, Vol. 19, however, had been passed for final printing before the Congress and parts 11-17 ire now being issued. OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, C..G., C.B.E. VOLUME 19. Part 16. Pp. 301—314 OPINION 527 Interpretation under the Plenary Powers of the nominal species Actinocrinus gilbertsoni Phillips, 1836 (Class Crinoidea) 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 1958 iis JAN 2 8 io9 Issued 15th October, 1958 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 527 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President: Dr. Karl JoRDAN (British Museum (Natural Htsbor yy, Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts., England) President : Professor James Chester BRADLEY (Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y., U.S.A ) (i2th 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. BoscuHMa (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) Dr. Hous ae (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) (5th July 1950) Senhor Dr. Afranio do AMARAL (S. Paulo, Brazil) (12th August 1953) (Vice-President) Professor J. R. DyMOND (University ef 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 (University of Tulane, Department of Geology, New Orleans, Louisiana, 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. Hottuuis (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands (12th UUs 1953) Dr. K. Key (Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation, Ce A.C.T., Australia) (45th 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) Ay ast S. BODENHEIMER (The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel) (11th November 54 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) OPINION 527 INTERPRETATION UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS OF THE NOMINAL SPECIES ‘ ACTINOCRINUS GILBERTSONI”’ PHILLIPS, 1836 (CLASS CRINOIDEA) RULING :—(1) Directions are hereby given under the Plenary Powers that the nominal species Actinocrinus gilbertsoni Phillips, 1836 (Class Crinoidea) be interpreted by reference to the specimen designated and figured as the neotype of that species by Wright (J.)(1955) and which, prior to being so designated, was figured also by that author in 1943. (2) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Number 1312 :— Amphoracrinus Austin (T.), Sr., 1848 (gender : masculine) (type species, by selection by Roemer (F.A.), (1855): Actinocrinus gilbertsoni Phillips, 1836, as interpreted under the Plenary Powers in (1) above) 304 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (3) The undermentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name No. 1576 :— gilbertsoni Phillips, 1836, as published in the com- bination Actinocrinus gilbertsoni and interpreted as directed under the Plenary Powers in (1) above (specific name of type species of Amphoracrinus Austin (T.), Sr., 1848) (4) The under-mentioned family-group name is hereby placed on the Official List of Family-Group’ Names in Zoology with the Name Number 247 :— AMPHORACRINIDAE Bather, 1899 (type genus: Amphoracrinus Austin (T.), Sr., 1848) I. THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 21st December 1955 Mr. James Wright (Edinburgh, Scotland) submitted to the International Commission, through Mr. R. V. Melville (Geological Survey and Museum, London), the following request for a direction under the Plenary Powers as to the inter- pretation of the nominal species Actinocrinus gilbertsoni Phillips, 1836, (Class Crinoidea) :— Proposed determination under the Plenary Powers of the imter- pretation of the Nominal Species ‘‘ Actinocrinus Gilbertsoni ”’ Phillips, 1836 (Class Crinoidea) By J. WRIGHT (Edinburgh) The purpose of the present application is to ask the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature to give directions under its OPINION 527 305 Plenary Powers that the nominal species Actinocrinus gilbertsoni Phillips, 1836 (Class Crinoidea) be interpreted by reference to the neotype designated therefor by the present applicant in 1955 (Wright e)1955.2 193), 2. The nominal species Actinocrinus gilberstoni Phillips (1836 : 206, pl. iv, fig. 19) was described from a single specimen (which is therefore the holotype) from the Carboniferous Limestone of ‘‘ Bolland” in the collection of William Gilbertson. The holotype cannot be found in the British Museum (Natural History), where Gilbertson’s collection is now housed. It has also been sought, without success, in the Geological Survey and Museum (London), the Sedgwick Museum (Cambridge), the Oxford University Museum, the Yorkshire Museum (York) and the museums of Bristol, Leeds, Blackburn, Preston, Manchester, Liverpool and Scarborough. It is therefore presumed lost. 3. The nominal genus Amphoracrinus was established by T. Austin, Jr. (1848 : 292) for the nominal species Actinocrinus gilbertsoni Phillips, A. crassus and A. granulatus T. and T. Austin (1843 : 201) and a fourth unnamed species. A. crassus and A. granulatus were briefly described, but they were not figured, and since they were barely recognisable from the descriptions even at the time, A. gilbertsoni is virtually the only species eligible to be the type species of Amphoracrinus; it was first formally so selected by Wachsmuth and Springer (1881 : 329) (: 155 of separate), and no earlier selection of a type species for this genus is known. 4. The nominal family AMPHORACRINIDAE was proposed by Bather (1899 : 922) for the reception of this genus. 5. The specimen designated as neotype by the present author in 1955 agrees with what is known of the lost holotype. It was collected by the writer from the Carboniferous Limestone of Bellman Quarry, Clitheroe, Lancashire, which lies within the area of Bolland, the type- locality. It was described and figured by the author in 1943 (Wright, J., 1943 : 86, pl. iv, figs. 2—4, 9) as well as in 1955 (loc. cit.). It has been presented to the Royal Scottish Museum, Edinburgh. This is a museum which has proper facilities for preserving type specimens and which gives research workers access to its collections. The following are attached to the specimen :— (1) White number-label 1954—20, the official registration number of the specimen, 306 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (2) The number 2406 written in indian ink, the number formerly given to the specimen in the writer’s collection. (3) A red label marked “‘ TYPE”. 6. Accompanying the specimen are the following labels :— (1) “‘Amphoracrinus gilbertsoni (Phillips), Zone C, Bellman Quarry, Clitheroe.” (2) “* Figd. J. Wright, 1943, Geol. Mag. vol. Ixxx, pl. iv, figs. 2—4, 9; 1955, Palaeont. Soc., pl. xlix, figs. 3, 16, pl. 1, figs. 3, 9.” (3) “ 1954—20. Neotype—Wright.” 7. The purpose of designating a neotype in this instance was to stabilise the usages of the binomen Amphoracrinus gilbertsoni (Phillips) and of the family-name AMPHORACRINIDAE in their accustomed sense and to protect these names from the instability that might at any moment arise so long as the nominal species Actinocrinus gilbertsoni Phillips is not defined by reference to a type specimen. This course is particularly desirable in the case of a crinoid such as gilbertsoni Phillips, for which it might otherwise be possible for some later author to give an interpretation different from that currently accepted, even though, as there is every reason to believe, the current interpretation is correct. Stability in the nomenclature of this group can only be assured if a neotype is designated for the present species and if its name and those of the immediately associated taxa are added to the appropriate Official Lists. The names in question are in each case the oldest available names for the taxa concerned. They are all in current use and have enjoyed uninterrupted usage since the dates of their respective first publication. 8. The International Commission is therefore requested to use its Plenary Powers :— (1) to give directions under its Plenary Powers that the nominal species Actinocrinus gilbertsoni Phillips, 1836, be interpreted by reference to the specimen designated and figured as the neotype of that species by the present applicant in 1955 (: pl. xlix, figs. 3, 16; pl. 1, figs. 3, 9) and, prior to being so designated, figured also by the same author in 1943 (: pl. iv, figs. 2, 3, 4, 9) ; (2) to place the under-mentioned generic name on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology : Amphoracrinus Austin (T.), Jr., OPINION 527 307 1848 (gender: masculine) (type species, by selection, by Wachsmuth & Springer (1881): Actinocrinus gilbertsoni Phillips, 1836, interpreted as specified in (1) above) ; (3) to place the under-mentioned specific name on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology: gilbertsoni Phillips, 1836, as published in the combination Actinocrinus gilbertsoni, inter- preted as specified in (1) above (specific name of type species of Amphoracrinus Austin (T.), Jr., 1848) ; (4) to place the under-mentioned family-group name on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology :—AMPHORACRINIDAE Bather, 1899 (type genus: Amphoracrinus Austin (T.), Jr., 1848). References Austin, T., Jr., 1848. “‘ Observations on the Cystidea of M. von Buch and the Crinoidea generally ’’ Quart. J. geol. Soc., 4 : 291—4 Austin, T. and Austin, T., Jr., 1843. ‘* Descriptions of several new genera and species of Crinoidea ” Ann. Mag. nat. Hist., 11 : 195—207 Bather, F. A., 1899. ‘A phylogenetic classification of the Pelmatozoa ” Rep. Brit. Assoc. 1898 : 916—23 Phillips, J., 1836. J/lustrations of the Geology of Yorkshire. Part II. The Mountain Limestone District. London Wachsmuth, C., and Springer, F., 1881. “Revision of the Palaeocrinoidea, Part II’ Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Philad. 1881 ; 177— 411 (1—237), pls. xvii—xix Wright, J., 1943. ‘“‘ Pimlicocrinus gen. noy., and two new species of Amphoracrinus from the Carboniferous Limestone” Geol. Mag., 80 : 269—83, pls. iii, iv Wright, J., 1955. ‘“‘ The British Carboniferous Crinoidea”’, vol. 2, pt.1. Palaeont. Soc. 308 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 2. On 11th November 1956 Mr. Wright submitted the following note containing two corrections on points of detail arising on the application which he had submitted in the present case : I wish to draw attention to two errors of fact in my original applica- tion in this case. First, the author of the nominal genus Amphoracrinus is T. Austin, Sr., not T. Austin, Jr. as there stated (Bull. zool. Nomencel. 12 : 156). Secondly, the nominal species Actinocrinus gilbertsoni Phillips, 1836, was selected as type species of Amphoracrinus by F. A. Roemer, 1855 (in Bronn and Roemer, Lethaea Geognostica, 3rd ed., 1 : 249— 250) and not by Wachsmuth and Springer, 1881, as there stated (p. 156). Iam grateful to Dr. W. H. C. Ramsbottom and Professor G. Ubaghs respectively for drawing my attention to these errors. Uf. THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 3. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt of Mr. Wright’s application the question of the interpretation of the nominal species Actinocrinus gilbertsoni Phillips, 1836 (Class Crinoidea) was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 1057. 4. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 20th April 1956 and was published on 20th July of that year in Part 5 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Wright, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 156—158). 5. 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 OPINION 527 309 Nomenciature of its Plenary Powers in the present case was given on 20th July 1956 (a) in Part 5 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Mr. Wright’s applica- tion was published) and (b) to the other prescribed serial publica- tions. In addition, such Notice was given to four general zoological serial publications and to three palaeontological serials in Europe and America respectively. 6. Support received from R. E. Peck (University of Missouri, Columbia, Missouri, U.S.A.) : On 15th October 1956 Dr. Ray- mond E. Peck (University of Missouri, College of Arts and Science, Columbia, Missouri, U.S.A.) addressed to the Office of the Com- mission the following note of support for the action recommended by the applicant in the present case (Peck, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 319) :— This is to recommend approval of the request of Mr. J. Wright of Edinburgh that the species of Actinocrinus gilbertsoni Phillips be interpreted by reference to the neotype designated by him. Mr. Wright has made a very conscientious search for the holotype and has determined that there is slight possibility that it will ever be found. In these circumstances designation of a neotype by a specialist like Mr. Wright will be of great value to systematists working with Crinoidea. 7. Publication of a note of two minor corrections furnished by the applicant in the present case : As explained in paragraph 2 of the present Opinion, Mr. James Wright, the applicant, submitted on 11th November 1956 a note containing two corrections on points of detail arising on his application in the present case. The note so submitted, which has been reproduced in the para- graph referred to above, was published on 25th January 1957 (Wright, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 25). 8. Question of the possible survival of a syntype of ‘‘Actinocrinus gilbertsoni ’’? Phillips, 1836: On 15th January 1957 Mr. Leslie 310 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Bairstow (British Museum (Natural History)) addressed a prelimin- ary and informal letter to the Office of the Commission in which he discussed the possibility that some or all of the specimens attributed to Actinocrinus gilbertsoni Phillips in the Gilbertson Collection now preserved in the British Museum (Natural History) might be unfigured syntypes of the above nominal species and raised the question whether in these circumstances it might be better that a lectotype should be selected from among the speci- mens referred to above rather than that approval should be given by the Commission to the neotype designated and figured by Wright in 1955. In the following month consultations took place between Mr. Bairstow and Mr. R. V. Melville and Dr. W. H. C. Ramsbottom of the Geological Survey and the possible syntypes of Actinocrinus gilbertsoni Phillips were examined. Mr. Bairstow expressed the view that there was a “strong probability ” that the specimens in question were syntypes of the above species ; Mr. Melville and Dr. Ramsbottom took the view that, as the syntype status of these specimens was not beyond doubt, only the Commission was in a position to give a definite Ruling and therefore that the case should go forward to the Commission as originally submitted. An agreed summary of these discussions was thereupon prepared and this later was incorporated (as Note 3) in the Voting Paper issued in this case (paragraph 10 — below). 9. No objection received: Subject to the communication received from Mr. Bairstow (paragraph 8 above) no objection to the action proposed in this case was received from any source. Ill. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 10. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(57)33 : On 4th April 1957 a Voting Paper (V.P.(57)33) was issued in which the Members of OPINION 527 Shit the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, ‘‘ the proposal relating to the specific name gi/bertsoni Phillips, 1836, as published in the combination Actinocrinus gilbertsoni, as set out in Points (1) to (4) in paragraph 8 on pages 157 to 158 of Volume 12 of Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature [i.e. in the paragraph numbered as above in the paper reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion], subject to the adjustments specified in the supplementary note published on page 35 of Volume 13 of the above serial” [i.e. in the note reproduced in paragraph 2 of the present Opinion]. 11. The Prescribed Voting Period : As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 4th July 1957. 12. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)33 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)33 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 :— Hering ; Vokes; Lemche; Prantl; Bonnet; Esaki; Hanko ; Holthuis; Boschma; Jaczewski; Dymond ; Bodenheimer ; Tortonese; Key; do Amaral; Riley ; Bradley (J.C.) ; Stoll; Hemming; Mertens; Cabrera ; Mayr ; Kuhnelt ; Miller ; (b) Negative Votes, one (1): Sylvester-Bradley ; 312 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (c) Voting Papers not returned : None. 13. Declaration of Result of Vote: On Sth July 1957, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)33, 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 Commission in the matter aforesaid. 14. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘* Opinion ”’ : On 22nd April 1958 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.(57)33. 15. Original References for Generic and Specific Names: The following are the original references for the generic and specific names placed on Official Lists by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— Amphoracrinus Austin (T.), Sr., 1848, Quart. J. geol. Soc. Lond. 4:292 gilbertsoni, Actinocrinus, Phillips, 1836, I/l. Geol. York. (2) : 206 16. Reference for the selection of a type species for a nominal genus : The following is the reference for the selection of a type OPINION 527 313 species for a nominal genus specified in the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— For Amphoracrinus Roemer (F.A.), 1855, in Bronn & Austin (T.), Sr., 1848 Roemer, Lethaea geogn. (ed. 3) 1 : 249—250 17. Reference for the designation of a neotype for a nominal species: The following is the reference for the designation of the neotype specified in the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— For Actinocrinus gilbertsoni Wright (J.), 1955, Brit. Carbonif. Phillips, 1836 Grinw 2 ye ple 49s fics. 3, 16.: pl. 50, figs. 3, 9 [The specimen here figured had been figured by the same author in 1943 (Geol. Mag. 80 : pl. iv, figs. 2, 3, 4, 9)] 18. Reference for a family-group name: The following is the reference for the family-group name specified in the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— AMPHORACRINIDAE Bather, 1899, Rep. Brit. Assoc. 1898 : 922 19. Compliance with Prescribed Procedures : The prescribed Procedures were duly complied with by the International Com- mission 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 Com- mission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 314 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 20. ‘* Opinion ’? Number : The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Five Hundred and Twenty-Seven (527) of the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twenty-Second day of April, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Eight. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING © 1958: THe INTERNATIONAL TRUST FOR ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Printed in England by METCALFE & COOPER LIMITED, 10-24 Scrutton St., London E C2 NOTICE TO ALL SUBSCRIBERS In accordance with the wishes expressed at the recent Oological Nomenclature is considering as a matter of urgency ow substantial economies can best be effected in its publica- s. Opinions and Declarations, Vol. 19, however, had been assed for final printing before the Congress and parts 11-17 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, c.M.G., C.B.E. VOLUME 19. Part 17. Pp. 315—324 OPINION 528 Addition of the generic name Limnocythere Brady, 1868 (Class Crustacea, Order Ostracoda) 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 1958 Da O Ap ee , ‘ oe bee \TrisOW. a Price Six Shillings and S x exice FAN \ \ \ \ (All rights reserved) ArT } JAN 28 1959 | Issued 15th October, 1958 Lo aa INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 528 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) Dr. ear eee (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. Vokes (University of Tulane, Department of Geology, New Orleans, Louisiana, 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. 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 Pranti (Ndrodni Museum V Praze, Prague, Czechoslovakia) (30th October 1954) Professor Dr. Wilhelm KUHNELT (Zoologisches Institut der Universitat, Vienna, Austria) (6th November 1954) pale 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) OPINION 528 ADDITION OF THE GENERIC NAME ** LIMNOCYTHERE ”’ BRADY, 1868 (CLASS CRUSTACEA, ORDER OSTRACODA) TO THE ‘ OFFICIAL LIST OF GENERIC NAMES IN ZOOLOGY ”’ RULING :—(1) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Number 1313 :— Limnocythere Brady, 1868 (gender: feminine) (type species, by selection by Brady & Norman (1889) : Cythere inopinata Baird, 1843) (Class Crustacea, Order Ostracoda) (2) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Number 1210 :— Limnicythere Brady, 1868 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling for Limnocythere Brady, 1868) (3) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Number 1577 :-— inopinata Baird, 1843, as published in the combination Cythere inopinata (specific name of type species of Limnocythere Baird, 1868) (4) The under-mentioned family-group name is hereby placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology with the Name Number 248 :— LIMNOCYTHERINAE (correction of LIMNICYTHERINAE) Sars, 1925 (type genus : Limnocythere Brady, 1868) 318 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (5) 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 Number 281 :— LIMNICYTHERINAE Sars, 1925 (type genus : Limnocythere Brady, 1868) (an Invalid Original Spelling for LIMNOCYTHERINAE) I. THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 27th January 1956 Mr. P. C. Sylvester-Bradley (University of Sheffield, Sheffield, England) submitted to the International Commission on his own behalf and on that of Dr. H. V. Howe (Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, U.S.A.) the following application for the addition of the generic name Limnocythere Brady, 1868 (Class Crustacea, Order Ostracoda) to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology :— Proposed addition to the respective ‘‘ Official Lists ’’ of the generic name ‘‘ Limnocythere ’’ Brady, 1868, and the family-group name ‘‘ Limnocytherinae ”’ Sars, 1925 (Class Crustacea, order Ostracoda) By P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (Universities of Sheffield, England, and Kansas, U.S.A.) and H. V. HOWE (Louisiana State University, U.S.A.) The purpose of the present application is to regularise the spelling of the family-group name LIMNOCYTHERINAE, introduced in the form LIMNICYTHERINAE but based on the genus Limnocythere Brady, 1868. OPINION 528 319 2. The name Limnocythere was introduced by G. S. Brady (1868, Intellectual Observer 12: 121) for two species, Cythere inopinata Baird, 1843 (Zoologist 1 : 195) and Cypris monstrifica Norman, 1862, the former of which was subsequently selected as the type species of the genus (G. S. Brady and A. M. Norman, 1889, “‘ Monogr. of the Marine and Fresh-water Ostracoda of the N. Atlantic and of N.W. Europe. Section I. Podocopa”’ Sci. Trans. roy. Dublin Soc. (2) 4:170). 3. The article in the Intellectual Observer in which the name Limnocythere was introduced incorporated an extended conspectus of a monograph on the British Ostracoda which Brady had read before the Linnean Society of London in 1866, but which was not published until late in 1868, after the appearance of the article in the Intellectual Observer. When the monograph appeared, the name for the genus was spelt Limnicythere (1868, Brady, ““ Monogr. of the Recent British Ostracoda ’’, Trans. linn. Soc. Lond. 26 : 419—420). Reference in a footnote was made to the article in the Intellectual Observer. No reference was made to the change in spelling, and the name was not consistently spelt that way in the monograph (Limnocythere appearing in a “Classified Table” on page 358). The name Limnicythere Brady, 1868, is therefore an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling rather than as Emendation in terms of the definitions introduced at Copen- hagen (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl. : 44). As such it has no standing in nomenclature. Brady himself, however, continued to use the spelling Limnicythere, and adopted it, again without com- ment, in a later extension of his monograph (Brady and Norman, 1889, op. cit.: 170). At first this spelling became current, though not quite universal. Latterly, however (mainly after the publication of G. W. Miiller’s contribution to “Das Tierreich’ : Lief. 31. Ostracoda. Berlin, 1912) the original spelling Limnocythere has gained wider acceptance, and is now used almost to the exclusion of Limnicythere. 4. Sars, in his great work on the “* Crustacea of Norway ”’, introduced a subfamily based on the genus which he called LIMNICYTHERINAE (1925, Crustacea of Norway 9 Ostracoda : 148). As this name was based on a mis-spelling of the generic name, Klie (1938, Die Tierwelt Deutschlands, Teil 34, Krebstiere oder Crustacea III, Ostracoda, Muschelkrebse, Jena : 149) quite properly corrected it to LIMNO- CYTHERINAE. 5. We have been unable to discover any publication in which the name Limnocythere was formally emended to Limnicythere. As the latter name was extensively used for fifty years after its first publication, however, it is possible that we have missed a reference in which an author made clear his intention of using Limnicythere as a substitute for Limnocythere. Such a case would confer on the name Limnicythere the status of an Invalid Emendation, which for the purposes of 320 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS nomenclature would then be a junior objective synonym of Limnocythere. Family-Group names based on junior objective synonyms are, according to the decisions taken at Copenhagen (1953, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomenci. : 36) valid, and, if senior, take precedence over the name based on the valid name of the type genus. In that case LIMNICYTHERINAE would take preference over LIMNO- CYTHERINAE. 6. We consider this ambiguity as to the correct spelling of this family-group name to be highly undesirable, and accordingly recom- mend that the Commission should direct :— (1) that the generic name Limnocythere Brady, 1868 (gender : feminine) (type species, by selection by Brady and Norman (1889) : Cythere inopinata Baird, 1843) be placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology ; (2) that the generic name Limnicythere Brady, 1868, be regarded as an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling with no nomenclatorial status, and accordingly be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology ; (3) that the family-group name LIMNOCYTHERINAE Sars, 1925 (correction by Klie, 1938, of the Invalid Original Spelling LIMNICYTHERINAE) be placed on the Official List of Family- Group Names in Zoology ; (4) that the family-group name LIMNICYTHERINAE Sars, 1925 (either an Invalid Original Spelling or a name based on a generic name which is an Invalid Emendation) be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology ; (5) the specific name inopinata Baird, 1843, as published in the combination Cythere inopinata (specific name of type species of Limnocythere Brady, 1868) be placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology. 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 addition OPINION 528 321 of the generic name Limnocythere Brady, 1868 (Class Crustacea, Order Ostracoda) to the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S).1071. 3. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 20th April 1956 and was published on 20th July of that year in Part 5 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Sylvester-Bradley & Howe, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 159—160). 4. Support Received : The publication of the present application elicited comments from two specialists, both of whom supported the action proposed. The communications so received are reproduced in the immediately following paragraphs. 5. Support received from Stuart A. Levinson (Humble Oil & Refining Company, Houston, Texas, U.S.A.) : On 19th October 1956 Dr. Stuart A. Levinson (Humble Oil & Refining Company, Houston, Texas, U.S.A.) addressed the following letter to the Office of the Commission in support of the present application (Levinson, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 318) :— I would like to suggest that the application “‘ Proposed addition to the respective Official Lists of the generic name Limnocythere Brady, 1868, and the family-group name LIMNOCYTHERINAE Sars, 1925” be approved by the Commission. The application clearly states the present status of the genus Limnocythere and the family-group name LIMNOCYTHERINAE. An approval by the Commission will standardize the usage by ostracode workers, leaving no doubt as to accepted spelling. 6. Support received from Gerd Hartman (Museum der Stadt, Osnabriick, Germany): On 21st February 1957 Mr. P. C. Sylvester-Bradley forwarded to the Office of the Commission a 322 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS letter in which Dr. Gerd Hartmann (Museum der Stadt, Osnabriick, Germany) intimated his support for the action proposed. The following is an extract from the letter in question (Hartmann, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 104) :— With regard to your papers on Limnocythere, Candona and Conchoecia it is really lucky that you have reached such good con- clusions in these cases. I think it is best to stabilise the nomenclature of these genera in taking the usual form of the names. Limnocythere : The usual form is Limnocythere. 1 agree with you absolutely. 7. No Objection Received : No objection to the action proposed in the present case was received from any source. Ill. THE DECISION BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 8. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(57)19 : On 15th February 1957 a Voting Paper (V.P.(57)19) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, ‘the proposal relating to the generic name Limnocythere Brady, 1868, as set out in Points (1) to (5) in paragraph 6 on page 160 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature” [i.e. in the paragraph numbered as above in the paper reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion]. 9. The Prescribed Voting Period : As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Paper closed on 15th May 1957. 10. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)19 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state OPINION 528 - 3250 of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)19 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 ; Boschma ; Mayr ; Lemche ; Hering ; Prantl; Holthuis; Jaczewski; Bonnet; Mertens; Dymond ; Vokes ; Bodenheimer ; Bradley (J.C.) ; Key ; Riley ; Stoll ; Esaki; do Amaral ; Kiihnelt ; Cabrera ; Tortonese ; Hemming ; Miller ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) Voting Papers not returned, one (1) : Hanko. 11. Declaration of Result of Vote : On 16th May 1957, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)19, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 10 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. 12. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 22nd April 1958 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.(57)19. 13. References for Generic and Specific Names : The following are the original references for generic and specific names placed on Official Lists and Official Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— inopinata, Cythere, Baird, 1843, Zoologist 1 : 195 Linnicythere Brady, 1868, Trans. linn. Soc. Lond. 26 : 419—420 Limnocythere Brady, 1868, Intell. Obsery. 12 : 121 7 324 OPINIONS AND ‘DECLARATIONS 14. Reference for the selection of a type species for a nominal genus : The following is the reference for the selection of a type species for a nominal genus specified in the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— For Limnocythere Brady, Brady & Norman, 1889, Sci. 1868 Trans. roy. Dublin Soc. (2) 4:170 15. References for Family-Group Names: The following are the references for the family-group names placed respectively on the Official List and Official Index of names of taxa of the family-group category by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— LIMNICYTHERINAE Sars, 1925 (an Invalid Original Spelling for LIMNOCYTHERINAE) LIMNOCYTHERINAE (correction of LIMNICYTHERINAE) Sars, 1925, Crustacea Norway 9 Ostracoda : 148 16. Compliance with Prescribed Procedures : The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Com- mission 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 Com- mission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 17. ‘* Opinion ’? Number : The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Five Hundred and Twenty-Eight (528) of the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twenty-Second day of April, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Eight. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING © 1958. THE INTERNATIONAL TRUST FOR ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Printed in England by METCALFE & 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. VOLUME 19. Part 18. Pp. 325—332 OPINION 529 Rejection for nomenclatorial purposes of the work by Walch (J.E.I.) published at Niirnberg in the period 1768—1774 under the title Die Naturgeschichte der Versteinerungen zur Erlduterung der Knorrischen Sammlung von Merkwiirdigkeiten der Natur 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 1958 i Price Five Shillings and Sixpesee— me SY-7, = HSONs se (All rights reserveq fey im \ Issued 29th October, 1958 l Loy ae INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 529 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 s (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) Dr. CRT oeiees (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) (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. DyMonpD (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 (University of Tulane, Department of Geology, New Orleans, Louisiana, 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. 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) Professor Dr. Wilhelm KiiHNELT (Zoologisches Institut der Universitat, Vienna, Austria) (6th November 1954) ean 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) OPINION 529 REJECTION FOR NOMENCLATORIAL PURPOSES OF THE WORK BY WALCH (J.E..) PUBLISHED AT NURNBERG IN THE PERIOD 1768—1774 UNDER THE TITLE “DIE NATURGESCHICHTE DER VERSTEINERUNGEN ZUR ERLAUTER- UNG DER KNORRISCHEN SAMM- LUNG VON MERKWURDIG- KEITEN DER NATUR ” RULING :—(1) It is hereby ruled that in the under- mentioned work the author did not apply the principles of binominal nomenclature as required by Article 25 of the Régles and therefore that no name acquired the status of availability by reason of being published in the said work :— Walch (J.E.I.), 1768—1774, Die Naturgeschichte der Versteinerungen zur Erlduterung der Knorrischen Sammlung von Merkwiirdigkeiten der Natur, Nitirn- berg. (2) The title of the work specified in (1) above is hereby placed in the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Works in Zoological Nomenclature with the Title Number 60. I. THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 24th May 1956 Dr. L. R. Cox (British Museum (Natural History), London) submitted the following application to the SMITHSONIAN | 328 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS International Commission for the rejection of the Naturgeschichte of J. E. I. Walch, a work published in the period 1768—1774, on the ground that in it Walch did not apply the principles of binominal nomenclature :— Proposed rejection for nomenclatorial purposes of Walch (J.E.L), |1768—1774], ‘° Die Naturgeschichte der Versteinerungen zur Erlauterung der Knorrischen Sammlung von Méerkwiirdigkeiten der Natur ’’, Nurnberg By L. R. COX, M.A., ScD., F.R.S. (British Museum (Natural History), London) The object of the present application is to ask the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature to reject for nomenclatorial purposes the work by Walch (J.E.I.) published at Niirnberg in the years 1768—74 under the title ‘‘ Die Naturgeschichte der Versteiner- ungen zur Erlauterung der Knorrischen Sammlung von Merkwiirdig- keiten der Natur ”’. 2. The problem presented by Walch’s “‘ Naturgeschichte ’’ recently came into the light in the course of the preparation of an application which it is hoped to submit shortly to the Commission in regard to the family name to be used for the genus Harpa (Z.N.(S.)1119). It was found that in two modern standard works (Thiele (J.), 1929—31, Handbuch der systematischen Weichtierkunde, 1 : 343 ; Wenz (W.), 1938—44, Handbuch der Paliozoologie (edit. O. H. Schindewolf), Gastropoda : 1309) the genus Harpa is cited as of “(Rumph) Walch, 1771 ”’, and it was ascertained that the probable source of this reference was an entry in Herrmannsen (A.N.), 1846—9, Indicis Generum Malacozoorum, 1 : 501, where the first post-Linnean reference given for Harpa is “ Walch 1771. Natgsch. d. Verst. Ill, p. 113”. Investigation of this reference has shown that, not only is the citation of the date and of the volume of Walch wrong (it should read “ 1768 . . . I1G)’’), but also that the name of the shell was published by Walch only in the German vernacular form ‘‘ Harfen-Schnecken ”’. 3. Walch’s names are, in fact, either in the German vernacular or, if in Latin, are polynominal. Thus on page 135 of his “ zweyten Theils erster Abschnitt ’’ (1768) we read, “‘ Die zweyte Gattung der Ostraciten haben wir Ostreo-Pinniten genennet ... Zu diesen schilferigen Ostrea-Pinniten sind diejenigen mit zu rechnen, welche sonst Ostracitae gibbosi auriformes ... genennet werden”, I do OPINION 529 329 not think anybody in recent years except Thiele and Wenz has thought of attributing a generic name to Walch. 4. These old non-binominal works constitute a permanent threat to stability in nomenclature until they have been formally ruled to be invalid by the International Commission. In accordance with the principle recommended by the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology, Copenhagen, 1953 (Copenhagen Decisions zool. nomencl. : 23—24, Decision 23) I recommend the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (1) to give a ruling that in the work entitled “‘ Die Naturgeschichte der Versteinerungen zur Erlauterung der Knorrischen Samm- lung von Merkwiirdigkeiten der Natur’’, published at Nirn- berg in the period 1768—1774, Walch (J.E.I.) did not apply the principles of binominal nomenclature as required by Article 25 of the Régles, and therefore that no name acquired the status of availability by reason of being published in this work ; (2) to place the title of the foregoing work on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Works in Zoological Nomenclature. Il. THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt of Dr. Cox’s application the question of the rejection of the work by Walch entitled Die Naturgeschichte der Versteinerungen zur Erlduterung der Knorrischen Sammlung von Merwiirdigkeiten der Natur was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.)1121. 3. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 31st May 1956 and was published on 24th August of that year in Part 6 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Cox, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 191—192), 330 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 4. No Objection Received : No objection to the action proposed in the present case was received from any source. Il. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 5. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(57)23 : On 28th February 1957 a Voting Paper (V.P.(57)23) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “the proposal relating to the Naturgeschichte . . . Knorrischen Sammlung of Walch, 1768—1774, as set out in Points (1) and (2) in paragraph 4 on page 192 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature” |i.e. in the paragraph numbered as above in the paper 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 28th May 1957. 7. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)23 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)23 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) : Lemche ; Holthuis ; Hering ; Mayr; Bonnet ; Vokes ; Key ; Mertens ; Jaczewski ; Boschma ; Riley ; Prantl ; Bodenheimer ; Dymond ; Esaki ; Kiihnelt ; do Amaral ; Bradley (J.C.) ; Cabrera ; Hemming ; Sylvester-Bradley ; Tortonese ; Stoll; Miller ; OPINION 529 331 (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) Voting Papers not returned, one (1): Hanko. 8. Declaration of Result of Vote : On 29th May 1957, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)23, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in para- graph 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 Com- mission in the matter aforesaid. 9. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 24th April 1958 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.(57)23. 10. Compliance with Prescribed Procedures : The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Com- mission 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 Com- mission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 332 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 11. ‘* Opinion ’’ Number : The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Five Hundred and Twenty-Nine (529) of the Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twenty-Fourth day of April, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Eight. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING © 1958. THE INTERNATIONAL TRUST FOR ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Printed in England by METCALFE & 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, CM.G., C.B.E. VOLUME 19. Part 19. Pp. 333—348 OPINION 530 Validation under the Plenary Powers of the generic names Elaphella Bezzi, 1913 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) and Lophiotherium Gervais, 1850 (Class Mammalia) 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 1958 : Price Ten Shillings and Sixpence (All rights reserved) Issued 29th October, 1958 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 530 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) Dr. Fen eCue (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 (/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) (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. DymMonpD (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 (University of Tulane, Department of Geology, New Orleans, Louisiana, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mez6gazdasdgi 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. HoLtuHuis (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) (145th 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 KiiHNELT (Zoologisches Institut der Universitat, Vienna, Austria) (6th November 1954) ' ics S. BODENHEIMER (The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel) (11th November 1954 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) OPINION 530 VALIDATION UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS OF THE GENERIC NAMES “ELAPHELLA” BEZZI, 1913 (CLASS INSECTA, ORDER DIPTERA) AND ‘** LOPHIO- THERIUM ” GERVAIS, 1850 (CLASS MAMMALIA) RULING :—(1) The action specified below is hereby taken under the Plenary Powers :— (a} The generic name Diplocus Blanchard, 1845 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) is hereby suppressed for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy ; (b) The generic name Lophiotherium Fischer de Wald- heim, 1829 (Class Mammalia) 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 with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) Elaphella Bezzi, 1913, as validated under the Plenary Powers in (1)(a) above (gender : feminine) (type species, under Rule (f) in Article 30 by designation by Enderlein (1913) as type species of the objectively identical nominal genus Allo- dicrania Enderlein, 1913 : Pangonia cervus Weide- mann, 1828) (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) (Name No. 1314); SMITHSONIAN. | ace! 336 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (b) Lophiotherium Gervais, 1850, as validated under the Plenary Powers in (1)(b) above (gender : neuter) (type species, by monotypy : Lophiotherium cer- vulum Gervais, 1850, as defined by the lectotype selected by Hopwood (A.T.) (1956)) (Class Mammalia) (Name No. 1315). (3) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) cervus Wiedemann, 1828, as published in the combination Pangonia ceryus (specific name of type species of Elaphella Bezzi, 1913) (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) (Name No. 1578) ; (b) cervulum Gervais, 1850, as published in the com- bination Lophiotherium cervulum and as defined by the lectotype specified in (2)(b) above (specific name of type species of Lophiotherium Gervais, 1850) (Class Mammalia) (Name No. 1579). (4) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) Allodicrania Enderlein, 1913 (a junior objective synonym of Elaphella Bezzi, 1913) (Name No. Ys (b) Dicrania Macquart, 1834 (a junior homonym of Dicrania Lepeletier & Serville, 1828) (Name No. 1212) ; (c) Dicranomyia Hunter, 1901 (a junior homonym of Dicranomyia Stephens, 1829) (Name No. 1213) ; OPINION 530 337 (d) Diplocus Blanchard, 1845, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers in (1)(a) above (Name No. 1214) ; (e) Stichocera Hine, 1920 (a junior objective synonym of Elaphella Bezzi, 1913) (Name No. 1215) ; (f) Lophiotherium Fischer de Waldheim, 1829, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers in (1)(b) above (Name No. 1216) ; (g) Lophiotherium Gervais, 1849 (a nomen nudum) (Name No. 1217) ; (h) Diplocus Pictet, 1853 (a junior homonym of Diplocus Blanchard, 1845, and a junior objective synonym of Lophiotherium Gervais, 1850) (Name No. 1218). (5) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology with the Name No. 560 :— gervaisii Pictet, 1853, as published in the combination Diplocus gervaisii (a junior objective synonym of cervulum Gervais, 1850, as published in the combina- tion Lophiotherium cervulum). I. THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 2nd March 1955, Mr. H. Oldroyd (British Museum (Natural History)) addressed a preliminary communication to the Office of the Commission on his own behalf and on that of three other specialists on the question of the possible use by the International Commission of its Plenary Powers to suppress the virtually 338 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS unknown generic name Diplocus Blanchard, 1845, for the purpose of validating the well-established generic name Elaphella Bezzi, 1913 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera). The specialists associated with Mr. Oldroyd in this proposal were :—({a) G. B. Fairchild (Gorgas Memorial Laboratory, Panama, R. de Panama); (b) Cornelius B. Philip (Rocky Mountain Laboratory, Hamilton, Montana, U.S.A.) ; (c) I. M. Mackerras (Queensland Institute of Medical Research, Brisbane, Australia). In the course of the detailed examination of this case in the Office of the Commission in preparation for its publication in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature correspondence took place between the Secretary and various specialists on the question whether, if the name Diplocus Blanchard, 1845, were to be suppressed as desired by the Diptera specialists, it should be suppressed for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and of those of the Law of Homonymy or for the first of these purposes only. This question was of direct concern to mammalogists owing to the existence of the later name Diplocus Pictet, 1853, which under the first of these courses would become an available name but under the second would remain invalid as a junior homonym of Diplocus Blanchard, 1845. This investigation showed that there was no need from the point of view of mammalogists to preserve the name Diplocus Pictet, which it was agreed was a junior objective synonym of the name Lophiotherium Gervais, 1850, the name currently in use for the genus concerned. The latter was, however, technically invalid itself, as a junior homonym of Lophiotherium Fischer de Waldheim, 1829, a name which was not in use and had indeed disappeared from the literature. Accordingly, if this side of the case was to be put on a firm foundation what was wanted was — (i) that the insect name Diplocus Blanchard, 1845, should be suppressed for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homcnymy (the later mammal name Diplocus Pictet, 1853, thus remaining invalid as a junior homonym) and (ii) that the long-forgotten name Lophiotherium Fischer de Waldheim, 1829, should be suppressed for the purpose both of the Law of Priority and of those of the Law of Homonymy (thereby validating the mammal name Lophiotherium Gervais, 1850). This action was recommended by Dr. A. Tindell Hopwood (British Museum (Natural History)), in conjunction with whom the details of this portion of the case had been investigated. This course was concurred in by Mr. Oldroyd on behalf of his colleagues OPINION 530 339 and himself, and accordingly a statement furnished by Dr. Hop- wood was thereupon incorporated into the proposed application. The application in its final form was submitted to the Commission on 24th April 1956. It was as follows :— Proposed use of the Plenary Powers to validate the generic names “¢ Rlaphella ’’ Bezzi, 1913 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) and ‘‘ Lophiotherium ’’ Gervais, 1850 (Class Mammalia) By G. B. FAIRCHILD (Gorgas Memorial Laboratory, Panama, R. de Panama) CORNELIUS B. PHILIP (Rocky Mountain Laboratory, Hamilton, Montana, U.S.A.) I. M. MACKERRAS (Queensland Institute of Medical Research, Brisbane, Australia) and H. OLDROYD (British Museum (Natural History), London) The object of the present application is to ask the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature to use its Plenary Powers to validate the well-known generic name Elaphella Bezzi, 1913 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) by suppressing the totally overlooked name Diplocus Blanchard, 1845. The facts of this case are set out below. 2. The genus with which the present application is concerned was first named in 1834 when Macquart published the name Dicrania for it (Macquart, 1834, Roret’s Suites a4 Buffon, Dipt. 1 : 195). Macquart placed two nominal species in this genus, namely, Pangonia cervus Wiedemann, 1828 (Aussereurop. Zweifl. Insekt. 1 : 94) and Pangonia furcata Wiedemann, 1828 (ibid. 1: 99). Macquart did not designate a type species for this genus. 3. The name Dicrania Macquart, 1834, is invalid as being a junior homonym of Dicrania Lepeletier & Serville, 1828 (Ency. meth., Ins. 10(2) : 371) (Class Insecta, Order Coleoptera). On this account the 340 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS name Dicrania Macquart was replaced in 1901 (Trans. amer. ent. Soc. 27 : 135) by Hunter who gave it the name Dicranomyia. Unfortunately, the name Dicranomyia Hunter is invalid, being a junior homonym of Dicranomyia Stephens, 1829 (Nom. Brit. Ins. : 53). This genus was renamed twice in 1913 : first by Bezzi (Soc. ent. 28(13) : 56), who called it Elaphella, second, by Enderlein (Zool. Anz. 42 : 253), who called it Allodicrania. FElephella was published as nom. nov. for Dicranomyia Hunter, Allodicraniaasanom nov. for Dicrania Macquart. Fortunately, there is no difficulty in establishing the relative priority of these names, for the parts of the serials in which they were published are fully dated, the part of the Soc. ent. containing the name Elaphella bearing the date 5th July 1913, that of the Zool. Anz. containing the name Allodicrania bearing the date 18th July 1913. 4. In the forty-two years which have since elapsed this genus has been continuously known by the name Elaphella. Authors who have used this name include: Enderlein, 1925 (Mitt. zool. Mus. Berlin 11(2) : 298) ; Krober, 1930 (Zool. Anz. 88 : 309); Borgmeier, 1933 (Rey. Ent. 3 : 292); Krober, 1934 (Rev. Ent. 4 : 235); Bezzi, 1920 (Ann. ent. Soc. Amer. 13 : 408); Bequaert & Renjifo-Salcedo, 1946 (Psyche 53 : 54). . 5. Unfortunately, the name Elaphella Bezzi is itself invalid, there being a much older but hitherto totally overlooked substitute name for Dicrania Macquart, to which attention was drawn by Neave in 1939 (Nomencl. zool. 2: 108). This is the name Diplocus Blanchard, 1845 (Hist. Ins. 2 : 470). This name was published as a nom. nov. for Dicrania in a perfectly regular manner and its availability cannot be questioned. No reference to the name Diplocus can, however, be found in the whole of the tabanid literature since the time of its publication. It was overlooked in the following worid catalogues : Kertész, 1900, Catalogus Tabanidarum Orbis Terrarum Universi, Budapest, 79 pp. ; Kertész, 1908, Cat. Dipt. Hucusque descript. Vol. U1, 367 pp. ; Surcouf, 1921, Wytsman’s Genera Insectorum, Fasc. 175, Diptera Tabanidae, Bruxelles, 181 pp. ; Krober, 1934, Catalogo do Tabanidae, etc. (Revista entomologica 2 ; 222-276). In addition, the name Diplocus was missed in several private catalogues also, for example, in the personal annotated copies of Kertész from both Austen and Ricardo (British Museum (Natural History)) now in the hands of Oldroyd and Fairchild respectively, and in a very complete generic catalogue compiled by J. Bequaert (Harvard Museum of Comparative Zoology). The name is not mentioned in the extensive generic revisions of Neotropical Tabanidae published by Adolpho Lutz from 1905 to 1937 in Brazil. 6. The species Pangonia cervus Wiedemann has been treated by all authors as representing the present genus, whatever the name applied to it. It was first formally made the type species in 1913 (Zool. Anz. 42 : 253) when Enderlein, not knowing of the existence of Elaphella, OPINION 530 341 made it the type species of Allodicrania, thereby automatically making it the type species also of Elaphella Bezzi and of all the other substitute names for Dicrania Macquart. 7. The name Elaphella cervus (Wiedemann) has become thoroughly established through continuous usage and is familiar to all workers in this group, while the name Diplocus cervus (Wiedemann) has never been used for it and, if now introduced would be unfamiliar and confusing. The species concerned is a well-known insect in Surinam, Brazil, Peru and Colombia. It has been discussed by at least fourteen authors, in some cases in more than one publication. It is considered therefore that in the interest of nomenclatorial stability it is desirable that the Commission should validate the name Elaphella Bezzi and that, having done so, it should place that name on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology. The objectively invalid names discussed in the present paper should at the same time be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Names. To these should be added the name Stichocera Hine, 1920 (Ohio J. Sci. 20 : 185), the most recent of the names published as substitutes for Dicranomyia Hunter. 8. In considering the proposal that the generic name Diplocus Blanchard, 1845, should be suppressed in favour of the name Elaphella Bezzi, 1913, the Commission will no doubt wish to consider also the generic name Diplocus Pictet, 1853 (Traité Paléont. (ed. 2) 1 : 340), the status of which might be affected by the action recommended. The name Diplocus Pictet applies to a fossil mammal and on the action to be taken as regards this name the applicants have consulted Dr. A. Tindell Hopwood (British Museum (Natural History)) who has both furnished the information given below in regard to the name Diplocus Pictet and in addition has advised how the proposals in regard to the Diptera name Diplocus Blanchard may be harmonised with the mammal side of the present case. 9. The following is the statement kindly furnished by Dr. Hopwood : (a) The type species of Diplocus Pictet is the nominal species Diplocus gervaisii Pictet, 1853 (: 340). The type specimen of this species is the type specimen also of Lophiotherium cervulum Gervais, 1850 (Zool. Palégont. franc. (ed. 1) : Explic., pl. 11, figs. 10, 10a, 11, 12). Thus, the specific names gervaisii Pictet and cervulum Gervais are objective synonyms of one another. This species was referred to again by Gervais in 1859 in the Second Edition of the Zool. Paléont. franc. (: 114) and on this occasion Gervais cited as a synonym Diplocus gervaisii Pictet, which, however, he attributed to ““Aymard in Pictet”’. In both editions of the above work Gervais treated the specimen illustrated on figs. 10 and 10a on his plate 11 as the principal specimen of his nominal species Lophiotherium cervulum of 1850. That specimen is accordingly here selected as the lectotype of that species. 342 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Similarly, the generic name Diplocus Pictet and Lophiotherium Gervais (which was described jointly with its type species, Lophiotherium cervulum) are objective synonyms of one another. (it should be noted that Sherborn and later Neave were in error in attributing the name Lophiotherium Gervais to 1849 (C. R. Acad. Sci., Paris 29 : 381, 573), for as there published this generic name was a nomen nudum. (b) The name Lophiotherium Gervais, 1850, is however, a junior homo- nym of Lophiotherium Fischer de Waldheim, 1829 (Nowy. Mém. Soc. imp. Nat. Moscou 1 : 284). This name was given by Fischer to a genus of caelebs which Sherborn (1927, Index Anim., Pars second. : 3669) identified with Lophiodon Cuvier (G.), [1821—1822] (Mém Acad. roy. Sci., Paris 5 (Hist. Ac.) : 161). (c) Fischer’s vagaries seem to have been forgotten and the name Lophiotherium Fischer has disappeared from the literature. On the other hand, the name Lophiotherium Gervais, 1850, is in universal use and it would be most undesirable that this arrangement should be disturbed on technical nomenclatorial grounds. It is accordingly requested that, when the Com- mission suppresses the name Diplocus Blanchard, 1845, in the interests of the name Elaphella Bezzi, 1913, in the Order Diptera, it should (a) suppress also the long-forgotten name Lophiotherium Fischer de Waldheim, 1829, for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy and (b) limit the suppression of the name Diplocus Bianchard to suppression for the purposes of the Law of Priority, thereby securing that the name Diplocus Pictet, 1853, remains invalid as a junior homonym of Diplocus Blanchard, 1845. 10. No family-group name problems arise in connection with either part of the present application, for the genus Elaphella Bezzi in Diptera is currently placed in the family TABANIDAE. As regards Lophiotherium Gervais, Dr. Hopwood has informed us that this genus has never been taken as the type genus of a family-group taxon. It is currently placed in the family PALEOTHERIIDAE of the Order Perissodactyla. This family consists of a rather aberrant group of mammals sharing some characters with primitive horses and others with primitive tapirs. The genus died out at the end of the Eocene, and the family in the Lower Oligocene. 11. For the reasons set forth in the present application the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature is asked :— (1) to use its Plenary Powers :— (a) to suppress the generic name Diplocus Blanchard, 1845 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) for the purposes of the OPINION 530 343 Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homo- nymy ; (b) to suppress the generic name Lophiotherium Fischer de Waldheim, 1829 (Class Mammalia) for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homo- nhymy ; (2) to place the under-mentioned generic names on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology :— (a) Elaphella Bezzi, 1913, as validated under the Plenary Powers under (1)(a) above (gender: feminine) (type species, under Rule (f) in Article 30 by designation by Enderlein (1913) as the type species of the objectively identical nominal genus Allodicrania Enderlein, 1913 : Pangonia cervus Wiedemann, 1828) (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) ; (b) Lophiotherium Gervais, 1850, as validated under the Plenary Powers under (1)(b) above (gender: neuter) (type species, by monotypy: Lophiotherium cervulum Gervais, 1850, as defined by the lectotype selected by Hopwood in paragraph 9(a) of the present application) (Class Mammalia) ; (3) to place the under-mentioned specific names on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology :— (a) cervus Wiedemann, 1828, as published in the combination Pangonia cervus (specific name of type species of Elaphella prezmil, NSN) 2 (b) cervulum Gervais, 1850, as published in the combination Lophiotherium cervulum and as defined by the lectotype specified in (2)(b) above (specific name of type species of Lophiotherium Gervais, 1850) ; (4) to place the under-mentioned generic names on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology :— (a) Allodicrania Enderlein, 1913 (a junior objective synonym of Elephella Bezzi, 1913) ; (b) Dicrania Macquart, 1834 (a junior homonym of Dicrania Lepeletier & Serville, 1828) ; (c) Dicranomyia Hunter, 1901 (a junior homonym of Dicrano- myia Stephens, 1829) ; (d) Diplocus Blanchard, 1845, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers under (1)(a) above ; 344 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (e) Stichocera Hine, 1920 (a junior objective synenym of Elaphella Bezzi, 1913) ; (f) Lophiotherium Fischer de Waldheim, 1829, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers under (1)(b) above ; (g) Lophiotherium Gervais, 1849 (a nomen nudum) ; (h) Diplocus Pictet, 1853 (a junior homonym of Diplocus Blanchard, 1845, and a junior objective synonym of Lophiotherium Gervais, 1850) ; (5) to place the under-mentioned specific name on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology :—gervaisii Pictet, 1853, as published in the combination Diplocus gervaisti (a junior objective synonym of cervulum Gervais, 1850, as published in the combination Lophiotherium cervulum). Il. THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt of Mr. Oldroyd’s preliminary enquiry, the question of the validation of the generic name Elaphella Bezzi, 1913 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) was allotted the Registered No. Z.N.(S.) 1077. 3. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 9th May 1956 and was published on 24th August of that year in Double-Part 7/8 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Fairchild et al., 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 195—199) 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 24th August, 1956 (a) in Double-Part 7/8 of Volume 12 of the OPINION 530 345 Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature and (b) to the other pre- scribed serial publications. In addition such Notice was given to four general zoological serial publications, seven entomological publications, and two mammalogy serials. 5. No Objection Received : No objection to the action proposed in the present case was received from any source. Ill. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 6. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(57)27: On 15th March 1957 a Voting Paper (V.P.(57)27) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “the proposal relating to the generic names Elaphella Bezzi, 1913, and Lophiotherium Gervais, 1850, as set out in Points (1) to (5) in paragraph 11 on pages 198—199 in Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature ”’ {i.e. in the paragraph numbered as above in the paper 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 15th June 1957. 8. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)27 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)27 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following twenty- three (23) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Mayr ; Vokes; Hering; Boschma; Lemche; Boden- heimer ; Riley ; Prantl; Holthuis; Dymond; Esaki ; Jaczewski; do Amaral; Key; Bonnet; Hemming ; 346 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Mertens ; Tortonese ; Cabrera ; Kiihnelt ; Stoll ; Bradley (J.C.) ; Sylvester-Bradley ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) Voting Papers not returned, two (2) : Hank6 ; Miller!?. 9, Declaration of Result of Vote: On 16th June 1957, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)27, 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 Com- mission in the matter aforesaid. 10. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Opinion ”’ : On 24th April 1958, 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.(57)27. 11. Original References for Generic and Specific Names : The following are the original references for generic and specific names placed on Official Lists and Official Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— Allodicrania Enderlein, 1913, Zool. Anz. 42 : 253 cervulum, Lophiotherium, Gervais, 1850, Zool. Paléont. frang. (ed. I) explica ply i, fies. 10; 0a iia? 1 After the close of the Prescribed Voting Period a late affirmative vote was received from Commissioner Miller. OPINION 530 347 ceryus, Pangonia, Wiedemann, 1828, Aussereurop. zweifl. Insekt. 1:94 Dicrania Macquart, 1834, Roret’s Suite a Buffon Hist. nat. Ins., Dipt, 13195 Dicranomyia Hunter, 1901, Trans. amer. ent. Soc. 27 : 135 Diplocus Blanchard, 1845, Hist. Ins. 2 : 470 Diplocus Pictet, 1853, Traité Paléont. (ed. 2) 1 : 340 Elaphella Bezzi, 1913, Soc. ent. 28(13) : 56 . geryaisti, Diplocus, Pictet, 1853, Traité Paléont. (ed. 2) 1 : 340 Lophiotherium Fischer de Waldheim, 1829, Nouv. Mém. Soc. imp. Nat. Moscou 1 : 284 Lophiotherium Gervais, 1849, C.R. Acad. Sci., Paris 29 : 381, 573 Lophiotherium Gervais, 1850, Zool. Paléont. frang. (ed. 1) : explic. pleoliengs, 10; 10a, 11, 12 Stichocera Hine, 1920, Ohio J. Sci. 20 : 185 12. Reference for the selection of a type species for a nominal genus : The following is the reference for the selection of a type species for a nominal genus specified in the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— For Elaphella Bezzi, 1913, through Enderlein, 1913, Zool. Anz. Allodicrania Enderlein, 1913 42 : 253 13. Reference for the selection of a lectotype for a nominal species : The following is the reference for the selection of a lectotype for a nominal species specified in the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— For Lophiotherium cervulum Hopwood (A.T.), 1956, Bull. Gervais, 1850 zool. Nomencl. 12 : 197, paragraph 9(a) 348 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 14. Family-Group-Name Aspects: No _ family-group-name problem arises in the present case, the genus Elaphella Bezzi, 1913 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) being currently placed in the family TABANIDAE, and the genus Lophiotherium Gervais, 1850 (Class Mammalia) in the family PALEOTHERIIDAE. 15. Compliance with Prescribed Procedures : The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Com- mission 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 Com- mission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 16. ‘* Opinion ’’ Number : The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Five Hundred and Thirty (530) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twenty-Fourth day of April, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Eight. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING © 1958. THE INTERNATIONAL TRUST FOR ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Printed in England by METCALFE & 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. VOLUME 19. Part 20. Pp. 349—360 — OPINION 531 Validation under the Plenary Powers of thé neric name Campsicnemus Haliday, 185 ACS ies NN Order Diptera) Yf ae: \ LONDON : Printed by Order of the International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature and Apts 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 1958 Price Eight Shillings (All rights reserved) Issued 29th October, 1958 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 531 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President: Dr. Karl JORDAN (British Museum (NRE 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. Fyne) (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th u 4 Professor Teiso EsAkI (Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan) (17th April 1950) Professor Pierre BONNET (Université de Toulouse, France) (9th June 1950) Mr. Norman Denbigh RILry (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 (University of Tulane, Department of Geology, New Orleans, Louisiana, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (MezGgazdasdgi 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 Cen 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) Professor F. S. BODENHEIMER (The Hebrew University, Jenisatenn Tsrael) (11th November 4 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) OPINION 531 VALIDATION UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS OF THE GENERIC NAME ‘‘ CAMPSICNEMUS ” HALIDAY, 1851 (CLASS INSECTA, ORDER DIPTERA) RULING :—(1) Under the Plenary Powers the generic name Camptosceles Haliday, 1832 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) 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 Number 1316 :— Campsicnemus Haliday, 1851, as validated under the Plenary Powers in (1) above (gender: mas- culine) (type species, by selection by Coquillet (1910): Dolichopus scambus Fallén, 1823). (3) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) scambus Fallén, 1823, as published in the combina- tion Dolichopus scambus (specific name of type species of Campsicnemus Haliday, 1851) (Name No. 1580) ; (b) curvipes Fallen, 1823, as published in _ the combination Dolichopus curvipes (Name No. 1581). SMITHSONIAN 352 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (4) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Numebr 1219 :— Camptosceles Haliday, 1832, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers in (1) above. I. THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 5th March 1956 Professor D. Elmo Hardy (University of Hawaii, College of Agriculture, Honolulu, Hawaii) addressed to the Office of the Commission a preliminary note on the question of the possible use of the Plenary Powers for the purpose of validating the generic name Campsicnemus Haliday, 1851 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) and on 4th April of the same year he submitted the following definitive application on this subject to the International Commission for consideration :— Proposed use of the Plenary Powers to validate the generic name ‘‘ Campsicnemus ’’ Haliday, 1851 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera) By D. ELMO HARDY (Department of Zoology and Entomology, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii) The object of the present application is to ask the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature to validate the long-estab- lished generic name Campsicnemus Haliday, 1851 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera). The facts of this case are set in the following paragraphs. 2. In 1832 (Zool. J. 5(19) : 357) Haliday established the nominal genus Camptosceles. He did not designate a type species for this genus but the first of the included species, Dolichopus scambus Fallén 1823 (Mon. Dolichop. Svec. (3): 19) was selected as the type species by Coquillet in 1910 (Proc. U.S. nat. Mus. 37:518). ~ OPINION 531 353 3. In 1851 (in Walker’s Ins. Brit., Diptera 1 : 187) Haliday replaced the name Camptosceles Haliday, 1832, by the new Campsicnemus, because he regarded that name as a junior homonym of Camptoscelis Dejean, 1828 (Spec. gén. Coléopt. 3: 430). Again Haliday did not designate a type species but in 1910 Coguillet (/oc. cit. 37 : 518) selected the second of Haliday’s species, Dolichopus curvipes Fallén, 1823 (Mon. Dolichop. Svec. (3) : 20) to the type species of Campsicnemus Haliday. 4. Under the Régles a generic name is not to be treated as a homonym of another such name differing from it only in termination (Article 36) and this provision was underlined and generalised in 1953 when the Fourteenth International Congress of Zoology inserted in the Régles a provision 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, Copenhagen Decisions zool. Nomencl.: 78, Decision 152). It will be seen therefore that the name Camptosceles Haliday, 1832, is not a homonym of Camptoscelis Dejean, 1828, that it is accordingly an available name and that the name Campsicnemus Haliday, 1851, is invalid as a junior objective synonym of Camptosceles Haliday, 1832. 5. In the mistaken belief that Camptosceles Haliday was not an available name, the name Campsicnemus Haliday, 1851, has been consistently used in the dolichopodid literature for over a hundred years. The genus concerned is widespread throughout the world. It contains about one hundred known species, over half of them occurring in Hawaii. This group represents over 60 per cent. of the Hawaiin dolichopodid fauna. There are over fifty undescribed species at hand. There can be no doubt that the best interests of stability would be served by maintaining the generic name Campsicnemus Haliday and that no advantage would be served by abandoning the practice of a century through re-introducing the almost completely unused and now virtually forgotten name Camptosceles Haliday, 1832. 6. Under Rule (f) in Article 30 where one nominal genus is replaced by another (as was done in this case) the two genera automatically take the same species as type species and the designation, indication or selection of a type species for either nominal genus automatically makes the species so designated, indicated or selected the type species also of the other nominal genus concerned. Coquillet (1910) was therefore in error when he sought to select different species to be the type species respectively of Camptosceles Haliday, 1832, and Campsic- nemus Haliday, 1851. The species (Dolichopus scambus Fallén, 1823) selected by Coquillet as the type species for the original genus should therefore be accepted as the type species also of Campsicnemus Haliday, 1851, 354 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 7. The generic names discussed above have not been taken as the base for the names of family-group taxa and in consequence no family- group-name problem arises in the present case. The genus to which these names have been applied is, as has already been indicated, currently referred to the family DOLICHOPODIDAE (correction of DOLICHOPIDAE) Latreille, 1807, for the addition of which to the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology a proposal is already before the International Commission in connection with a different application (Hemming, 1955, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 11 : 79—81)}. 8. In the light of the considerations set out above, the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature is asked :— (1) to use its Plenary Powers to suppress the under-mentioned generic name for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy :—Camptosceles Haliday, 1832 ; (2) to place the under-mentioned generic name on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology :—Campsicnemus Haliday, 1851 gender: feminine) (type species by selection by Coquillet (1910) : Dolichopus scambus Fallén, 1823) ; (3) to place the under-mentioned specific names on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology :— (a) scambus Fallén, 1823, as published in the combination Dolichopus scambus (specific name of type species of Campsicnemus Haliday, 1851) ; (b) curvipes Fallén, 1823, as published in the combination Dolichopus curvipes ; (4) to place the generic name specified in (1) above as there 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 Professor Hardy’s application the question of the possible validation of the generic name Campsicnemus Haliday, 1851 1 The proposal here referred to has since been approved by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, whose decision on this matter has been embodied in Direction 49 (1956, Ops. Decls. int. Comm. zool. Nomencl. 1(D) : 265—280). OPINION 531 355) (Class Insecta, Order Diptera), under the Plenary Powers was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S) 1080. 3. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 20th April 1956 and was published on 24th August of the same year in Part 6 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Hardy, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12 : 178—180). 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 24th August 1956 (a) in Part 6 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Professor Hardy’s application was published) and (b) to the other prescribed serial publications. In addition such Notice was given to four general zoological serial publications and to seven entomological serials in Europe and America. 5. No Objection Received : No objection to the action proposed in the present case was received from any source. Ill. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 6. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(57)21 : On 28th February 1957 a Voting Paper (V.P.(57)21) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “the proposal relating to the generic name Campsicnemus Haliday, 1851, as set out in Points (1) to (4) in paragraph 8 on pages 179—180 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature” |i.e. in the paragraph numbered as above in the paper reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion]. 7. Support received from R. L. Coe (British Museum (Natural History), London) during the Prescribed Voting Period : On 2nd April 1957 Mr. R. L. Coe (British Museum (Natural History) 356 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS London) addressed the following communication to the Office of the Commission intimating his support for the action proposed in this case :— Regarding the proposal to validate the generic names Campsicnemus Haliday and Lestodiplosis Kieffer in the Order Diptera, I am strongly in favour of acceptance. 8. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting ; Paper was issued under the Three-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 28th May 1957. 9, Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)21: At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)21 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following twenty- three (23) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Lemche ; Holthuis ; Hering ; Mayr; Bonnet; Vokes ; Key ; Mertens ; Boschma ; Jaczewski; Riley ; Prantl ; Bodenheimer ; Dymond ; Esaki ; Kitihnelt ; do Amaral ; Bradley (J.C.); Hemming ; Sylvester-Bradley ; Tortonese ; Stoll; Mi£iller ; (6b) Negative Votes, one (1): Cabrera ; (c) Voting Papers not returned, one (1) : Hanko. 10. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 29th May 1957, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)21, OPINION 531 357 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. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present “ Opinion ”’ : On 28th April 1958 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.(57)21. 12. Determination of the gender attributable to the generic name ** Campsicnemus ’’ Haliday, 1851 : During the Prescribed Voting Period for Voting Paper V.P.(57)21 a communication was received in the Office of the Commission from Dr. F. I. van Emden (Commonwealth Institute of Entomology, London) expressing the view that the gender properly attributable to the generic name Campsicnemus Haliday, 1851, was the masculine gender and not, as stated in the application submitted in the present case, the feminine gender. This matter was thereupon investigated by the Secretary who on 28th April 1958 executed the following Minute directing that for the reasons set out therein the gender to be attributed to the above generic name be the masculine gender : — Gender attributable to the generic name ‘‘ Campsicnemus ”’ Haliday, 1851 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 question of the gender properly attributable to the generic name Campsicnemus Haliday, 1851 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera), the proposed validation 358 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS of which under the Plenary Powers forms the subject of Application Z.N.(S.) 1080 submitted by Professor R. Elmo Hardy (University of Hawaii, Honolulu). 2. In his application Professor Hardy attributed the feminine gender to this name. By what I now see was an error of judgement on my part the accuracy of this attribution was not questioned at the time and the foregoing gender attribution for the generic name Campsicnemus accordingly appeared in the application as later published in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature. 3. Subsequent to the issue on 28th February 1957 of the Voting Paper (V.P.(57)21) relating to the present case Dr. I. F. van Emden (Commonwealth Institute of Entomology, London) addressed to the Office of the Commission a letter (undated but received on 6th April 1957) in which he expressed the opinion that, having regard to the termination “-us”’ of the generic name Campsicnemus, the gender properly attributable to that name was the masculine gender and not the feminine gender attributed to it in the application submitted by Professor Hardy. On being consulted on the point so raised, Professor L. W. Grensted, Consulting Classical Adviser, submitted a Report (dated 25th April 1958) in which he supported the view advanced by Dr. van Emden. Professor Grensted’s Report was as follows :— Campsicnemus—gender The name Campsicnemus is based on kvyun (cnema), a tibia, which is feminine. But the termination “-us’’, in the Latinised form, makes it masculine, like such names as Heferocerus, Platystomus, etc. This comes under what is now, I think, the agreed interpretation of Copenhagen Decision 84%. The Greek noun is, in fact, not preserved entire, but Latinised, with a nominative masculine suffix. Alternatively, the name is in the form of a Greek two-termination adjective in “-os” kapyuxvnuds, and this would also, when used as a noun, i.e. aS a generic name, be naturally masculine. 4. In the light of the information now available as set out above it is evident that the correct gender for the generic name Campsicnemus is the masculine gender and not the feminine gender attributed to it in the application submitted to the Commission. I have communicated the substance of the Report received from Professor Grensted to Professor Hardy who offers no objection to the correction of the gender attributed to the above generic name. 2 For the provision here referred to see Declaration 39 (1958, Ops. Decls. int. Comm. zool. Nomencl. 19 : i—xviii). OPINION 531 359 5. In the circumstances set out above, I now, as Secretary to the International Commission, hereby direct that the gender to be attributed to the generic name Campsicnemus Haliday, 1851, be the masculine gender and that that gender be so attributed in the Ruling to be prepared for the Opinion required to give effect to the vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)21. 13. Original References for Generic and Specific Names : The following are the original references for the generic and specific names placed on Official Lists and ee Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— _ Campsicnemus Haliday, 1851, in Walker’s Ins. Brit., Diptera 187 Camptosceles Haliday, 1832, Zool. J., 5(19) : 357 curvipes, Dolichopus, Fallén, 1823, Mon. Dolichop. Svec. (3) : 20 scambus, Dolichopus, Fallén, 1823, Mon. Dolichop. Svec. (3) : 19 14. Family-Group-Name Aspects: No action at the family- group-name level is involved in this case, for, as explained by the applicant (paragraph 7), the genus Campsicnemus Haliday, 1851, is currently placed in the family DOLICHOPODIDAE (correction of DOLICHOPODES) Latreille, 1809, the name of which has already been placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology by the Ruling given in Direction 49 (1956, Ops. Decl. int. Comm. zool. Nomencl. 1(D) : 265—280). 15. Compliance with Prescribed Procedures : The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Com- mission 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 Com- mission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 360 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 16. “‘ Opinion ’? Number : The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Five Hundred and Thirty-One (531) of the International ‘Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twenty-Eighth day of April, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Eight. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING © 1958. THE INTERNATIONAL TRUST FOR ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Printed in England by METCALFE & 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. VOLUME 19. Part 21. Pp. 361—376 OPINION 532 Validation under the Plenary Powers of the specific name verrucosa Sars, 1901, as published in the combination Alona verrucosa (Class Crustacea, Order Cladocera) { (3) DW es art | i : a 3) as Fie ea ig { | JAN 28 S59} \ ? LONDON: \ , Fee ws i ; oo Printed by Order of the Internationaerast 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 1958 Price Ten Shillings and Sixpence (All rights reserved) Issued 29th October, 1958 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 532 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 eae 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) (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. Voxes (University of Tulane, Department of Geology, New Orleans, Louisiana, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezdgazdasdgi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. StToLit (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 KiHNELT (Zoologisches Institut der Universitat, Vienna, Austria) (6th November 1954) Eaeeaa 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) OPINION 532 VALIDATION UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS OF THE SPECIFIC NAME “VERRUCOSA” SARS, 1901, AS PUBLISHED IN THE COMBINATION “ALONA VERRUCOSA”? (CLASS CRUSTACEA, ORDER CLADOCERA) RULING:—(1) The following action is hereby taken under the Plenary Powers :— (a) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby suppressed for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy :— verrucosa Lutz, 1879, as published in the com- bination Alona verrucosa ; (b) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby suppressed for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy :— pulchra Hellich, 1874, as published in the com- bination Alona pulchra. (2) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) Alona Baird, 1843 (gender : feminine) (type species, by selection by Johnson (D.S.) (1956) : Lynceus quadrangularis Miiller (O.F.), 1785) (Class Crus- tacea, Order Cladocera) (Name No. 1317) ; (b) Leydigia Kurz, 1874 (gender: feminine) (type species, by original designation of Lynceus quad- rangularis Leydig, 1860, and through Declaration 21: Alona leydigi Schédler, 1863, a substitute SMITHSONIAN avr n qate 364 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS nominal species for Lynceus quadrangularis Ley- dig, 1860, the name of which is invalid as a junior homonym of Lynceus quadrangularis Miller (O.F.), 1785) (Class Crustacea, Order Cladocera) (Name No. 1318) ; (c) Lynceus Miiller (O.F.), 1776 (gender : masculine) (type species, by selection by Latreille (1810) : Lynceus brachyurus Miiller (O.F.), 1776) (Class Crustacea, Order Conchostraca) (Name No. ISD). (3) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) verrucosa Sars, 1901, as published in the combina- tion Alona verrucosa, as validated under the Plenary Powers in (1){a) above (Name No. 1582) ; (b) rectangula Sars, 1862, as published in the combina- tion Alona rectangula (Name No. 1583) ; (c) quadrangularis Miller (O.F.), 1785, as published in the combination Lynceus quadrangularis (specific name of type species of A/ona Baird, 1843) (Name No. 1584) ; (d) /eydigi Schédler, 1863, as published in the combina- tion Alona leydigi (specific name of type species of Leydigia Kurz, 1874) (Name No. 1585) ; (e) brachyurus Miller (O.F.), 1776, as published in the combination Lynceus brachyurus (specific name of type species Lynceus Miiller (O.F.), 1776) (Name No. 1586). (4) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Number 1220 :— Lynceus Gray (J.E.), 1821 (a junior homonym of Lynceus Miiller (O.F.), 1776). OPINION 532 365 (5) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) verrucosa Lutz, 1879, as published in the combina- tion Alona verrucosa, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers in (1)(a) above (Name No. 561) ; (b) pulchra Hellich, 1874, as published in the combina- tion Alona pulchra, as suppressed under the Plenary Powers in (1)(b) above (Name No. 562) ; (c) tuberculata Hudendorff, 1876, as published in the combination Alona tuberculata (a junior homonym of tuberculata Kurz, 1874, as published in the combination Alona tuberculata) (Name No. 563) ; (d) quadrangularis Leydig, 1860, as published in the combination Lynceus quadrangularis (a junior homonym of quadrangularis Miller (O.F.), 1785, as published in the combination Lynceus quad- rangularis) (Name No. 564). (6) The under-mentioned family-group name is hereby placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology with the Name Number 249 :— LYNCEIDAE Sayce (O.A.), 1902 (type genus : Lynceus Miller (O.F.), 1776). I. THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 8th May 1954 Mr. D. S. Johnson (University of Malaya, Singapore) addressed a preliminary communication to the Office of the Commission on the question of the possible use by the 366 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Commission of its Plenary Powers for the purpose of validating the specific name verrucosa Sars, 1901, as published in the com- bination Alona verrucosa (Class Crustacea, Order Cladocera), by suppressing the senior homonym verrucosa Lutz, 1879, as published in the combination Alona verrucosa. There followed con- siderable correspondence between the Secretary and Mr. Johnson, in the later stages of which Dr. J. P. Harding (British Museum (Natural History), London) also took part. This led on 22nd May 1956 to the submission to the Commission by Mr. Johnson of the following definitive application :— Proposed use of the Plenary Powers to validate the specific name ‘* verrucesa ’’ Sars, 1961, as published in the combination ‘* Alona verrucosa ’’ (Class Crustacea, Order Cladocera) By D. S. JOHNSON (University of Malaya, Singapore) The object of the present application is to ask the International Com- mission to provide a firm nomenclatorial basis for the specific name verrucosa Sars, 1901, as published in the combination Alona verrucosa (Class Crustacea, Order Cladocera). This is a common pan-tropical species, the name currently used for which is invalid as a junior homonym of an identical name previously published by Lutz. The reason why the validation of the specific name verrucosa Sars is particularly to be desired is that, as is shown below, if this name were to be rejected, there is no name which would clearly be applicable to this well-known species, there being three other names which might be subjectively applied to it by specialists. There would therefore be a continuing prospect of instability and confusion in the nomenclature of this species. The facts of this case are set out briefly below. 2. In 1901 ( 56, pl. IX, figs. 7, 7a) Sars described a speciesmon Cladocera to which he applied the name Alona verrucosa. This species is allied to, but is accepted as distinct from A/ona rectangula Sars, 1862 (: 278). This latter species is now better understood than formerly, having been defined and redescrited by Jenkin in 1934. It has since been recorded by Brehm (1937) who has identified a number of other nominal species with it. 3. Unfortunately, in 1879 (: 44) Lutz established a nominal species Alona verrucosa which cannot be identified with certainty. It is OPINION 532 367 possible that the species so named is the same as that to which later Sars gave an identical name, but it is probable that it is not. The name Alona verrucosa Lutz must be regarded as being a nomen dubium, for its interpretation is likely to differ from one author to another. These differences of opinion are likely to give rise to considerable confusion, unless the Commission intervenes, since the name verrucosa is likely to be applied by some authors to the common species with which the present application is concerned (i.e. to verrucosa Sars) though with Lutz treated as the author, while other authors may be expected to apply what they consider to be the next junior synonym to Sars’ species. 4. There are two nominal species which were described prior to the publication of the name A. verrucosa Sars, which it is possible are the same as Sars’ species. These are: (1) Alona pulchra Hellich, 1874 (: 215, 219) and (2) Alona tuberculata Hudendorf, 1876 (: 54, pl. H, fig. 6). The second of these names need not detain us, for it is invalid, being a junior homonym of Alona tuberculatus Kurz 1874 (itself, a subjective junior synonym of Alona guttata Sars, 1862). The nominal species Alona pulchra Hellich is of uncertain identity. Some of the taxa referred to this species show strong resemblances to verrucosa Sar, but Brehm (1933a) has pointed out that Hellich’s species is in reality quite distinct. Thus, the name Alona pulchra Hellich must be regarded as a nomen dubium and one moreover which, unless suppressed by the Commission, is likely to give rise to confusion through being applied to the Sars’ verrucosa by those authors who reject Sars’ name as a junior homonym of verrucosa Lutz. 5. Another name which might be applied to verrucosa Sars by authors who reject that name as a junior homonym of verrucosa Lutz, is alonopsiformis Brehm, 1933, as published in the combination Alona alonopsiformis. Brehm himself (1937) considers this to be identical with Alona verrucosa Sars. 6. A further difficulty and source of possible confusion arises from the fact that in 1905 Daday established a nominal species Alona anodonta, which it is possible is identical with Alona verrucosa Sars. However, according to Daday, his species lacks the teeth on the labrum which is one of the distinguishing features of verrucosa Sars. The question whether these two nominal species represent the same taxon is thus very much a matter of opinion. Brehm (1933a; 1937), for example, does not identify these nominal species with one another. 7. It will be seen, therefore, that, if the name Alona verrucosa Lutz were to be permitted to retain its status as an available name, the species now known as Alona verrucosa Sars, 1901, might, according to the subjective taxonomic judgments by individual workers, appear in the literature under any one of no less than four following specific 368 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS names: (1) verrucosa Lutz, 1879; (2) anodonta Daday, 1905; (3) alonopsiformis Brehm, 1933; or even (4) pulchra Hellich, 1874. If, on the other hand the two nomina dubia here in question, namely (a) pulchra Hellich and (b) verrucosa Lutz, were to be suppressed by the Commission under its Plenary Powers, all possible source of con- fusion would be removed. So far, the species described by Sars as verrucosa has been known only by that name and no confusion exists, but, as has been shown, that name at present possesses no solid legal foundation. It is to provide that name with such a foundation and to prevent the confusion which would arise if an attempt were to be made to reject it on any of the grounds described above that the present application is submitted to the Commission. 8. For the sake of completeness it would be helpful if, when dealing with the present application, the Commission were at the same time to place on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology the name Alona Baird, 1843 (Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. 11 : 92) that being the name of the genus to which the species discussed in the present application are referred. The genus Alona Baird is commonly treated as being typified by the nominal species Lynceus quadrangularis Miiller (O.F.), 1785 (: 199, pl. TX, figs. 1—3) and it has sometimes been suggested that this species was actually so selected by Lilljeborg (1900, Cladocera Sueciae : 446, footnote). Reference to Lilljeborg’s work shows, how- ever, that “‘ rigidly construed ”’ (as required by Rule (g) in Article 30 of the Régles) Lilljeborg did not select the above to be the type species of Alona Baird, all that he did being to cite it “‘als ein typischer Vettreter ’’ of the genus. I have been unable to trace in the literature any valid type selection for the genus Alona Baird and Dr. J. P. Harding (British Museum (Natural History), London), whom I have consulted, informs me that he also is unaware of any such selection. On his suggestion and in order to bring this issue to a close I now here select the nominal species Lynceus quadrangularis Miiller (O.F.), 1785, to be the type species of the genus Alona Baird. 9. In 1860 (: 221, pl. VIII, fig. 59) Leydig published the name Lynceus quadrangularis as the name for an entirely different species from that to which this name had been given by Miiller in 1785. Fourteen years later Kurz in 1874 established the nominal genus Leydigia (: 57) and designated Lynceus quadrangularis Leydig, 1860, as type species. As already noted, that specific name is a junior primary homonym of the name Lynceus quadrangularis Miiller, 1785, and is therefore invalid. This nominal, species was re-named Alona leydigi by Schédler in 1863 (: 27). I am informed by the Secretary to the Commission that under a recent decision embodied in Declaration 21 (now in the press!) the Commission has ruled that, where one of two or more objectively 1 The Declaration here referred to was published on 19th June, 1956 (Ops. Decls. int, Comm. zool, Nomencl. 12 : i-viii). OPINION 532 ; 369 identical nominal species is designated, indicated or selected as the type species of a genus, that genus shall be cited as having as its type species the oldest established of the nominal species concerned. Since the nominal species Lynceus quadrangularis Leydig, 1860, and Alona leydigi Schédler, 1863, are objectively identical with one another (Schédler’s name /eydigi having been published as a substitute for the invalid name quadrangularis Leydig), it follows that under the Declaration referred to above it is the nominal species Alona leydigi Schédler, 1863, and not the nominal species Lynceus quadrangularis Leydig, 1860, which is to be treated as being the type species of Leydigia Kurz, 1874. It is recommended that the present opportunity should be taken to place the names Leydigia Kurz and leydigi Schédler on the Official Lists of valid generic and specific names respectively and the name quadrangularis Leydig on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology. In order fully to cover all aspects of the present case it would be desirable also that the generic name Lynceus Miiller (O.F.), 1776 (Zool. dan. Prodr. : xxvii, 199) (Class Crustacea, Order Conchostraca) should be placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Lynceus brachyurus Miiller (O.F.), 1776 (ibid. : 199) as type species by selection by Latreille, 1810 (Consid. gén. Ordre nat. Anim. Classes Arachn. Crust. Ins. : 421, 91). At the same time the specific name brachyurus Miiller, 1776, as published in the above combination, should be placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology. Finally, the name Lynceus Gray (J.E.), 1821 (London med. Repository 15 : 302) (Class Mammalia), should, as a junior homonym of Lynceus Miiller (O.F.), 1776, be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology. 10. Neither the generic name Alona Baird nor the name Leydigia Kurz has been taken as the base for a family-group name. No family- group-name problem therefore arises, so far as the names of genera of the Cladocera dealt with in the present application are concerned. The generic name Lynceus Miller, 1776 (Order Conchostraca) was, however, taken as the base for the name of a family-group taxon by Sayce (O.A.), in 1902 (Proc. Roy. Soc. Victoria (n.s.) 15 : 257). The family-group name LYNCEIDAE Sayce, 1902, should now be placed on the Official List. : 11. For reasons explained above, I ask the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature :— (1) to use its Plenary Powers to suppress :— (a) the under-mentioned specific name for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy : verrucosa Lutz, 1879, as published in the combination Alona verrucosa ; 370 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (b) the under-mentioned specific name for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homony- my : pulchra Hellich, 1874, as published in the combina- tion Alona pulchra ; (2) to place the under-mentioned generic names on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology :— (a) Alona Baird, 1843 (gender: feminine) (type species, by selection in paragraph 8 of the present application : Lynceus quadrangularis Miller (O.F.), 1785) (Class Crustacea, Order Cladocera) ; (b) Leydigia Kurz, 1874 (gender: feminine) (type species by original designation of Lynceus quadrangularis Leydig, 1860, and through Declaration 21: Alona _ leydigi Schédler, 1863 (a substitute nominal species for Lynceus quadrangularis Leydig, 1860, the name of which is invalid as a junior primary homonym of Lynceus quadrangularis Miller (O.F.), 1785)) (Class Crustacea, Order Cladocera) ; (c) Lynceus Miiller (O.F.), 1776 (gender: masculine) (type species, by selection by Latreille (1810): Lynceus brachyurus Miller (O.F.), 1776) (Class Crustacea, Order Conchostraca) ; (3) to place the under-mentioned specific names on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology :— (a) verrucosa Sars, 1901, as published in the combination Alona verrucosa, as validated under the Plenary Powers under (1)(a) above ; (b) rectangula Sars, 1862, as published in the combination Alona rectangula ; (c) quadrangularis Miller (O.F.), 1785, as published in the combination Lynceus quadrangularis (specific name of type species of Alona Baird, 1843) ; (d) leydigi Schédler, 1863, as published in the combination Alona leydigi (specific name of type species of Leydigia Kurz, 1874) ; (e) brachyurus Miiller (O.F.), 1776, as published in the com- bination Lynceus brachyurus (specific name of type species of Lynceus Miiller (O.F.), 1776) ; (4) to place the under-mentioned generic name on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology : Lynceus Gray (J.E.), 1821 (a junior homonym of Lynceus Miller (O.F.), 1776) ; OPINION 532 Sill (5S) to place the under-mentioned specific manes on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology :— (a) the two specific names specified in (1) above, as there respectively suppressed under the Plenary Powers ; (b) tuberculata Hudendorff, 1876, as published in the com- bination Alona tuberculata (a junior primary homonym of tuberculata Kurz, 1874, as published in the combina- tion Alona tuberculata) ; (c) quadrangularis Leydig, 1860, as published in the combina- tion Lynceus quadrangularis (a junior primary homonym of quadrangularis Miiller (O.F.), 1785, as published in the combination Lynceus quadrangularis) ; (6) to place the under-mentioned family-group name on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology : LYNCEIDAE Sayce (O.A.), 1902 (type genus : Lynceus Miiller (O.F.), 1776). References : Brehm, V., 1933 Zool. Anz. 104 : 79 Brehm, V., id., 1933a “‘ Die Cladoceren der Deutschen Limnologischen Sunda-Expedition”’. Arch. f. Hydrobiol., Suppl. 11 : 631—771 Brehm, V., id., 1937 ‘‘ Brasilianische Cladoceren’’. Int. Rev. Ges. Hydrobiol. Plankt. 35 : 497—514 Daday, E., 1905 “‘ Untersuchungen tiber die Siisswasser-Mikrofauna Paraguays ’’. Zoologica 44 Hellich, B., 1874, “‘ Uber die Cladocerenfauna B6hmens”’. SitzBer. K. Béhm. Ges. d. Wissenschaften 1874 ; 215—219 Hudendorff, A., 1876 “‘ Beitrige zur Kenntnisse der Siisswasser Cladoceren ”’ Bull. Soc. imp. Nat. Moscou 51 (No. 1) : 54, pl. II, fig. 6 Jenkin, P. M., 1934 “* Reports on the Percy Sladen Expedition to some Rift Valley Lakes in Kenya in 1929,—VI. Cladocera from the Rift Valley Lakes in Kenya”’. Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. (10) 13 : 281—308 Kurz, W., 1874 ‘‘ Dodekas neuer Cladoceren nebst einer kurzen Ubersicht der Cladocerenfauna Boéhmens’”’. SitzBer. K. Akad. Wiss. Wien, Math. Naturw. KI. 70 (No. 1) : 57 Leydig, F., 1860 Naturgeschichte der Daphniden : 221, pl. VIII, fig. 59 Lutz, A., 1879 “‘ Untersuch iiber die Cladoceren der Umbegung von Bern”. Mitt. nat. Ges. Bern. 1879 : 38—54 372 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Matile, P., 1890 “‘ Die Cladoceren der Umgegend von Moskau ”’. Bull. Soc. imp. Nat. Moscou (n.s.) 4 : 148 Sars, G. O., 1862 “‘ Over de i Omegnen af Christiania forekommenda Cladoceren ”’ Forh. Vidensk.-Selsk. Kristiania 1861 : 287 , id., 1901 “* Contributions to the knowledge of the Fresh-. water Entomostraca of South Ametica, as shown by artificial hatching from dried material’. Arch. Math. Naturv. Krist. 23 (No. 3): 1—102 .. Schédler, J. E., 1863 Neue Beitrdége zur Naturgeschichte der Cladoceren : DE Il. THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application: Upon the receipt of Mr. Johnson’s preliminary enquiry the question of the possible validation under the Plenary Powers of the specific name verrucosa Sars, 1901, as published in the combination Alona verrucosa (Class Crustacea, Order Cladocera), was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 840. 3. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 31st May 1956 and was published on 24th August of the same year in Double-Part 7/8 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Johnson, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12. : 200—205). 4, Issue of Public Notices: Under the revised procedures 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 24th August 1956 (a) in Double-Part 7/8 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Mr. Johnson’s application was published) and (b) to the other pre- scribed serial publications. In addition such Notice was given to four general zoological serial publications. ae ee OPINION 532 373 5. No Objection Received : No objection to the action proposed in the present case was received from any source. TI. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 6. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(57)28: On 15th March 1957 a Voting Paper (V.P.(57)28) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “‘ the proposal relating to the specific name verrucosa Sars, 1901, as published in the combination Alona verrucosa, as set out in Points (1) to (6) in paragraph 11 on pages 203—204 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature’? i.e. in the paragraph numbered as above in the paper 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 15th June 1957. 8. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)28: At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)28 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following twenty- two (22) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Mayr; Vokes; Hering; Boschma; Lemche; Riley ; Prantl ; Holthuis; Dymond; Esaki; Jaczewski; do Amaral; Key; Bonnet; Hemming; Mertens ; Tortonese ; Cabrera ; Kihnelt ; Stoll; Bradley (J.C.) ; Sylvester-Bradley ; 374 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS (b) Negative Votes, one (1): Bodenheimer ; (c) Voting Papers not returned, two (2) : Hank6 ; Miller. 9. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 16th June 1957, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57)28, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 8 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. 10. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Cpinion ”’: On 28th April 1958 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.(57)28. 11. Original References for Generic and Specific Names: 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 :— Alona Baird, 1843, Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. 11 : 92 brachyurus, Lynceus, Miller (O.F.), 1776, Zool. dan. Prodr. : 199 leydigi, Alona, Schédler, 1863, Neue Beitr. Naturgesch. Cladoc.: 27 * After the close of the Prescribed Voting Period a late affirmative vote was received from Commissioner Miller. OPINION 532 375 Leydigia Kurz, 1874, SitzBer. Kais. Akad. Wiss. Wien (Math. Nat. Cl.) 70 (No. 1) : 57 Lynceus Miller (O.F.), 1776, Zool. dan. Prodr. : xxvii, 199 Lynceus Gray (J.E.), 1821, London med. Reposit. 15 : 302 pulchra, Alona, Hellich, 1874, SitzBer. K6énigl.-béhm. Ges. Wiss. 1874 : 215, 219 quadrangularis, Lynceus, Miller (O.F.), 1785, Zool. dan. Prodr. : 72, 199, pl. IX, figs. 1—3 quadrangularis, Lynceus, Leydig, 1860, Naturgesch. Daphniden : 2 pk VIN, fig. 59 rectangula, Alona, Sars, 1862, Forh. Vidensk.-Selsk. Christiania 1861 : 278 tuberculata, Alona, Hudendorf, 1876, Bull. Soc. imp. Nat. Moscou 51 (No. 1) : 54, pl. U, fig. 6 _ verrucosa, Alona, Lutz, 1879, SitzBer. naturf. Ges. Leipsig 5 : 44 verrucosa, Alona, Sars, 1901, Arch. Math. Naturvidensk. 23 (No. 3): 56, pl. IX, figs. 7, 7a _ 12%. References for Selections of Type Species of Nominal Genera: The following are the references for selections of type species for nominal genera specified in the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— For Alona Baird, Johnson (D.S.), 1956, Bull. zool. 1843 Nomencl. 12 : 202 For Lynceus Miiller _—Latreille, 1810, Consid. gén. Anim. (O.F.), 1776 Crust. Arach. Ins. : 421, 91 13. References for Family-Group-Names: The following is the reference for the family-group name placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— LYNCEIDAE Sayce (O.A.), 1902, Proc. roy. Soc. Victoria (n.s.) 15 : 257 376 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 14. Compliance with Prescribed Procedures: The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Com- mission 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. “ Opinion’? Number: The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Five Hundred and Thirty-Two (532) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twenty-Eighth day of April, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Eight. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING © 1958. THE INTERNATIONAL TRUST FOR ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Printed in England by METCALFE & Cooper LimITED, 10-24 Scrutton St., London E C2 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, c.M.G., C.B.E. VOLUME 19. Part 22. Pp. 377—394 OPINION 533 Designation under the Plenary Powers of a type species for the genus Candona Baird, [1846], in harmony with accustomed usage and validation under the same Powers to Herpetocypris of the generic name Erpetocypris Brady & Norman, 1889 (Class Crustacea, Order Ostracoda) ZRMHSON SS >: 4 as (f & \\ 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 1958 Price Twelve Shillings (All rights reserved) Issued 29th October, 1958 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN OPINION 533 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) DE. ae 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 (University of Tulane, Department of Geology, New Orleans, Louisiana, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezégazdasdgi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th August 1953) Dr. Norman R. StToLi (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) 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) eee 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) OPINION 533 DESIGNATION UNDER THE PLENARY POWERS OF A TYPE SPECIES FOR THE GENUS “‘ CANDONA ” BAIRD, [1846], IN HARMONY WITH ACCUSTOMED USAGE AND VALIDATION UNDER THE SAME POWERS TO ‘“HERPETOCYPRIS ” OF THE GENERIC NAME “‘ERPETOCYPRIS” BRADY & NORMAN, 1889 (CLASS CRUSTACEA, ORDER OSTRACODA) RULING :—(1) The following action is hereby taken under the Plenary Powers :— (a) All selections of type species for the nominal genus Candona Baird, [1846] (Class Crustacea, Order Ostracoda), made prior to the present Ruling are hereby set aside and the nominal species Cypris candida Miiller (O.F.), 1776, is hereby designated to be the type species of the above genus ; (b) The Original Spelling Erpetocypris Brady & Norman, 1889, is hereby suppressed for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy and the emendation of that name to Herpetocypris is hereby validated. (2) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) Candona Baird, [1846] (gender: feminine) (type species, by designation under the Plenary Powers in (1)(a) above: Cypris candida Miller (O.F.), 1776) (Name No. 1320) ; (b) Herpetocypris (emendation under the Plenary Powers in (1)(b) above of Erpetocypris) Brady & Norman, CARTY LIOVAT was 380 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 1889 (gender : feminine) (type species, by original designation : Cypris reptans Baird, [1836]) (Name No. 1321) ; (c) Typhlocypris Vejdovsky, 1882 (gender: feminine) (type species, by monotypy: Cypris eremita Vejdovsky, 1880) (for use by any specialist who may regard Typhlocypris Vejdovsky, 1882, as representing a taxon distinct from Candona Baird, [1846]) (Name No. 1322). (3) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) candida Miiller (O.F.), 1776, as published in the combination Cypris candida (specific name of type species of Candona Baird, [1846]) (Name No. 1587) ; (b) reptans Baird, [1836], as published in the combina- tion Cypris reptans (specific name of type species of Herpetocypris Brady & Norman, 1889) (Name No. 1588) ; (c) eremita Vejdovsky, 1880, as published in the combination Cypris eremita (specific name of type species of Typhlocypris Vejdovsky, 1882) (Name No. 1589). (4) The under-mentioned family-group names are hereby placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) CANDONINAE Kaufmann, 1900 (type genus Candona Baird, [1846]) (Name No. 250) ; (b) HERPETOCYPRIDINAE Kaufmann, 1900 (type genus : Herpetocypris Brady & Norman, 1889) (Name No. 251). OPINION 533 381 (5) The under-mentioned generic name is hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Number 1221:— Erpetocypris Brady & Norman, 1889 (an Original Spelling for Herpetocypris, suppressed under the Plenary Powers in (1)(b) above for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy). I. THE STATEMENT OF THE CASE On 22nd March 1956 there was received in the Office of the Commission a preliminary application for the use by the Commission of the Plenary Powers for the purpose of designating a type species in harmony with accustomed usage for the genus Candona Baird, [1846] (Class Crustacea, Order Ostracoda) prepared by Mr. P. C. Sylvester-Bradley (University of Sheffield, England, and then of the University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, U.S.A.). After an exchange of corfespondence between the Secretary and the applicant which led to the clarification of certain matters dealt with in this case, the application was sub- mitted to the Commission in final form by Mr. Sylvester-Bradley on 2nd May 1956. The revised application, so submitted, was as follows :— Proposed use of the Plenary Powers to designate for the genus ‘“*Candona’’ Baird, [1846], a type species in harmony with accustomed usage and validation of emendation to ‘‘ Herpetocypris ”’ of the generic name ‘‘ Erpetocypris’’ Brady & Norman, 1899 (Class Crustacea, Order Ostracoda) By P. C. SYLVESTER-BRADLEY (University of Sheffield, England, and University of Kansas, U.S.A.) Howe (1955 : 26) has recently discovered and reported an early type selection of the genus Candona Baird, [1846], which has hitherto been 382 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS universally overlooked and which, if now brought into force, as it must be by the strict application of the Régles would (a) alter the meaning of the genus Candona, which for a hundred years has stood for one of the most abundant and cosmopolitan of all fresh-water Ostracod genera ; and (b) lead to the suppression of another very well-known fresh-water genus, Erpetocypris Brady and Norman, 1889. The purpose of the present application is to suppress this newly- discovered type selection so that these two well-known generic names can be retained with their long accustomed meaning. 2. The generic name Candona was proposed by Baird (1846a : 152, 153) for four species and one nomen nudum. ‘The four species in question were Cypris candida Miller (O.F.), 1776 (: 199) ;_ C. reptans Baird, [1836] (: 99) ; C. hispida Baird, 1836; and C. detecta Miiller (O.F.), 1776. . 3. One of these species (Cypris reptans Baird, [1836]) was selected by Baird (1846b : 414) as type species. Baird’s selection has been entirely overlooked, however, until its recent discovery by Howe (1955 : 26) who states: “ Baird’s designation of a genotype was probably the first such designation in the field of ostracods, and under the Rules should hold ”’. 4. Nevertheless, the genus Candona has never been interpreted in the light of Baird’s type-selection, but by that of Brady and Norman (1889 : 98) who selected Cypris candida Miller as type species. With this interpretation the genus has become perhaps the best known and most abundant and widely distributed of all fresh-water Ostracods. G. W. Miller (1912) in his comprehensive work on the Ostracoda of the World describes forty-two species of Candona, and lists another fourteen species under the name of the genus, while Klie (1938) described forty-one species and named varieties from Germany alone. 5. Candona was made type genus of the nominal family-group taxon CANDONINAE almost simultaneously by Kaufmann (1900 : 107, 108), Miller (1900 : 12, 13) and Daday (1900 : 205). 6. At the same time as they selected Cypris candida as type species of Candona, Brady and Norman (1889 : 84) erected a new genus, Erpetocypris, with Cypris reptans Baird as type species. Sars (1890 : 34) amended the spelling of the name to Herpetocypris and under one spelling or the other the genus has become very well known. The type species itself has been recorded from Europe, North Africa, North America, South America, Persia and Japan, and is also a known fossil. OPINION 533 383 7. Herpetocypris was made type genus of the nominal family-group taxon HERPETOCYPRIDINAE by Kaufmann (1900 : 105). 8. If Howe’s discovery of Baird’s selection of Cypris reptans as type species of Candona were to be brought into action, the name would have to be transferred from the large group of species which for the last hundred years it has signified, and take the place of Herpetocypris, which would disappear as an objective synonym. At the same time another name would need to be found for the genus at present known as Candona. Howe (1955:71) suggests Typhlocypris Vejdovsky (1882 : 64) (type species Cypris eremita Vejdovsky, 1800:L), a name which has for the last fifty years been abandoned as a junior subjective synonym of Candona. (In this connection it must be noted that Neave (S.A.), 1940 (Nomencl. zool. 4 : 601) was in error in citing the name Typhlocypris Vejdovsky as having been first published in 1880 in the paper ‘‘Opuvodu fauny studnickne, Prague, xlix”’. Reference to this paper which was published in the volume for 1880 of the Jahresb. K. béhn. Ges. Wiss. (: XLIX-LVI) shows that the name Typhlocypris did not appear in it.) The family-group names would be affected in the same manner. These nomenclatorial changes would cause disastrous confusion. 9. It is therefore recommended that the International Commission use its Plenary Powers to direct that all type selections made previous to that of Brady and Norman (1889) in respect of the genus Candona should be regarded as invalid, thus preserving for the name in question as well as for the name Herpetocypris their accustomed meaning. 10. At the same time it is desirable that the Commission should stabilize the spelling of the name Herpetocypris. Within the meaning of the definitions introduced at Copenhagen, Erpetocypris is a Valid Original Spelling and Herpetocypris is an Invalid Emendation. The emendation was made first by Sars (1890 : 34) without comment. Clause (1893 : 198, footnote) makes the same emendation, and Brady and Norman themselves, in the second part of their work, say “In Part I, for Erpetocypris read partim Herpetocypris”’ (Brady and Norman, 1896 : 772, footnote). Since that time both spellings have been in use, but Herpetocypris has been the more popular. All the main Ostracod handbooks use Herpetocypris (e.g. Miller, 1912; Sars, 1925—1928 ; Klie, 1938) and in the author’s card index there are five times the number of papers which use Herpetocypris to those which use the original spelling. It therefore seems advisable to ask the Commission, in the interests of stability, to use their Plenary Powers to validate the emendation to Herpetocypris. It will be seen from the Appendix that a majority of the taxonomists who support this application so far as it refers to the type species of Candona also support the recommendation to validate the spelling Herpetocypris. The feeling expressed is not strong, however, and there is reason in the arguments put forward by Dr. Oertli (Appendix, paragraph (2)(c)) 384 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS for the retention of Erpetocypris. There are two important points on which all who have been consulted seem to agree :— (1) that a definite official pronouncement should be made authorizing one spelling or the other and thus ending any uncertainty as to which name should be used in the future ; preference as to which of the two spellings should be authorized is of secondary importance ; (2) that the family name based on the taxon should be spelled in the same way as the genus; if Erpetocypris were to be chosen as the authorized spelling of the generic name, this would necessitate use of the Plenary Powers for the suppression of the family group name, HERPETOCYPRIDINAE, Kaufmann, 1900, in favour of a new name, ERPETOCYPRIDINAE, since Herpetocypris would be an objective synonym of Erpetocypris, and as such by the provisions affecting family-group names made at Copenhagen, would be an available name for the type-genus of a family-group name ; HERPETOCYPRININAE would thus be a senior objective synonyn of ERPETOCYPRIDINAE. 11. Accordingly the International Commission is requested :— (1) to use its Plenary Powers (a) to set aside all type-selections for the genus Candona Baird, [1846], made prior to the ruling now asked for, and having done so, to designate Cypris candida Miiller (O.F.), 1776, to be the type species of the foregoing genus and (b) to validate the currently accepted emendation Herpetocypris for the generic name Erpetocypris Brady and Norman, 1889 ; (2) to place the following names on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology :— (a) Candona Baird, [1846], (gender : feminine) (type species by designation under the Plenary Powers under (1)(b) above : Cypris candida Miiller (O.F.), 1776) ; (b) Herpetocypris (emend. of Erpetocypris) Brady and Norman, 1889 (gender: feminine) (type species, by original designation : Cypris reptans Baird, [1836]) ; (c) Typhlocypris Vejdovsky, 1882 (gender: feminine) (type species, by monotypy: Cypris eremita Vejdovsky, 1880) (for use by any specialist who may regard Typhlocypris as representing a taxon distinct from Candona Baird, [1846]) ; (3) to place the following specific names on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology :— (a) candida Miller (O.F.), 1776, as published in the combination Cypris candida (specific name of type species of Candona Baird, [1846]) ; OPINION 533 385 (b) reptans Baird, [1836], as published in the combination Cypris reptans (specific name of type species of Herpetocypris Brady and Norman, 1889) ; (c) eremita Vejdovsky, as published in the combination Cypris eremita (specific name of type species of Typhlocypris Vejdovsky, 1882) ; (4) to place the following names on the Official List of Family- Group Names in Zoology :— (a) CANDONINAE Kaufmann, 1900 (type genus: Candona Baird, [1846]) ; (b) HERPETOCYPRIDINAE Kaufmann, 1900 (type genus: Herpetocypris Brady and Norman, 1889) ; (5) to place the name Erpetocypris Brady and Norman, 1889 (an original spelling suppressed under the Plenary Powers under (1)(b) above) on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology for the purposes of the Law of Priority, but not for those of the Law of Homonymy. References : Baird, W., 1836 “‘ List of Entomostraca found in Berwickshire ”’ Hist. Berwickshire nat. Club. 1(3) : 95—100, pl. 3. 1835 [1836] , 1846a “‘ Arrangement of the British Entomostraca, with a list of species, particularly noticing those which have as yet been discovered within the bounds of the Club” Hist. Berwickshire nat. Club, 2(13) : 145—148. 1845 [1846] , 1846b “* Description of some new genera and species of British Entomostraca ’”’ Ann. Mag. nat. Hist (1) 17 : 410—416, pl. 9 Brady, G. S. & A. M. Norman, 1889—96 ‘“‘ A monograph of the marine and fresh-water Ostracoda of the North Atlantic and of North-western Europe, Part 1” Sci. Trans. roy. Dublin Soc. (2) 4 : 63—270, pls. 8—23 (1889) ; “‘ Part 2” ibid. (2) 5 : 621— 746, pls. 5|0—63 (1896) Claus, C., 1893 “‘ Beitrage zur Kenntniss der Stisswasser-Ostracoden. I.” Arbeit. Zool. Inst. Univ. Wien. 10 : 147—216, pls. 1—12 Daday, E., 1900 A Magyarorszagi Kagyldsrakok maganrajza. Ostracoda Hungarise, Budapest, 320 pp. Howe, H. V., 1955 “‘ Handbook of Ostracod Taxonomy ’’ Louisiana State Univ. Studies, Phys. Sci. Ser. No. 1 ; 386 pp. 386 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Kaufmann, A., 1900 “‘ Zur Systematik der Cypriden”’ Mitt. Naturf. Ges. Bern, 1900 : 103—109 Klie, W., 1938 Die Tierwelt Deutschlands, Teil 34. Krebstiere oder Crustacea III. Ostracoda, Muschelkrebse, 230 pp. Miiller, G. W., 1900 ‘‘ Deutschlands Siisswasser-Ostracoden ”’ Zoologica (Stuttgart) 30 pp. 1—112, pls. 1—21 , 1912, Das Tierreich Lief 31. Ostracoda. 33 + 434 pp. Miller, O. F., 1776 Zoologiae Danicae Prodromus seu Animalium Daniae et Norvegiae Indigenarum Characteres, Nomina et Synonyma Imprimis Popularium. 32 +- 282 pp. Sars, G. O., 1890 ‘‘On some freshwater Ostracoda and Copepoda raised from dried Australian mud” Forh. Vidensk.-Selsk. Christiana, 1889, No. 8, pp. 1—79, pls. 1—8 , 1922 —28 ‘* An account of the Crustacea of Norway ”’ Vol. 9. Ostracoda. 227 pp. 119 pls. Vejdovsky, F., 1880 ‘‘ Druha Slavnostni Prednadska. O Puvodu Fauny Studniéné”’ Jber. Béhm. Ges. Wiss. 1880 : XLIX—LVI , 1882 “* Thierische Organismen Brunnenwasser von Prag ”’ 70 pp. 8 pls. APPENDIX Support for and Opposition to the foregoing Application (1) The following taxonomists support the foregoing application in its entirety :— (a) Dr. Olaf Elofson, Institute of Zoology, Uppsala, Sweden : I support the proposal in its entirety (8th November 1955) ; (b) Dr. J. P. Harding, British Museum (Natural History) : I am prepared to support this application in its entirety. I regard it as essential that the proposal with regard to Candona be accepted. With regard to the choice between the spellings Erpetocypris and Herpetocypris 1 am relatively indifferent, but prefer the latter and therefore support the present applica- tion (13th October 1955) ; (c) Dr. E. J. Iles, University of Manchester, England : I unreservedly support the application that the name Candona should be validated for the genus with Cypris candida Miller as type species. The changes which would result in the taxonomic meaning of the name as a result of the OPINION 533 387 strict application of the rules of priority, would lead to endless confusion. There seems to be less ground for validation of the spelling Herpetocypris rather than Erpetocypris which has priority. Though both derivations of the roots would seem to be acceptable, Herpetocypris would seem to more nearly follow usual practice. For that reason I support the application that the emended spelling Herpetocypris should be validated (21st October 1955) ; (d) Dr. Robert V. Kesling, Museum of Paleontology, University of Michigan, U.S.A. : I am particularly anxious that the proposal be approved, inasmuch as I have a paper in process on the morphology and dimorphism in a species that belongs in the genus Candona, as commonly accepted. If there is sufficient evidence to determine the original author of CANDONINAE, this information might well be included in the proposal. I support this proposal enthusiastically (24th September 1955) ; (ec) Dr. A. J. Key, Geological Institut, Rijksuniversiteit van Utrecht, Netherlands : I declare that I quite agree to all details within the application of Prof. Dr. P. C. Sylvester-Bradley, to designate Cypris candida O. F. Miller as the type species of the ostracode genus Candona Baird, 1845. As argued by Prof. Sylvester-Bradley, recognition of Baird’s type selection would cause an endless confusion, because it is concerned with two of the best known freshwater ostracode genera, i.e. Candona and Herpetocypris. As to the spelling of the generic name Erpetocypris Brady and Norman, 1889, I prefer the currently accepted spelling Herpetocypris (26th September 1955) ; (f) Dom Remacle Rome, Louvain, Belgium (23rd September 1955) ; (g) Prof. Dr. Giuliano Ruggieri, University of Bologna, Italy (26th October 1955) ; (h) Dr. Robert H. Shaver, University of Mississippi, U.S.A. : I should like to go on record entirely in support of your proposals as a result of conditions as stated (22nd September 11955): (2) The following taxonomists support the foregoing application in all respects except for the suppression of the spelling Erpetocypris in favour of Herpetocypris, which they oppose :— (a) Dr. N. Grekoff, Institut Frangais du Pétrole, Rueil-Malmaison, France : D’accord pour le génotype de Candona, pour lequel vous proposez d’indiquer lespéce candida, admis par lusage. 388 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Je crois quil est préférable de garder Erpetocypris au lieu d’Herpetocypris, mais ici, je m’inclinerai devant V’avis de la majorité des spécialistes de la question. La difficulté serait de trouver un nom de sous-famille (? Herpetocypridinae ou Erpetocypridinae). Cependant, avec Z. Bronstein (1947, p. 143) je place le genre Erpetocypris dans le sous-famille des Cypridinae G. W. Miiller, 1894, Candona étant le type de la sous-famille Candoninae Kaufmann 1900 (14th October IS5)) 8 (b) Dr. Ivar Hessland, Geologiska Institutet, Stockholms Hégskala, Sweden : As a matter of principle I am for the original spelling of Herpetocypris, i.e. Erpetocypris. 1 am very much against suppression of designations of type species, but may agree to your proposal in this particular case, viz. with regard to Candona (6th October 1955) ; (c) Dr. H. Oertli, Bern, Switzerland : I fully support the proposal clearing the position and validity of Candona. On the other hand, I should prefer the spelling Erpetocypris. ‘This, the correct spelling, has not been forgotten for dozens of years, but has been applied by about all who were conscious of the differences between Herpetocypris and Erpetocypris. 1 think that most who wrote Herpetocypris have taken this name over from other authors, 1.e., without going to the “‘source’”’. In the last few years more and more Erpetocypris has been used. I should prefer therefore not to stop this development in applying the right name, but to declare it officially as the preferable one (24th September 1955) (3) Dr. Henry V. Howe, Louisiana State University, U.S.A., while not wishing to make formal opposition to the application, feels that ‘* Baird’s designation should stand as a clear, definite landmark in the history of ostracod research, as Baird was the first man in the field to realize the importance of precise definition (2nd October 1955)”. Dr. F. M. Swain, University of Minnesota, U.S.A., agrees with Dr. Howe. THE SUBSEQUENT HISTORY OF THE CASE 2. Registration of the present application : Upon the receipt of Mr. Sylvester-Bradley’s preliminary enquiry the question of OPINION 533 389 the designation of a type species in harmony with accustomed usage for the genus Candona Baird, [1846] (Class Crustacea, Order Ostracoda) was allotted the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 1022. 3. Publication of the present application : The present applica- tion was sent to the printer on 9th May 1956 and was published on 24th August of that year in Double-Part 7/8 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (Sylvester-Bradley, 1956, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 12. : 206—212). 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 24th August 1956 (a) in Double-Part 7/8 of Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature (the Part in which Mr. Sylvester-Bradley’s application was published) and (b) to the other prescribed serial publications. In addition such Notice was given to four general zoological serial publications. 5. Comments received: As reference to the application reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Opinion will show, the views of thirteen specialists were obtained on the present case before the submission by Mr. Sylvester-Bradley of his application to the Commission. Of these, eleven supported the proposals submitted in regard to the name Candona. Of these eleven specialists, three, however, supported the retention of the original spelling Erpetocypris as against the emendation Herpetocypris. The remaining two specialists out of the thirteen referred to above were opposed to the proposals relating to the name Candona. After the publication of the present application cwo communications were received, one signed by three German specialists who supported the proposals submitted in this case, except that regarding the acceptance of the emendation Herpetocypris, the other, also from a German specialist, giving full support to all the proposals submitted. The comments 390 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS received from the thirteen specialists consulted by Mr. Sylvester- Bradley have been reproduced in full in the Appendix to his application. The documents containing the comments furnished by four German specialists after the publication of Mr. Sylvester- Bradley’s application are reproduced in the immediately following paragraphs. 6. Support received from G. Liittig, H. Hiltermann and B. Moos (Amt fiir Bodenforschung, Hannover, Germany) : On 21st January Dr. G. Liittig (Amt ftir Bodenforschung, Hannover, Germany) addressed the following letter to the Office of the Commission on behalf of himself and his colleagues, Dr. H. Hiltermann and Dr. B. Moos, of the same institution, in support of the present case :-— Mr. P. C. Sylvester-Bradley has directed some amendments con- cerning the generic names Candona and Herpetocypris. I herewith wish to express that I concur with those amendments but with the following exception :— The generic name Erpetocypris Brady & Norman, 1889, should be kept because the alteration of the transcription is no obligation. If numerous authors have chosen the mode of writing “ Herpetocypris ”’, it is partly due to the fact that they have not “‘ followed up the source ”’. Lately the use of the name Erpetocypris has been employed more frequently (Chapman, 1935 ; Beasley, 1945 ; Tressler, 1949 ; Pokorny, 1952; Triebel, 1953; Liittig, 1955). Therefore the popularity of the name Herpetocypris may be disputed. : 7. Support received from G. Hartmann (Museum der Stadt, Osnabriick, Germany) : On 14th February 1957 Dr. G. Hartmann (Museum der Stadt, Osnabriick, Germany) addressed to Mr. Sylvester-Bradley, the applicant in the present case, a letter in support of three applications recently published in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature. The letter in question was communicated to the Office of the Commission and the following extract is that relevant to the present case (Hartmann, 1957, Bull. zool. Nomencl. 13 : 104) :— With regard to your papers on Limnocythere, Candona and Conchoecia it is really lucky that you have reached such good conclusions OPINION 533 391 in these cases. I think it is best to stabilise the nomenclature of these genera in taking the usual form of the names. Candona : Candona and Herpetocypris are usual forms of writing. I agree with you and thank you very much for trying to clear the position and validity of Candona. It is very good too to know about the validity of Typholcypris. Nevertheless I do not think that a distinction between Candona and Typhlocypris is necessary. Ill. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 8. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(57)29: On 15th March 1957 a Voting Paper (V.P.(57)29) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or against, “the proposal relating to the generic name Candona Baird, [1846], and associated names, as set out in Points (1) to (5) in paragraph 11 on pages 208 to 209 in Volume 12 of the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature” [i.e. in the paragraph numbered as above in the paper reproduced in the first paragraph 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 15th June 1957. 10. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)29 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(57)29 was as follows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following twenty- three (23) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Mayr ; Vokes; Hering ; Boschma; Lemche; Boden- heimer ; Riley ; Prantl ; Holthuis; Dymond; Esaki ; 392 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Jaczewski ; do Amaral ; Bonnet ; Hemming ; Mertens ; Key ; Tortonese ; Cabrera; Kihnelt; Stoll; Bradley (J.C.) ; Sylvester-Bradley ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) Voting Papers not returned, two (2) : Hank6o ; Miller. 11. Declaration of Result of Vote: On 16th June 1957, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P.(57) 29, 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 April 1958 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.(57)29. 13. Original References for Generic and Specific Names : The following are the original references for the generic and specific 1 After the close of the Prescribed Voting Period a late vote was received from Commissioner Miller, who voted in favour of the proposals relating to the name Candona but against those relating to the emendation of the name Erpetocypris. OPINION 533 393 names placed on Official Lists and Official Indexes by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— candida, Cypris, Miller (O.F.), 1776, Zool. dan. Prodr. : 199 Candona Baird, [1846], Hist. Berwickshire Nat. Club 2(13) : 1 153) eremita, Cypris, Vejdovsky, 1880, Jber. béhm. Ges. Wiss. 1880 : L Erpetocypris (an Invalid Original Spelling for Herpetocypris Brady & Norman, 1889) Herpetocypris Brady & Norman, 1889, Sci. Trans. roy. Dublin Soc. (2) 4: 64 reptans, Cypris, Baird, [1836], Hist. Berwickshire Nat. Club 1(3) : 99 Typhlocypris Vejdovsky, 1882, Thierisch. Organism. Brunnen- wdsser : 64 14. Original References for Family-Group Names: The following are the original references for the family-group names placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology by the Ruling given in the present Opinion :— CANDONINAE Kaufman, 1900, Mitt. Naturf. Ges. Bern 1900 : 107, 108 HERPETOCYPRIDINAE Kaufman, 1900, Mitt. Naturf. Ges. Bern 1900 : 105 15. Compliance with Prescribed Procedures : 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. 394 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS 16. ‘* Opinion ’? Number : The present Opinion shall be known as Opinion Five Hundred and Thirty-Three (533) of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twenty-Ninth day of April, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Eight. : Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING © 1958. THE INTERNATIONAL TRUST FOR ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Printed in England by METCALFE & COOPER LIMITED, 10-24 Scrutton St., London E C2 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 19. Part 2. Pp. ()—(& DIRECTION 96 Determination of the relative priority to be accorded to certain specific names published in 1775 for taxa belonging to the Order Lepidoptera (Class Insecta) 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 1958 Price Nine Shillings and Sixpence (All rights reserved) Issued 16th May, 1958. INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE RULING GIVEN IN DIRECTION 96 A. The Officers of the Commission Honorary Life President : Dr. Karl JonDAN (British Museum (Natural History), Zoological Museum, Tring, Herts, Engiand) 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 CasrerA (La Plata, Upeentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) Dr. Ea LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th — July 194 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) (5th July 1950) Professor Erich Martin HERING (Zoologisches Museum der Humboldt-Universitat zu Berlin, Germany) (5th July 1959) 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 (University of Tulane, Department of Geology, New Orleans, : Louisiana, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) ; Professor Béla HANKO (Mezdgazdasdgi 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 University, Sheffield, England) (12th August 1953) — Dr. L. B. HoLttuuts (Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historie, Leiden, The Netherlands) (12th August 1953) Dr. K. 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) : Professor F. S. BODENHEIMER (The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel) (11th November ~ 54) Professor Ernst MAYR (Museum of Comparative Zoology at Harvard College, Cambridge, Massachusetts, U.S.A.) (4th December 1954) i Professor Enrico TORTONESE (Museo di Storia Naturale ‘“‘ G. Doria,” Genova, Italy) . (16th December 1954) DIRECTION 96 DETERMINATION OF THE RELATIVE PRIORITY TO BE ACCORDED TO CERTAIN SPECIFIC NAMES PUBLISHED IN 1775 FOR TAXA BELONGING TO THE ORDER LEPIDOPTERA (CLASS INSECTA) RULING :—(1) It is hereby directed that in accordance with the provisions of Opinion 516 the under-mentioned specific names published in 1775 for taxa belonging to the Order Lepidoptera (Class Insecta) are to take the relative priority specified below :— (a) the specific name circe Fabricius (J.C.), 1775, as published in the combination Papilio circe, to take priority over the specific name proserpina [Denis (M.) & Schiffermiiller (1.)], 1775, as published in the combination Papilio proserpina.; (b) the specific name pandora [Denis (M.) & Schiffer- miller (1.)], 1775, as published in the combination Papilio pandora, to take priority over the specific name maja Cramer (P.), [1775], as published in the combination Papilio maja ; (c) the specific name icarus Rottemburg (S.A.von), 1775, as published in the combination Papilio icarus, to take priority over the specific name icarus Cramer (P.), [1775], as published in the combination Papilio icarus. (2) The under-mentioned specific names are hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with the endorsements and with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) circe Fabricius (J.C.), 1775, as published in the combination Papilio circe, a specific name which SMITHSONIAN .. iy \ ow Lshrwfm (iv) OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS under (1)(a) above ranks for priority before the specific name proserpina [Denis (M.) & Schiffer- miiller (I.)], 1775, as published in the combination Papilio proserpina (specific name of type species of anes Fruhstorfer (H.), [1911]) (Name No. PSs) 8 (b) pandora [Denis (M.) & Schiffermiiller (1.)], 1775, as published in the combination Papilio pandora, a specific name which under (1)(b) above ranks for priority before the specific name maja Cramer (P.), [1775], as published in the com- bination Papilio maja (Name No. 1514) ; (c) icarus Rottemburg (S.A.von), 1775, as published in the combination Papilio icarus, a specific name which under (1)(c) above ranks for priority before the specific name icarus Cramer (P.), [1775], as published in the combination Papilio icarus (specific name of type species of Polyommatus Latreille, 1804‘) (Name No. 1515) ; (d) penelope Schaufuss (L.W.), 1870, as published in the combination Castnia penelope (Name No. 1516). (3) The under-mentioned generic names are hereby placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with the Name Numbers severally specified below :— (a) Brintesia Fruhstorfer (H.), [1911] (gender : feminine) (type species, by original designation : Papilio circe Fabricius (J.C.), 1775, a name which under (1) (a) above ranks for priority before the name Papilio proserpina [Denis (M.) & Schiffermiiller (I.)], 1775 (Name No. 1269) ; 1 The generic name Polyommatus Latreille, 1804, was placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology as Name No. 689 by the Ruling given in Opinion 270. DIRECTION 96 (v) (b) Pandoriana Warren (B.C.S.), 1942 (gender : femi- nine) (type species, by original designation : Papilio maja Cramer (P.), [1775], a name which under (1)(b) above ranks for priority below the name Papilio pandora [Denis (M.) & Schiffer- miller (1.)], 1775) (Name No. 1270). (4) The under-mentioned specific name is hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology with the Name No. 520 :— icarus Cramer (P.), [1775], as published in the com- bination Papilio icarus (a name which under (1)(c) above ranks for priority below the name icarus Rottemburg (S.A.von), 1775, as published in the combination Papilio icarus, and is therefore invalid as a junior homonym of that name). I. THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THE PRESENT ** DIRECTION ” The present Direction deals with a matter consequential upon the Ruling given in Opinion 5167. In that Opinion the Commission gave a Ruling under its Plenary Powers as to the relative precedence to be accorded to five works dealing with the Order Lepidoptera (Class Insecta) published in 1775 ; in the present Direction the Commission determined in the light of the Ruling given in Opinion 516 the relative precedence to be accorded to certain "Opinion 516 has been published in the immediately preceding Part of the present volume. (vi) OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS names published in one or other of the works referred to above. The decision embodied in the present Direction is based upon the following paper submitted to the Commission by the Secretary on 20th November 1957 :— Proposed addition to the ‘‘ Official List of Specific Names in Zoology ”’ of the specific names of three species of butterfly (Class Insecta, Order Lepidoptera), each of which was published in the year 1775, and matters incidental thereto 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 place on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology the specific names of three species of butterfly which were published in the year 1775, the status of which it has not hitherto been possible to determine owing to the existence of other names in other books also published in 1775 and the consequent doubts as to which of the names concerned should be given priority over the other. Now that proposals for determining the relative precedence to be accorded to the works concerned have at length been devised in consultation with specialists in this group and have been submitted to the Commission in a Report bearing the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 448 issued with Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(57)25?, the moment appears opportune for seeking a Ruling in the three cases now in question. Such a settlement is not only of importance to workers in the Lepidoptera but may be of wider interest also as illustrating the results to be expected from the practical application of the proposals submitted in the foregoing Report. One of the cases involved is of direct concern to the Commission, for it affects the specific name to be accepted for the type species of a genus, the name of which has already been placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology. The doubt which has hitherto existed as to the name which should be used for the species concerned has so far prevented the Commission from completing the action described above by placing the oldest available specific name for the species in question on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology. It is very desirable that this omission should be made good as soon as possible, in order that the requisite entry may be made on the above Official List before the first instalment—now in the press—is actually published. 2. The relevant particulars regarding the three names concerned are set out below. 3. The proposals here referred to are those which later formed the basis of the decision embodied in Opinion 516, See Footnote 2. ee DIRECTION 96 (vil) SATYRIDAE (a) ‘* Papilio circe ’’ Fabricius (J.C.), 1775 Papilio circe Fabricius (J.C.), 1775, Syst. Ent. : 495 Papilio proserpina [Denis (M.) & Schiffermiiller (I.)], 1775, Ankiindung [sic] ae Werk. Schmett. Wienergegend : 155, 169, pl. 1a, fig. 9 (larva) ; pl. 1b, gs. 9a, 9b It has been shown in the Report to which reference has already been made that the Systema Entomologiae of Fabricius ranks for the purposes of zoological nomenclature from Easter Monday, 17th April, 1775, while the Ankiindung [sic] of Denis & Schiffermiller similarly ranks only from 8th December of that year. In the same Report it has been recommended that these priorities should be accepted and therefore that precedence should be given to the Systema Entomologiae over the Ankiindung. Under the foregoing arrangements the oldest available specific name for the present species will become circe Fabricius, that name taking precedence over its junior subjective synonym proserpina [Denis & Schiffermiiller]. This is very satisfactory, for it is by this name that this species has been known almost exclusively since it was so named by Fabricius over 180 years ago. This species is today assigned to the genus Brintesia Fruhstorfer (H.), [1911] (in Seitz, Grossschmett. Erde 9 : 307), of which it is the type species by original designation. The specific name circe Fabricius should now be placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with a note that it takes precedence over the name proserpina [Denis & Schiffermiiller] and that it is the specific name of the type species of Brintesia Fruhstorfer. The last-mentioned name should be placed at the same time on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology. No action is called for in the case of the name proserpina [Denis & Schiffermiiller], for, as it is a name generally agreed to be a junior synonym—even at the subspecific level—of circe Fabricius, it could not appropriately be placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology, while, as a nomen- clatorially available name, it is ineligible for admission to the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology. NYMPHALIDAE (b) ‘* Papilio pandora ’’ [Denis (M.) & Schiffermiiller (I.)], 1775 Papilio pandora [Denis (M.) & Schiffermiiller (1.)], 1775, Ankiindung [sic] syst. Werk. Schmett. Wienergegend : 176 Papilio maja Cramer (P.), [1775], Uitl. Kapellen 1(3) : 39, pl. XXV, Figs. B, C As. shown in the Report referred to in the first paragraph of the present application, the portions of Volume 1 of Cramer’s Ujitlandsche (Vili) OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Kapellen published in 1775 rank for priority as from 31st December of that year, while the Ankiindung of Denis & Schiffermiiller ranks from 8th December 1775 and accordingly takes precedence over Cramer’s work. The species here in question has been called by the name pandora [Denis & Schiffermiiller] by the great majority of authors during the hundred and eighty years which has elapsed since the publication of that name, though the name maja Cramer has been applied to it by a few recent authors. It is satisfactory therefore from the point of view of stability in the nomenclature of this group that the name pandora [Denis & Schiffermiiller] is now seen to have priority over maja Cramer. The present species was for long included in the great heterogeneous assemblage of taxa formerly placed in the genus Argynnis Fabricius, 1807. Following the lead set by T. Reuss some thirty years ago, this group has been extensively revised by various authors (including Warren (B.C.S.) ; dos Passos (C.F.) and others) and the present species is now by agreement placed in the genus Pandoriana Warren, 1942 (Entomologist 75 : 245—246), of which (under the name Papilio maja Cramer) it is the type species by original designation. The specific name pandora [Denis & Schiffermiiller] and the generic name Pandoriana Warren should now be placed on the respective Official Lists, the entry to be made in respect of the first of these names being endorsed to show that it takes precedence over the name maja Cramer. For reasons similar to those explained under (a) above in connection with the name proserpina [Denis & Schiffermiiller], no action by the Commission is called for as regards the specific name maja Cramer. LYCAENIDAE (c) ‘* Papilio icarus ’’ Rottemburg (S.A.von), 1775 The problem here is concerned with the following names which are homonyms of one another :— Papilio icarus Rottemburg (S.A.von), [1775,] Der Naturforscher 6 : 21 Papilio icarus Cramer (P.), [1775], Uitl. Kapellen 1(2) : 26, pl. 18, figs. A, B In the proposed settlement of the relative precedence to be allotted to certain works published in 1775 to which reference has been made in the first paragraph of the present application it has been recommended that preference should be given to the important paper by S. A. von Rottemburg entitled ‘Anmerkungen zu den Hufnagelischen Tabellen ” DIRECTION 96 (ix) published in the serial Der Naturforscher on some not definitely established but certainly early date in 1775, over the portions of Cramer’s Ujitlandsche Kapellen published on unknown dates in that year, the arrangement suggested being in general in harmony with established practice, that practice having always given a high precedence to von Rottemberg’s paper in relation to other works published in iW fay The specific name icarus Rottemburg is now well-established for the Lycaenid known in England as the ““Common Blue’’. In 1935 the species so named was designated by the Commission under its Plenary Powers to be the type species of the genus Polyommatus Latreille, 1804, a long-standing doubt as to the interpretation of that nominal genus being thus brought toaclose. The decision so taken was later embodied in Opinion 175. In 1948 the generic name Polyommatus Latreille was placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology, this decision being later embodied in Opinion 270. The specific name icarus Rottemburg, as the specific name of the type species of the genus Polyommatus Latreille, was not then placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology, it being decided that it would be better first to determine the relative priority of that name as published by von Rottemburg in 1775 in the serial Der Naturforscher and an identical name published for an entirely different species by Cramer in the same year in the Ujitlandsche Kapellen. Under the settlement which, as explained above, it is now proposed should be reached in regard to the relative precedence to be accorded to the above and other works published in 1775, Rottemburg’s icarus will take precedence over that of Cramer and will accordingly become the oldest available name for the species in question. It is accordingly recommended that the specific name icarus Rottemburg, 1775, as published in the combination Papilio icarus, be placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with a twofold endorsement stating (1) that by the Ruling proposed to be given on the application now being submitted with Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(57)254, this name takes priority over the specific name icarus Cramer, [1775], as published in the combination Papilio icarus, and (2) that this name is the specific name of the type species of the genus Polyommatus Latreille, 1804. The invalid junior homonym icarus Cramer, 1775, will need now to be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology. At the same time it will be necessary to place on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology whatever is the oldest specific name, available either subjectively or objectively, for the species to which Cramer gave the invalid name Papilio icarus. This latter question has been very kindly investigated on my behalf by Mr. N. D. Riley who informs me that the oldest name available for any subspecies of this species is Castnia penelope Schaufuss, 1870 (Nunqu. otios. 1 : 9). 4 See Footnote 3. (x) OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS Recommendations 3. For the reasons set forth in the present application the Inter- national Commission on Zoological Nomenclature is asked :— (1) to give a Ruling, under the settlement of the precedence to be assigned to certain works published in 1775 recommended in the Paper bearing the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 448 sub- mitted with Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(57)25 concurrently with the present application®, the under-mentioned specific names are to take the precedence specified below :-— (a) the specific name circe Fabricius (J.C.), 1775, as published in the combination Papilio circe, to take precedence over the specific name proserpina [Denis (M.) & Schiffermiiller (I.)], 1775, as published in the combination Papilio proserpina ; (b) the specific name pandora [Denis (M.) & Schiffermiiller (I.)], 1775, as published in the combination Papilio pandora, to take precedence over the name maja Cramer (P.), [1775], as published in the combination Papilio maja ; (c) the specific name icarus Rottemburg (S.A. von), 1775, as published in the combination Papilio icarus, to take precedence over the name icarus Cramer (P.), [1775], as published in the combination Papilio icarus ; (2) to place the under-mentioned specific names on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology :— (a) circe Fabricius (J.C.), 1775, as published in the combination Papilio circe and with the precedence specified in (1)(a) above (specific name of type species of Brintesia Fruhstorfer (H.), [1911]) ; (b) pandora [Denis (M.) & Schiffermiiller (I.)], 1775, as published in the combination Papilio pandora and with the prece- dence specified in (1)(b) above ; (c) icarus Rottemburg (S.A. von), 1775, as published in the combination Papilio icarus and with the precedence specified in (1)(c) above (specific name of type species of Polyommatus Latreille, 1804) ; (d) penelope Schaufuss (L.W.), 1870, as published in the combination Castnia penelope ; 5 See Footnote 3. DIRECTION 96 (xi) (3) to place the under-mentioned generic names on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology :— (a) Brintesia Fruhstorfer (H.), [1911] (gender : feminine) (type species by original designation : Papilio circe Fabricius (J.C.), 1775, with the precedence specified in (1)(a) above) ; (b) Pandoriana Warren (B.C.S.), 1942 (gender: feminine) (type species, by original designation: Papilio maja Cramer (P.), 1775, with the precedence specified in (1)(b) above) ; (Note : No family-group-name problem arises in con- nection with either of the above generic names, neither of which has been taken as the base for the name of a nominal family-group taxon.) (4) to place the under-mentioned specific name on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology :— icarus Cramer (P.), [1775], as published in the combination Papilio icarus (a junior homonym under (1)(c) above of icarus Rottemburg (S.A. von), 1775, as published in the combination Papilio icarus). 2. Registration of the present application: The problems relating to the particular names dealt with in the present Direction arose initially in connection with the relative precedence to be accorded to certain works published in 1775 and at that time were accordingly dealt with on the Registered File Z.N.(S.) 448. Later, when it was decided to make immediate application to the Commission for Rulings regarding the status to be accorded to these names, the problem so involved was re-registered under the Number Z.N.(S.) 1281. Il. THE DECISION TAKEN BY THE INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE 3. Issue of Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(57)26 : On 26th November 1957 a Voting Paper (V.P.(O.M.)(57)26) was issued in which the Members of the Commission were invited to vote either for, or (xii) OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS against, “the proposal relating to the specific names of three species of butterfly published in 1775, as set out in Points (1) to (4) in paragraph 3 in the paper bearing the Registered Number Z.N.(S.) 1281 [i.e. in the paragraph numbered as above in the paper reproduced in the first paragraph of the present Direction] submitted by the Secretary simultaneously with the present Voting Paper ’”’. 4. The Prescribed Voting Period: As the foregoing Voting Paper was issued under the One-Month Rule, the Prescribed Voting Period closed on 26th December 1957. 5. Particulars of the Voting on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(57)26 : At the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, the state of the voting on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(57)26 was as foliows :— (a) Affirmative Votes had been given by the following twenty- two (22) Commissioners (arranged in the order in which Votes were received) : Holthuis ; Bonnet ; Lemche ; Hering; Riley ; Prantl ; Stoll ; Mayr ; Boschma ; Tortonese ; Mertens ; Vokes ; do Amaral ; Miller ; Hemming ; Bodenheimer ; Cabrera ; Dymond; _ Bradley (J.C.); Kiithnelt ; — Jaczewski ; Sylvester-Bradley ; (b) Negative Votes : None ; (c) On Leave of Absence, one (1): Key ; DIRECTION 96 (xiii) (d) Voting Papers not returned, two (2) : Hanko ; Esaki®. 6. Declaration of Result of Vote : On 27th December 1957, Mr. Hemming, Secretary to the International Commission, acting as Returning Officer for the Vote taken on Voting Paper V.P..O.M.)(57)26, signed a Certificate that the Votes cast were as set out in paragraph 5 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. 7. Preparation of the Ruling given in the present ‘‘ Direction ”’ : On 12th January 1958, 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 Commission in its Vote on Voting Paper V.P.(O.M.)(57)26. 8. 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 Direction :— Brintesia Fruhstorfer (H.), [1911], in Seitz, Grossschmett. Erde 9 : 307 circe, Papilio, Fabricius (J.C.), 1775, Syst. Ent. : 495 icarus, Papilio, Rottemburg (S.A.von), 1775, Der Naturforscher 6: 21 icarus, Papilio, Cramer (P.), [1775], Uitl. Kapellen 1(2) : 26, pl. 18, figs. A, B 6 Shortly after the close of the Prescribed Voting Period, information was received that Professor Esaki had died during that Period on 14th December 1957. (xiv) OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS pandora, Papilio, [Denis (M.) & Schiffermtller (1.)], 1775, Ankiindung [sic] eines syst. Werk. Schmett. Wien. Gegend : 17 Pandoriana Warren (B.C.S.), 1942, Entomologist 75 : 245—246 penelope, Castnia, Schaufuss, 1870, Nunqu. otios. 1 : 9 9. Family-Group-Name Aspects : Neither of the generic names placed on the Official List by the Ruling given in the present Direction has been taken as the base for the name of a taxon of the family-group category and in consequence no family-group- name problem arises in the present case. 10. Compliance with Prescribed Procedures : The prescribed procedures were duly complied with by the International Com- mission 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 by the under- signed Francis Hemming, Secretary to the International Com- mission on Zoological Nomenclature, in virtue of all and every the powers conferred upon him in that behalf. 11. ‘* Direction ’’ Number: The present Direction shall be known as Direction Ninety-Six (96) of the International Com- mission on Zoological Nomenclature. Done in London, this Twelfth day of January, Nineteen Hundred and Fifty-Eight. Secretary to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature FRANCIS HEMMING © 1958. THE INTERNATIONAL TRUST FOR ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Printed in England by METCALFE & COOPER LIMITED, 10-24 Scrutton St., London E C2 OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, cM.G., C.B.E. VOLUME 19. Part 23. (Concluding Part) 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 1959 Price One Pound, Seven Shillings (All rights reserved) ssued 20th March, 1959 ae eee ola OPINIONS AND DECLARATIONS RENDERED BY THE INTER- NATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Edited by FRANCIS HEMMING, c.M.G., C.B.E. VOLUME 19. Part 23. Pp. 395—436 (also published with this Part : T.P.—XII) 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 1959 ; Price One Pound, Seven Shillings (All rights reserved) sued 20th March, 1959 INTERNATIONAL COMMISSION ON ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE COMPOSITION AT THE TIME OF THE ADOPTION OF THE OPINIONS, DECLARATIONS 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) (ist January 1947) Senor Dr. Angel CABRERA (La Plata, Argentina) (27th July 1948) Mr. Francis HEMMING (London, England) (27th July 1948) (Secretary) Py Henne LEMCHE (Universitetets Zoologiske Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark) (27th uly 1 ) 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 (University of Tulane, Department of Geology, New Orleans, Louisiana, U.S.A.) (12th August 1953) Professor Béla HANKO (Mezégazdasdgi Muzeum, Budapest, Hungary) (12th Augrst 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) 4 Professor Dr. Wilhelm KUHNELT (Zoologisches Institut der Universitat, Vienna, Austria) (6th November 1954) ee F. S. BODENHEIMER (The Hebrew University, Jerusalem, Israel) (11th November 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, /taly) (16th December 1954) Volume 19 397 Corrigenda page 231. Paragraph 6, first line : substitute ‘‘ Hartmann” for “‘ Hartman”’ pages 361—376 Substitute “1776” for “1785” after the names “‘ Lynceus quadrangularis Miller (O.F.)”’ and “ quadrangularis Miller (O.F.) wherever they occur. Archer, A. F. Bairstow, L. Barnes, R. D. Volume 19 ; INDEX TO AUTHORS OF APPLICATIONS DEALT WITH IN THE PRESENT VOLUME AND OF COMMENTS ON THOSE APPLICATIONS Page 575.) 185) 10203 5 HO) 78-79, 102, 103 Barros Machado, A. de Bonnet, P. Bradley, J. C. Braendegard, J. Braun, R Bristowe, W. S. Chickering, A. M. Clark, D. J. 89, 102, 103 63-65, 102, 103 XXXV 61, 79, 102, 103 WS, 0 79-80, 102, 103 62, 103 80, 102, 103 Cloudsley-Thompson, J. L. Coe, R. L. Cox, L. R. Denis, J. dos Passos, C. F. 81, 102, 103 297,350 328-329 81, 102, 103 36-40 Duellmann, W. E. Duffey, E. Elofson, O. Fage, L. Fairchild, G. B. Forster, R. R. Franclemont, J.G. .. Frizzell, Harriet E. .. Gertsch, W. J. Goodnight, C. J. Grekoff, N. Grensted, L. W. Hackman, W. Harding, J. P. Hardy, D. E. ASU SMgTiTUTO 399 Page 173-177, 186-188 82, 102, 103 . 386 82, 103 339-344 82) 1027103 33-35 SD, O23 102, 103 83, 102, 103 59, 84, 102, 103 387-388 XXII—XXIV . 61-62, 84, 102, 103 - SIO 294-296, 352-354 NAY APR 1 0 ge 400 Opinions and Declarations Page Hartmann, G. 322, 390-391 Hemming, F. 9, 19-43, 58, 66, 67-69, 69-75, 94-106, 120- 123, 163-164, 164-166, 189- 195, 237-239, 240-241, 242- 243, 244-245, 284-288, 357- 359, V—-XVi, XXI-XXIV, XXXI-— XXXIV, (vi)—(xi) Hering, E. M. .. 85-86, 103 Hessland, I. .. By 56 SS Hiltermann, H. a .. 390 Holthuis, L. B. 114-116, 120-123, 146-160, 221-235 Homann, H. .. 86, 102, 103 lowes Ee Vene 318-320, 388 Hull, J. E. 60, 86, 102, 103 lhles, 185 Ue 386-387 Johnson, D. S. 366-372 Kaestner, D. A. 78, 102, 103 Kaston, B. J... 56, 87, 102, 103 Keen, Myra .. a: 5) LORY Kesling, R. V. ale oo ded Key, AcJ. sooo: 4) oe Sol Key, K. H. L. he: XXXVI Kraus, O. Lawrence, R. F. Lemche, H. Lempke, B. J. Levi, H. W. Levinson, S. A. Locket, G. H. Loveridge, A. Littig, G. Macfadyen, W. A. Mackerras, I. M. Marples, B. J. Melville, R. V. Mertens, R. .. Millidge, A. F. Misra, K.S. .. Moos, B. Page 51-5838 7 Oz 103 88, 103 204-206 35-36 . 30-54, 88, 102, 103, 104-106 /32t ». 62, S8alO2e 103 Ss2 . 390 2 Oy 339-344 89, 102, 103 30 1738S) 79 ase 272, 280-282 . . 899-90; 102% 103 Be tits . 390 Nemenz, H. Norgaard, E. Volume 19 Page Gieo0) 102, 103 90, 102, 103 Oertli, H. . 388 Oldroyd, H. . 339-344 Oliver, J. A. .. 265-271 Peck, R. E. 5 sy) peters, J. A. .. . 186 Petrunkevitch, A. 253-255 Bhdip, C.B. .. 339-344 Ramsbottom, W. H. C. 56 Bl Raley, N: D. .. 32-33 Roewer, C. Fr. Rome, Dom R. Roth, V. D. Ruggieri, G. Savage, J. M... Savory, T. H. Ns MOP 08) 5 dei Oe OZ 103 Soi 185, 265— 271, 283 Oe O2Z W038 Schmidt, G. E. W. Schmidt, K. P. Shaver, R. H. Smith, Hobart M. Smithers, R. H. N. Stubblefield, C. J. 401 Page 92-93, 102, 103 183-184 5 aks) 181-182, DUD UB. 08) 256 Sylvester-Bradley, P. C. 318-320, Tambs-Lyche, H. Tams, Wats ae Taylor, E. H. Verity, R. Wiehle, H. Wright, J. Zariquiey, R. 381-388 60, 93, 102, 103 32-33 .. 184 Sy) 94, 102, 103 304-307, 308 Sly = st - o - ' Volume 19 SUBJECT INDEX achiria Rafinesque, 1817, as published in the combination Hippa achiria (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy ie i placed on the Official Index 2 ree and Invalid bas Names in Meine) with Name No. 540 .. Acilius Rafinesque, 1815 (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy ; aa ae = a si a ae ae placed on the Official Index of Be and Invalid Generic Names in ces with Name No. 1183 Acrodytes Fitzinger, 1843 (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 3 oe si fen ie ns Fa Bie ae placed on the Official Index of ec’ and Invalid Generic Names in Ee, with Name No. 1182 . Aglaope Rafinesque, 1814 (a junior homonym of Aglaope Latreille, 1809), placed on the Official Index me se hi and Invalid Generic Names in Becaloey with Name No. 1191 Ahaetulla Link, 1807 (Class Reptilia), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1308, with Ahaetulla roe es Link, 1807, as type species gender of name Ahaetulla Gray (J.E.), 1825 (a junior homonym of Ahaetulla Link, 1807), placed on the Official Index jae Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in n Zoology with Name No. 1203 .. ahaetulla Linnaeus, 1758, Coluber (Class Reptilia), ae 2 of, by reference to lectotype selected by Savage (J.M.) & Oliver (J.A.) (1956) . : placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 1571 .. Albunea Weber, 1795 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1299, with Cancer ose Linnaeus, 1758, as type species gender of name ALBUNEIDAE (correction of ALBUNIDAE) Stimpson, 1858 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in in Zoology with Name No. 242, with Albunea Weber, 1795, as type genus 403 Page 212 218 Diet 216 lial 172 ZANT 263 263 264 263 264 213 zi 219 404 Opinions and Declarations ALBUNIDAE Stimpson, 1858 (an Invalid Original Spelling for ALBUNEIDAE), placed on the Official Index of BOE and Invalid gam: eee Names in Peete with Name No. 276 .. Alciope Rafinesque, 1814 (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the Punpes of the Law of Eonity but not for those of the Law of Homonymy : ; i ss a one placed on the Official Index of pees and Invalid Generic Names in eosin with Name No. 1184 Allodicrania Enderlein, 1913 (a junior objective synonym of Elaphella Bezzi, 1913), placed on the Official Index wp eae and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1211 .. Alona Baird, 1843 (Class Crustacea, Order Cladocera), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1317, with oe bear Miller (O.F.), 1776, as type species d gender of name AMPHORACRINIDAE Bather, 1899 (Class Crinoidea), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology with Name No. 247, with Arp Oe inus Austin (T.), Sr., 1848, as type genus : Amphoracrinus Austin (T), Sr., 1848 (Class Crinoidea), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1312, with Actinocrinus gilbertsoni Phillips, 1836, as type species ae me te me aN ae ai gender of name angulatus Bate, 1888, as published in the combination Panulirus angulatus (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), ean on the OE List a SPEC Names in Zoology with Name No. 1526 .. ; : antarcticus Lund, 1793, as published in the combination Scyllarus antarcticus (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), Bee on the noe List or SPECIE Names in Zoology with Name No. 1527 .. : : : Arctus De Haan, [1849] (a junior objective synonym of Scyllarus Fabricius, 1775), placed on the Official Index ae ROLES and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1170 .. : Arctus Dana, 1852 (a junior homonym of, and a junior objective synonym of, Arctus De Haan, [1849], and a junior objective synonym of Scyllarus Fabricius, 1775), placed on the Official Index ef ROSES and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1171 .. arctus Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the combination Cancer arctus (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), and as defined by lectotype selected by Holthuis (1956), placed on the Cas List a ee Names in Lome with Name No. 1528 .. Astacoides Guérin-Meéneville, 1839 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1275, with Astacoides goudotii Guérin-Méneville, 1839, as type species. gender of name Page 220 211 216 336 363 363 304 303 303 138 138 141 142 139 135 135 Volume 19 Atyaephyra de Brito Capello, 1867 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1300, with eH yra rosiana de Brito Capello, 1867, as type species : gender of name Ayus Ortmann, 1891 (a junior objective synonym of Linuparus White, 1847), placed on the Official Index or Pee and Invalid Generic Names in ey with Name No. 1172 .. barbatus Fabricius, 1793, as published in the combination Cancer barbatus (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), paced on the tee List a SEG Names in Zoology with Name No. 1551 .. bartonii Fabricius (J.C.), 1798, as published in the combination Astacus bartonii (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), Paced on the a heaee List oi Specie Names in Zoology with Name No. 1529 Bartonius Ortmann, 1905 (a junior objective synonym of Cambarus Erichson, 1846), placed on the Official Index oe fo and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1173 : bicarinatus Gray (J.E.), 1845, as published in the combination Astacus bicarinatus (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), peed on the yeas List ay aoe Names in Zoology with Name No. 1546 boiga Lacépéde, 1789, as published in the combination Coluber boiga (Class Reptilia), ruled to take precedence below pictus Gmelin (J.F.), [1789], as published in the combination Coluber pictus, both oe names published in different works on unknown dates in the same year : Aa oe a iN ne brachyurus Miller (O.F.), 1776, as published in the combination Lynceus brachyurus (Class Crustacea, Order Conchostraca), placed on the Ones List a Soe Names in Zoology with Name No. 1586 oe Brintesia Fruhstorfer (H.), [1911] (Class Insecta, Order Lepidoptera), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1269, with akcie circe Fabricius (J.C.), 1775, as type species .. gender of name Byzenus Rafinesque, 1814 (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the Eee of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy ; a a ES Se ae on sen ae placed on the Official Index of pate and Invalid Generic Names in eee with Name No. 1185 Cambarellus Ortmann, 1905 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1276, with Cambarus montezumae de Saussure, 1857, as type species J gender of name 405 Page 213 213 142 214 139 142 141 279 364 (iv) (iv) Pil AI 217 136 136 406 Opinions and Declarations CAMBARINAE Hobbs, 1942 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in assed with Name No. 237, with Cambarus Erichson, 1846, as type genus at Cambarus Erichson, 1846 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in ey with Name No. 1277, with Astacus bartonii Fabricius, 1798, as type species. a i P ; te gender of name Campsicnemus Haliday, 1851 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera): validation of, under the Plenary Powers tie oa sie oe : ae dis Bs gender of name placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1316, with Dolichopus scambus Fallén, 1823, as type species Camptosceles Haliday, 1832 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the DUE oscs of the Law of Prout) but not for those of the Law of Homonymy . , me =e as : Me a sit placed on the Official Index ay cea and Invalid Generic Names in abaieey with Name No. 1219 ; as ae candida Miller (O.F.), 1776, Cypris (Class Crustacea, Order Ostracoda), designation of, under the Plenary Powers, to be the type species of Candona Baird, [1846] placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 1587 Candona Baird, [1846] (Class Crustacea, Order Ostracoda), all previous type selections for, set aside under the Plenary Powers, and Mesa candida Miller ye F. “), 1776, designated to be the type species of gender of name ee noe Be re + oA ae ee placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1320 CANDONINAE Kaufmann, 1900 (Class Crustacea, Order Ostracoda), placed on the Official List of Family- Group Names in Popleey with Name No. 251, with Candona Baird, [1846], as type genus caudolineata Gray (J.E.), [1834], as published in the combination Ahaetulla caudo- lineata (Class Reptilia), piace on the pene List oy nee Names in eS with Name No. 1572... -cera, generic names ending in, determination of gender to be attributed to.. cervulum Gervais, 1850, Lophiotherium (Class Mammalia), to be ne by lecto- type selected by Hopwood (A.T.) (1956) fee é ee ae placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 1579 cervus Wiedemann, 1828, as published in the combination Pangonia ceryus (Class Insecta, Order Diptera), pee on the Ae List a ale Names in foes with Name No. 1578 . Page 144 136 136 351. 351 3510 351 352 Si) 380 Sy) 379 379 380 264 Iv 336 336 336 Volume 19 Chaeraps Huxley, [1879] (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling for Cherax Erichson, 1846), placed on the Official Index on aie and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1174 .. -cheilus and -chilus, generic names ending in, determination of gender to be attributed to oh ae ae Ae ae om Bs ae j Cheraps Erichson, 1846 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, as an Invalid Original Spelling for Cherax ‘ ot placed on the Official Index a ee and Invalid Generic Names in ares with Name No. 1175 -Cherax Erichson, 1846 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), ruled, under the Plenary Powers, to be the Valid Original Spelling for the nominal genus concerned gender of name placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1278, with Astacus (Cheraps) preissii Erichson, 1846, as type species .. E -chilus, generic names ending in, determination of gender to be attributed to .. chiragra Fabricius, 1775, as published in the combination Cancer chiragra (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), Pees on the ene List oh ale Names in Zoology with Name No. 1552 .. circe Fabricius (J.C.), 1775, as published in the combination Papilio circe (Class Insecta, Order Lepidoptera), ruled to take priority over proserpina [Denis (M.) & Schiffermiuller (1.)|, 1775, as published in the combination Papilio proserpina placed on the Official List of Specific Names in AoE) with Name No. 1513, with endorsement to above effect Cramer (P.), [1775]-[1790], De Uitlandsche Kapellen voorkomende in de drie Waereld-Deelen Asia, Africa en America, and supplement thereto by Caspar Stoll, assignment of dates to the several portions thereof, for the pues of the Law of Priority Ae ai as : ‘ Lis a. oe addition of title of, to the Official List of Works Approved as Available for Zoo- logical Nomenclature with Title No. 38, with endorsement that portion treated as having been published in 1775 is to rank for the purposes of the Law of Priority below [Denis (M.) & Schiffermiiller (1.), Ankiindung [sic] eines systematisches Werkes von den Schmetterlinge der Wiener Gegend published in the same year Vol. 1, pp. 1-132, pls. 1-84 of work, published in 1775, ruled to take Peden after the above- named work by Denis (M.) & Schiffermiiller (1.) ase particulars of compilation and dates of publication of the several Parts in which the above work was published be Lt ue au ae ai Crangonus Rafinesque, 1815 (a junior objective synonym of Crangon Fabricius, 1798), placed on the Official Index oh pees and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1192 407 Page 142 lil-iv 135 142 135 136 136 iii-iv 214 (iii) (iii) 6-7 217 408 Opinions and Declurations crocea Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Squilla crocea (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy Bis Se placed on the Official Index af pee and Invalid perc Names in Pee with Name No. 541 .. cruentatus Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the combination Cancer cruentatus (Class Crustacea), 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 af cae and Inyalid ene Names in Hone with Name No. 542 .. cubicus Forskal, 1775, as published in the combination Cancer cubicus (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority, but not for those of the Law of Homonymy Be placed on the Official Index a peed and Invalid Bee Names in Fee with Name No. 543 .. curvipes Fallén, 1823, as published in the combination Dolichopus curvipes (Class Insecta, Order Diptera), meee on the oe List er pee Names in Aaa with Name No. 1581 .. Declarations containing interpretations of provisions in the Régles, see Régles Internationales de la Nomenclature Zoologique Deidamia yon Willemoes-Suhm, 1873 (a junior homonym of Deidamia Clemens, 1859), placed on the Official Index oy eee and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1176 : Dendrelaphis Boulenger, 1890 (Class Reptilia), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1310, with Ahaetulla caudolineata a (J.E. ): [1834], as type species j gender of name Dendrophis Boie (H.), 1826 (a junior objective synonym of Leptophis Bell, 1825), placed on the Official Index us pcaaae and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1204... ; [Denis (M.) & Schiffermiiller (1.)] [pre-8th December] 1775, Ankiindung [sic] eines systematisches Werkes von den Schmetterlinge der Wiener Gegend, ruled, under the Plenary Powers, to take precedence after Rottemburg (S.A. von), ‘ ‘Anmerkun- gen zu den Hufnagelischen Tabellen ’’ and Fuessly (J.C.), Verzeichniss der ihm bekannten schweizerischen Insekten, both works published in the same year determination of agate of, relative to other works er es in the same year J ae oe me ae ee addition of title of, to the Official List of Works PU as Available Jer Zoo- logical Nomenclature with Title No. 37 a Page 212 218 212 218 22 218 351 142 263 263 264 Volume 19 desmarestii Millet, 1831, as published in the combination Hippolyte desmarestii (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), ales on the Cheat List oF Be Names in Zoology with Name No. 1553 Dicrania Macquart, 1834 (a junior homonym of Dicrania Lepeletier & Serville, 1828), placed on the Official Index a eed and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1212 .. ; Dicranomyia Hunter, 1901 (a junior homonym of Dicranomyia Stephens, 1829), placed on the Official Index of piriecied and Invalid Generic Names in Oey with Name No. 1213... digueti Bouvier, 1897, as published in the combination Cambarus digueti (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), peed on the CHE List eos pee Names in Fey with Name No. 1530. diogenes Girard, 1852, as published in the combination Cambarus diogenes (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), Bisecdie on the oie List gh ee Names in Zoology with Name No. 1554 .. Diplocus Blanchard, 1845 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy a 4 ai ae ie Ei ne placed on the Official Index aE Hieeeied and Invalid Generic Names in pe oaloey with Name No. 1214 Diplocus Pictet, 1853 (a junior homonym of Diplocus Blanchard, 1845, and a junior objective synonym of Lophiotherium Gervais, 1850), placed on the Official Index or Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No.1218 he Dryinus Merrem, 1820 (a junior homonym of Dryinus Latreille, [1804], and a junior objective synonym of Ahaetulla Link, 1807), placed on the Official Index or Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1206 a Dryophis Dalman, 1823 (a junior objective synonym of Ahaetulla Link, 1807), placed on the Official Index aM Bes and Invalid Generic Names in Be esy with Name No. 1207 . : Elaphella Bezzi, 1913 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera), validation of, under the Plenary Powers ies Me a: a Be ae te ae ue gender of name placed on the Official List of Generic Names in oopey with Name No. 1314, with Pangonia cervus Weidemann, 1828, as type species. elephas Fabricius (J.C.), 1787, as published in the combination Astacus elephas (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), Bee on the Cea List oF pepeewie Names in Zoology with Name No. 1531 409 Page 214 336 336 139 214 335 337 337 264 264 335 335 335 139 410 Opinions and Declarations Engaeus Erichson, 1846 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1279, with Astacus Enea fossor Erichson, 1846, as type species .. : gender of name Enoplognatha Pavesi (P.), 1880 (Class Arachnida), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1273, with Theridion mandibulare Lucas, 1846, as type species : a 3h ; gender of name Enoplometopus Milne Edwards (A.), 1862 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1280, with Enoplometopus pictus Milne Edwards (A.), 1862, as type species gender of name eremita Vejdovsky, 1880, as published in the combination Cypris eremita (Class Crustacea, Order Ostracoda), acai on the ee List ee Specie IES in Zoology with Name No. 1589 .. Erpetocypris Brady & Norman, 1889 (Class Crustacea, Order Ostracoda), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy ¥ me ats ie ; placed on the Official Index a, eee and Invalid Generic Names in nee with Name No. 1221 Ae : ; EURYRHYNCHINAE Holthuis (L.B.), 1950 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology with Name No. 235, with Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878], as type genus Euryrhynchus Nitzsch, 1829 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling for Eurynorhynchus Nilsson, 1821), placed on the ee Index a Sedge and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1161. Beers Miers, ee eure Crustacea, Order Pepe determination of gender of . : a placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1274, with Euryrhynchus wrzesniowskii Miers, [1878], as type species eusebia Risso, 1816, as published in the combination Squilla eusebia (Class Crustacea, Order Stomatopoda), Placer! on the Che List ieee sare ti Names in n Zoey with Name No. 1567 . Fabricius (J.C.), 1775, Systema Entomologiae, determination of date of publication Ol oc i ae Ae Ly ke oe ae ruled, for the purposes of the Law of ee to take DE over other works published i in the same year oe 3 os ie : addition of title of, to the Official List of Works ADRIOW EE as Available He Zoo- logical Nomenclature with Title No. 34... Page 136 136 48 48 136 136 380 379 381 114 114 113 113 Volume 19 Fabricius (O. .)> 1823, “‘ Fortegnelse over afgangne Biskop Fabriciusses efterladte Naturalier ’’, rejection of, for nomenclatorial purposes, as not Bens been au published within the meaning of Article 25 of the Régles : ati ; addition of title of, to the Official Index of Reed and Invalid Works in Zoo- logical Nomenclature with Title No. 59 af, fasciatus Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Mesapus fasciatus (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy .. te it placed on the Official Index of peed and Invalid HaCO: Names in atcha with Name No. 544 .. fasciatus Risso, 1816, as published in the combination Crangon fasciatus (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), eee on the ee List i Dae Names in Zoology with Name No. 1555 .. ferussaci Roux, 1830, as published in the combination Sguilla ferussaci (Class Crustacea, Order Stomatopoda), Ee on the enQuia! List Heh: Beene Names in Zoology with Name No. 1568 flavomaculata Heller, 1864, as published in the combination Pontonia flavomaculata (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), piced ° on the Rite List os pene Names in Zoology with Name No. 1556 fluviatilis Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Symethus fluviatilis (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes - of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy.. , he placed on the Official Index gs Coe and Invalid per en Names in apoleey with Name No. 545 .. fossor Rafinesque, 1817, as published in the combination Astacus fossor (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy - ne placed on the Official Index gh ReTeeles and Invalid pSneeuie Names in Le with Name No. 546 .. fossor Erichson, 1846, as published in the combination Astacus (Engaeus) fossor (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), pene on the Mirae List a Bp eetie Names in Zoology with Name No. 1532 Fuessly (J.C.), 1775, Verzeichniss der ihm bekannten schweizerischen Insekten, ruled, under the Plenary Powers, to take precedence after Rottemburg (S.A. von), “Anmerkungen zu den Hufnagelischen Tabellen”’ but before [Denis (M.) & Schiffermiiller (I.)], Ankiindung [sic] eines systematisches Werkes von den Schmetter- linge der Wiener Gegend, both works published in the same year .. ; Af determination of a ed of, relative to other works paptec in the same year she Se te F ae ee he addition of title of, to the Official List of Works AML as Available na Zoo- logical Nomenclature with Title No. 36 : 41] Page 203 204 212 218 215 216 215 212 218 212 218 139 412 Opinions and Declarations generic names, having the termination “ -cheilus” (or “-chilus’’), “‘-gnathus”’ ce 99 “eé °° ce 3° ce 9° ce 9° _ s -rhamphus’’, “‘-rhynchus’’, “‘-stathus -cera’”’ or “-metopa’’, determination > IY of gender to be attributed to 99 ee generic names, having the termination “ -ides -ites”’ or “ -oides’’, determina- tion of gender to be attributed to aw Lied gender rules, adopted at Copenhagen, revocation and modification of gervaisii Pictet, 1853, as published in the combination Diplocus gervaisii (a junior objective synonym of cervulum Gervais, 1850, as published in the combination Lophiotherium cervulum), placed on the Official Index on Re and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 560 Ade gilbertsoni Phillips, 1836, Actinocrinus (Class Crinoidea), interpretation of, ey reference to neotype designated and figured by Wright (J.) (1955).. ; placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 1576 -gnathus, generic names ending in, determination of gender to be attributed to goudotii Guérin-Meéneville, 1839, as published in the combination Astacoides goudotii (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), 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 oy Pees and Inyalid peice Names in ee with Name No. 528 .. gundlachi von Martens, 1878, as published in the combination Palinurellus gundlachi (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), de on the So List oh Spee Names in Zoology with Name No. 1533 .. HERPETOCYPRIDINAE Kaufmann, 1900 (Class Crustacea, Order Ostracoda), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology with Name No. 251, with Herpetocypris Brady & Norman, 1889, as type genus. Herpetocypris, emendation to, of ead is Bray & Norman, 1889, validation of, under the Plenary Powers gender of name s ae 6 oe se Oty Be Ae Pe placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Poo iEey with Name No. 1321, with Page ili-iv 337 303 304 lil-iv 35 143 139 380 379 380 Cypris reptans Baird, [1836], as type species. 3 : i 379-380 heterochelus Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Alciope heterochelus (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the Pipesss of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy é ot placed on the Official Index a Pee and Invalid SPER Names in egies with Name No. 547 .. hispidus Olivier, 1811, as published in the combination Palaemon hispidus (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), amendment to entry relating to, on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology, given in Opinion 381 Bg ae A 212 218 216 Volume 19 Homola Leach, 1815 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1301, with Homola speenon Leach, 1815, as type species : gender of name HOMOLIDAE White, 1847 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Family- Group Names in Zoology with Name No. 243, with Homola Leach, 1815, as type genus Ibacus Leach, 1815 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in PaReey, with Name No. 1281, with Ibacus peronii Leach, 1815, as type species d : gender of name icarus Rottemburg (S.A. yon), 1775, as published in the combination Papilio icarus (Class Insecta, Order Lepidoptera), ruled to take priority over icarus Cramer (P. ) [1775], as published in the combination Papilio icarus 8 ae : placed on the Official List of Specific Names in ee with Name No. 1515, with endorsement to above effect ss icarus Cramer (P.), [1775], as published in the combination Papilio icarus (Class Insecta, Order Lepidoptera), ruled to take priority below icarus Rot euibure (S.A. von), 1775, as published in the combination Papilio icarus es ; placed on the Official Index a posed and Invalid poe Names in Feceey with Name No. 520 .. -ides, generic names ending in, determination of gender to be attributed to incisus (Péron MS.) Leach, 1815, as published in the combination Scyllarus incisus (a junior objective synonym of peronii Leach, 1815, as published in the combination Ibacus peronit), placed on the Official Index eof pee and Invalid ipa Names in Zoology with Name No. 529 : inopinata Baird, 1843, as published in the combination Cythere inopinata (Class Crustacea, Order Ostracoda), ee on the es List er ae Names in Zoology with Name No. 1577 .. : : -ites, generic names ending in, determination of gender to be attributed to.. leptodactyla von Willemoes-Suhm, 1873, as published in the combination Deidamia leptodactyla (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), pices on the Gices List of Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 1534 op Leptodiplosis Kieffer, 1894 (Class Insecta, Order ee ruled to be an Invalid Original Spelling for Lestodiplosis : placed on the Official Index on eo and Invalid Generic Names in eoceey with Name No. 1209 ; 413 Page 213 213 220 136 136 (iii) (iv) (iii) (v) Xx1 143 317 XXi 139 293 294 414 Opinions and Declarations Page Leptophis Bell, 1825 (Class Reptilia), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1309, with Coluber ahaetulla Linnaeus, 1758, as type species 263 gender of name 263 Lestodiplosis Kieffer, 1894 (Class Insecta, Order Diptera), ruled to be the Valid Original Speling for the generic name poubisheny also with the spelling Pepi diplosis 293 gender of name ae mi a oft ya ae p 293 placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1311, with Lestodiplosis septemguttata Kieffer, 1894, as type species .. 293 levigatus Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Jnachus levigatus (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy. . ne i Se placed on the Official Index oy ia atte and Invalid uses: Names in Hoaleey with Name No. 548 .. 218 leydigi Schédler, 1863, as published in the combination Alona leydigi (Class Crustacea, Order Cladocera), planed on the SR of SRE Names in Zone with Name No. 1585... 364 Leydigia Kurz, 1874 (Class Crustacea, Order Cladocera), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology ‘with Name No. 1318, with Alona leydigi Schédler, 1863, as type species : Aa 363-364 gender of name 363 Limnicythere Brady, 1868 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling for Limnocythere Brady, 1868), placed on the Official Index ph poggee and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1210 3 317 LIMNICYTHERINAE Sars, 1925 (an Invalid Original Spelling for LIMNOCYTHERINAE), placed on the Official Index of Repecreg and Invalid Fare Gio Names in Zoology with Name No. 281 .. 318 Limnocythere Brady, 1868 (Class Crustacea, Order Ostracoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in AEG with Name No. 1313, with pee inopinata Baird, 1843, as type species 317 gender of name 317 LIMNOCYTHERINAE (correction of LIMNICYTHERINAE) Sars, 1925 (Class Crustacea, Order Ostracoda), placed on the Official List of Family- Group Names in Boley with Name No. 248, with Limnocythere Brady, 1868, as type genus 317 limosus Rafinesque, 1817, as published in the combination Aestacus limosus (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), paren on the sts List Hen Specie Names in Zoology with Name No. 1558 - 215 Volume 19 415 Page Linuparus White, 1847 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1282, with Palinurus trigonus von Siebold, 1824, as type species : ae x ae Ae ia 136 gender of name 136 Lissa Leach, 1815 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1302, with Cancer chiragra Fabricius (J.C.), 1775, as type species Be ae ae Se Ry aaa? ALS) gender of name 213 Lissula Rafinesque, 1818 (a junior objective synonym of Lissa Leach, 1815), placed on the Official Index ae Be and Invalid Generic Names in eyee ey with Name No. 1193 .. PAT) longicarpus Say, 1817, as published in the combination Pagurus longicarpus (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed se on the itera List cc SECS Names in Zoology with Name No. 1557 .. 215 longipes Risso, 1816, as published in the combination Portunus longipes (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), eis on the aoe List dee Soa Names in Zoology with Name No. 1559 .. : : 215 Lophiotherium Fischer de Waldheim, 1829 (Class Mammalia), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the ae both of the Law of putas and of the Law of Homonymy 4 : 5 : 355) placed on the Official Index of peed and Invalid Generic Names in EWE. with Name No. 1216 337 Lophiotherium Gervais, 1849 (a nomen nudum), placed on the Baca Index of Beiceied and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1217. 337 Lophiotherium Gervais, 1850 (Class Mammalia), validation of, under the Plenary Powers ay a 3 re aie us Me ag Aa 35, 336 gender of name as a a ae Bs # Be Se so. OS® placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1315, with Lophiotherium cervulum Gervais, 1850, as type species 336 lunulata Risso, 1816, as published in the combination Maia lunulata (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the pee List us Bae Names in GOOEY with Name No. 1560 _.... 215 Lupania Rafinesque, 1818 (a junior objective synonym of Portunus Weber, 1795), placed on the Official Index oa pe aaeen and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1194... PAT] LYNCEIDAE Sayce (O.A.), 1902 (Class Crustacea, Order Conchostraca), placed on the Official List of Bee PUD Names in Zoology \ with eae Miiller ae F), 1776, as type genus 365 Lynceus Miller (O.F.), 1776 (Class Crustacea, Order Conchostraca), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1319, with rege brachyurus Miller (O.F.), 1776, as type species 364 gender of name 364 416 Opinions and Declarations Page Lynceus Gray (J.E.), 1821 (a junior homonym of Lynceus Miller (O. F.), 1776), placed on the Official Index a Bones and Invalid Generic Names in HOT with Name No. 1220 .. se é : é 264 Lysmata Risso, 1816 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1303, with Melicerta seticaudata Risso, 1816, as type species a ae a ae Se Be 213-214 gender of name .. ae a Be ay Ke ae 5 Be Be Ail madagascarensis Milne Edwards (H.) & Audouin, 1839, as published in the com- bination Astacus madagascarensis (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 1545.. Bes & 141 madagascariensis Audouin & Milne Edwards (H.), 1841, as published in the combination Astacus madagascariensis (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling for madagascarensis Milne Edwards (H.) & Audouin, 1839, as published in the combination Astacus madagascarensis), placed on the O ffeial Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 530 . ae .. 143 maja Cramer (P.), [1775], as published in the combination Papilio maja (Class Insecta, Order Lepidoptera), ruled to take precedence below pandora [Denis (M.) & Schiffermiller (1.)], 1775, as published in the combination Papilio pandora Bee (Gu) mandibulare Lucas, 1846, as published in the combination Theridion mandibulare (Class Arachnida), placed on the Tees List aor Sara Names in pet with Name No. 1521 .. : 48 Melicerta Schrank, 1803 (Class Rotifera), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology w with Name No. 1306, with Sabella ringens Linnaeus, 1767, as type Fi species Pes 21 gender of name .. se ue 56 a. ae ae ne za Rene AIC Melicerta Péron & Lesuer, 1810 (a junior homonym of Melicerta Schrank, 1803), placed on the Official Index a pes and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1198 .. ; 217 Melicerta Risso, 1816 (a junior homonym of Melicerta Schrank, 1803), placed on the Official Index os eat and Invalid Generic Names in 1 Zoology with Name No. 1199 .. 218 Melicerta Tilesius, 1831 (a junior homonym of Melicerta Schrank, 1803), placed on the Official Index sh es aa and Invalid Generic Names in 1 Zoology with Name ue No. 1200 .. Melicerta Stephens, 1833 (a junior homonym of Melicerta Schrank, 1803), placed on the Official Index so Ropciede and Invalid Generic Names in 1 Zoology with Name Ae No. 1201 .. MELICERTADAE Hudson & Gosse, 1886 (an Invalid Original Spelling for MELICERTIDAE), placed on the Official Index of Dees and Invalid pen oe Names in pee with Name No. 279 ae : 220 Volume 19 MELICERTIDAE (correction of MELICERTADAE) Hudson & Gosse, 1886 (Class Rotifera), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology with Name No. 245, with Melicerta Schrank, 1803, as type genus .. ; Mesapus Rafinesque, 1814 (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy ce ae wy tye ee ais aA oe A placed on the Official Index os aad and Invalid Generic Names in ee with Name No. 1186 -metopa, generic names ending in, determination of gender to be attributed to montezumae de Saussure, 1857, as published in the combination Cambarus montezumae (Class Crustacea, ‘Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List Oy Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 1535 ic 5 a a , nasutus Lacépéde, 1789, as published in the combination Coluber nasutus (Class Reptilia), placed on the ce List ey Byceiic Names in Bere with Name IW@, ISVS oo : Nectoceras Rafinesque, 1817 (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy ue bo oe an a ve af ts Hu placed on the Official Index oF gece and Invalid Generic Names in Oe, with Name No. 1187 Niphea Rafinesque, 1815 (Class Crustacea), 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 of poe and Invalid Generic Names in eee with Name No. 1188 novemdecos Sulzer, 1776, as published in the combination Cancer novemdecos (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy ae placed on the Official Index of Sages and Invalid aes) Names in aS: with Name No. 549 .. nuncius Lindstrom & Thorell, 1884, as published in the combination Palaeophoneus [sic] muncius (Class Arachnida), placed on the gee List eh peed! Names in Zoology with Name No. 1570 .. p 417 Page 220 Dail 217 IV 139 264 211 251 Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Family-Group Names in Zoology, names placed on : ALBUNIDAE Stimpson, 1858 LIMNICYTHERINAE Sars, 1925 ; MELICERTADAE Hudson & Gosse, 1886 PALAEOPHONOIDAE Thorell & Lindstrém, 1885 PALINURINI Latreille, [1802-1803] 5 SCYLLARIDES Latreille, 1825 STENOPIDAE Huxley, [1879] THELXIOPEIDAE Rathbun, 1937 THERIDIIDES Sundevall, 1833 THERIDIONIDAE Simon, 1881 418 Opinions and Declarations Page Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology, names placed on : Acilius Rafinesque, 1815 as oe aie ath a ne ate Be NG Acrodytes Fitzinger, 1843 ee ne ihe ee ae is ie Be 172 Aglaope Rafinesque, 1814 oe Pe ai ae a ae aie Pere 2) (7/ Ahaetulla Gray (J.E.), 1825 ar a Se Be x Ba .. 264 Alciope Rafinesque, 1814 a tes a ae 56 5 be ua 216 Allodicrania Enderlein, 1913 .. hy Oe Be ba nib a a 336 Arctus De Haan, [1849] RY ae vs ay, ae Ke Pe ae 141 Arctus Dana, 1852 Be aa We te oe Bs a ee ae 142 Ayus Ortmann, 1891 ave bs ae ths ee ts ats He s& 142 Bartonius Ortmann, 1905 os ae a at. 28 ss S E 142 Byzenus Rafinesque, 1814 a 1p Ee : ey * i eee Pil 7/ Camptosceles Haliday, 1832 .. a5 ae es ire ih eh sis Chaeraps Huxley, [1879] ae a Ne ies ae ae sg aw la Cheraps Erichson, 1846 . ae Re ie ue a 5 Me .. 142 Crangonus Rafinesque, 1815). Bit Pe ae ad es con) ee Deidamia von Willemoes-Suhm, 1873 . ae ae ae ai He oy 142 Dendrophis Boie (H.), 1826 ats oa be a6 ss te ae si) P24: Dicrania Macquart, 1834 ig om Ae ae ais Me a .. == 336 Dicranomyia Hunter, 1901 ae cg Be se 30, ae Eee % 336 Diplocus Blanchard, 1845 ub Ae a oe Fe ic. 3 ee 337 Diplocus Pictet, 1853 ree sh af a $4 ae a by Bi 337 Dryinus Merrem, 1820 .. a we aye ae a ae a8 se 9264 Dryophis Dalman, 1823 . ae ie re oe an a .. 264 Erpetocypris Brady & Norman, "1889 .. ae es ate ie ih Ho) teil Euryrhynchus Nitzsch, 1829 _... a0 ae ifs a xe He .. 114 Leptodiplosis Kieffer, 1894 ae es aie a ae ce Be aie SE Limnicythere Brady, 1868 Be ike ath = ee or a — 317 Lissula Rafinesque, 1818 a Ete ae a5 ae Petey 2417/ Lophiotherium Fischer de Waldheim, 120" a ne Me Ae Be Sul Lophiotherium Gervais, 1849 .. a Ba des Me ae Pei sed, Lupania Rafinesque, 1818 oe ss a He ee ae i eng 22 Lynceus Gray (J.E.), 1821 sie Ae 5 ie oo ee .. 364 Melicerta Péron & Lesuer, 1810. A a ah ays Ae ae eee 21 7/ Melicerta Risso, 1816 .. Bt a a3 =f ic as oe ey PAils) Melicerta Tilesius, 1831 bes aie ie ae a ME ue ae 218 Melicerta Stephens, 1833 oe 0 M6 a a aK 5m . 213 3 Mesapus Rafinesque, 1814 Be Bes sit oe is ae a .. (217 Nectoceras Rafinesque, 1817 .. te 8 ne Ve is 24g ou) 2 Niphea Rafinesque, 1815 eG i ba = 8 a 2 Palaeophoneus Lindstrom & Thorell, 1884 7 bel at aes it .. » 2592 Palinurus Fabricius (J.C.), 1798 fe x or me an i ft 142 Palinurus De Kay, 1842 an ah as ai a ae 6 Aor 142 Pallinurus Weber, 1795 2... cs, Passerita Gray (J.E.), 1825... ne 53 = oe 4 s. . 26 Phyllonethis Thorell, 1869 : at a Re & re ay 48 Polycheles Brady & Robertson, 1870 . 13 Be Ast! ee He a 142 Puer Ortmann, 1891 as ai Aye A a He Me te 142 Stichocera Hine, 1920 .. Ne ae Ale Ne if st an es 337 Syllarus Rafinesque, 1815 a eee he ay os ae eS Reve, All 7) Symathus Rafinesque, 1815 a ae x oe a a vik) SS ey Symethus Rafinesque, 1814 ig Bs a3 sr an a 46 on 217 Symnista Rafinesque, 1815 ae he ae ne es Bi sf Be 7 7/ Tachyophis Mertens, 1934 us ne ae ae as aye es LE 264 Thelxiope Rafinesque, 1814 ae ae oe a Ak ats Re Be 2 ald) Theridio Simon, 1864 .. re ais a Ay ts es ia 49 Theridium Leach (W.E.), 1824 . ae By, es Ae i ed oh 49 Volume 19 419 Page Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology, names placed on: achiria Rafinesque, 1817, Hippa a a a a ae a0 Hen DLS crocea Rafinesque, 1814, Squilla Be de a 2 oe ae LOLS cruentatus Linnaeus, 1758, Cancer A at Fs Re a eh; rad STS cubicus Forskal, 1775, Cancer .. a oe 3 re of ¥ een a P0I fe) fasciatus Rafinesque, 1814, Mesapus .. Ss He a ot at Be. allies fluviatilis Rafinesque, 1814, Symethus .. ae * the a ae Et S28 fossor Rafinesque, 1817, Astacus ats a ae es om bs Sones PAIlfe) gervaisii Pictet, 1853, Diplocus ahs ne 4M a a es337 goudotii Guérin- Méneville, 1839, Astacoides .. ngs ah ang as Heemeyl43 heterochelus Rafinesque, 1814, Alciope Be xa! oe oe Bes mee ELS icarus Cramer (P.), [1775], Papilio a a ats e ae BS ae (v) incisus (Péron MS.) Leach, 1815, Scyllarus .. as ae ae xe ce 143 levigatus Rafinesque, 1814, Inachus .. Bee a Bs madagascariensis Audouin & Milne Edwards G. yt 1841, Astacus .. ae .. 143 novemdecos Sulzer, 1776, Cancer p he fe ae NO pelagica Rafinesque, 1817, Nectoceras Be Se ae oe ar Ou elo) picta Razoumowsky, 1789, Aranea he ae Pe Sie pe ae Se 49 portunoides Rafinesque, 1814, Cancer Se us =e mS aye eee} pulchra Hellich, 1874, Alona .. a a ae a6 A ae we 365 pusilla Rafinesque, 1817, Ocypoda Ne 6% a ae oe ne Ae ePAle quadrangularis Leydig, 1860, Lynceus .. = a us ae ie S05) quadricolor Rafinesque, 1814, Peneus .. fe a te we ie Ba WZl®) quadricornis Weber, 1795, Pallinurus .. : ere ne a as we 43 quadricornis Fabricius CJ. e ), 1798, Palinurus — as ee a a woe £43 rugosus Rafinesque, 1817, Nectylus as ae ae ame a ae oe 219 scaber Rafinesque, 1814, ‘Byzenus Ae ie it a ee ae os 219 striata Rafinesque, 1814, Aglaope af gt be He Be ate Ve 2D tibiatrix Laurenti, 1768, Hyla i oe Ms Bs i a > 172 tomentosus Rafinesque, 1814, Inachus .. Bs ve a a 58 aay i°) triodona Rafinesque, 1814, Squilla Ue is eis ia Le ae an DED truncatulus Rafinesque, 1817, Pagurus av Pat fe oe ie Bs 219 tuberculata Hudendorff, 1876, Alona Ee Se a ie ae 365 ursus Dana, 1852, Arctus : a A ae vs Bt "143- 144 ursusmajor Herbst, 1793, Cancer ‘(Astacus) Be xe si ee Ae .. 144 ursusminor Herbst, 1793, Cancer (Astacus) .. En oe - Af ae 144 verrucosa Lutz, 1879, Alona ee a Aa be a: +6 ai 365 vulgaris Latreille, [1802-1803], Palinurus ae 6 Be 6 ae 3% 144 vulgaris Latreille, 1804, Palinurus aie a a aie si ie 144 zonata Spix, 1824, Hyla ere aL oe ae ne oe a "722173 Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Works in Zoological Nomenclature, titles of works placed on : Fabricius (O. ), 1823, “ Fortegnelse over eet Bekone Fabriciusses efterladte Naturalier” .. e 5 at oe aes AE Walch (J.E.1.), 1768-1774, Die Neo onan der Versteinerungen Zur ee der Knorrischen Sammlung von Merkwiirdigkeiten der Natur, Nurnberg. . 327 Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology, names placed on : ALBUNEIDAE (correction of ALBUNIDAE) a umpsets 1858 ae ae aA EAS) AMPHORACRINIDAE Bather, 1899 ae ze Pa ne esd: CAMBARINAE Hobbs, 1942 oe Ae ae 56 a6 28 aes a5 144 CANDONINAE Kaufmann, 1900 .. oe Ae aca we Be a3 380 EURYRHYNCHINAE Holthuis (L.B.), 1950 oo ae ah a: 50 Pe 114 HERPETOCYPRIDINAE Kaufmann, 1900 ae a3 awe bie te ros 380 HOMOLIDAE White, 1847 Y “ pa eee 22.0) LIMNOCYTHERINAE (correction of LIMNICYTHERINAE) Sars, 1925 Fe ie ieee Sih) 420 Opinions and Declarations Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology, names placed on (contd.) : LYNCEIDAE Sayce (O.A.), 1902 .. MELICERTIDAE (correction of MELICERTADAE) Hudson & Gosse, 1886 PALAEOPHONIDAE (correction of PALAEOPHONOIDAE) Thorell & Lindstrom, 1885 . ‘ PALINURIDAE (correction of PALINURINI) Latreille, [1802-1803] PARASTACIDAE Huxley, [1879] .. oa as ee Ae POLYCHELIDAE Wood-Mason, 1874 . SCYLLARIDAE (correction of SCYLLARIDES) Latreille, 1825 STENOPODIDAE (correction Of STENOPIDAE) Huxley, [1879] THERIDIIDAE (correction of THERIDIIDES) Sundevall, 1833 Official List of Generic Names in Zoology, names placed on: Ahaetulla Link, 1807 Albunea Weber, 1795 Alona Baird, 1843 a Amphoracrinus Austin (i)! Sr., "1848 .. Astacoides Guérin-Meéneville, 1839 Atyaephyra de Brito Capello, 1867 Brintesia Fruhstorfer (H.), [1911] Cambarellus Ortmann, 1905 .. Cambarus Erichson, 1846 Campsicnemus Haliday, 1851 Candona Baird, [1846] Cherax Erichson, 1846 Dendrelaphis Boulenger, 1890 Elaphella Bezzi, 1913... Engaeus Erichson, 1846 . Enoplognatha Pavesi (.)), 1880 Enoplometopus Milne Edwards (A.), 1862 Euryrhynchus Miers, [1878] an Herpetocypris (emend. of Erpetocypris) Brady « & Norman, 1889 Homola Leach, 1815 me Ibacus Leach, 1815 Leptophis Bell, 1825 $35 Lestodiplosis Kieffer, 1894 Leydigia Kurz, 1874 a Limnocythere Brady, 1868 Linuparus White, 1847 Lissa Leach, 1815 Lophiotherium Gervais, 1850 Lynceus Miller (O.F.), 1776 Lysmata Risso, 1816 ae Melicerta Schrank, 1803 Orconectes Cope, Nee Palaeophonus (emend. of Palaeophoneus) Lindstrom & Thorell, 1884 Palinurellus von Martens, 1878 Palinurus (emend. of Pallinurus) Weber, 1795 Palinustus Milne Edwards (A.), 1880 .. : Pandoriana Warren (B.C.S.), 1942 Paracambarus Ortmann, 1906 .. Paranephrops White, 1842 Parastacus Huxley, [1879] Parribacus Dana, 1852 Phrynohyas Fitzinger, 1843 Polycheles Heller, 1862 .. Pontophilus Leach, [1817] Procambarus Ortmann, 1905 Puerulus Ortmann, 1897 Scyllarus Fabricius (J.C.), 1775 "213-214 214 136 251 136 137 137 (v) 137 13% 137 137 172 Sa 214 137 187-488 ae 83) f q Volume 19 421 Page Official List of Generic Names in Zoology, names placed on (contd.) : Stenopus Latreille, 1819 ae a iM ae 33 api 214 Thaumastocheles Wood- Mason, S74. a Mt oe ot aks ial Thenus Leach, 1815 ae 5% ae ue Ae Ss an a ae 138 Theridion Walckenaer, 1805 a Ee ahs ie oe 56 bas a 48 Typhlocypris Vejdovsky, 1882 ee th ng sit a fi eeeeso0) Willemoesia Grote, 1873 He ie ae ae a ae % Aes 138 Official List of Specific Names in Zoology, names placed on: ahaetulla Linnaeus, 1758, Coluber as a ah 3% a ms me 264 angulatus Bate, 1888, Panulirus S <3 see 8 sho ie Py 138 antarcticus Lund, 1793, Scyllarus ae As Bes at a ae ie 138 arctus Linnaeus, 1758, Cancer .. i a we oe Be As Me 139 barbatus Fabricius, 1793, Cancer Ae ae a ie bombed dic Ak 214 bartonii Fabricius (J.C.), 1798, Astacus Bie ae ae xs ie re 139 bicarinatus Gray (J.E.), 1845, Astacus aa Si a Ps ae Ais 141 brachyurus Miller (O.F.), 1776, Lynceus Ae ae a ne oh aia 364 -candida Miller (O.F.), 1776, Cypris_ .. 5% 5 ed aig - 96 380 caudolineata Gray (J.E.), [1834], Ahaetulla .. an 55 35 NG so AXA cervulum Gervais, 1850, Lophiotherium We Ae ‘gh a aN = 336 cervus Wiedemann, 1828, Pangonia .. an a6 xg a5 Be SK 336 chiragra Fabricius, 1775, Cancer Be Bi 5% 5 & Bh Bs 214 circe Fabricius (J.C.), 1775, Papilio .. 6 qe ne = aie (in) curvipes Fallén, 1823, Dolichopus hes ae ae a =e Bie me 351 desmarestii Millet, 1831, Hippolyte .. ie ae ab AG os Ren 24 digueti Bouvier, 1897, Cambarus ves oe a Bia ne Pee Ms 139 diogenes Girard, 1852, Cambarus br ae Ae ae a vs a aL 24 elephas Fabricius (J.C.), 1787, Astacus.. .. ve oa bo ae a 139 eremita Vejdovsky, 1880, Cypris a ee oe ai os Ee ee 380 eusebia Risso, 1816, Squilla a8 * ne =o E3 Ae ae ee 2G fasciatus Risso, 1816, Crangon .. ites we ee aes ae Ae aan 215 ferussaci Roux, 1830, Squilla .. me aed We a es Ete ee 2 2G flavomaculata Heller, 1864, Pontonia S: ye oh Bi ie A 215 fossor Erichson, 1846, Astacus (Engaeus) af 26 ae 3 ae as 169 gilbertsoni Phillips, 1836, Actinocrinus oe ME os is a mou 2304 gundlachi von Martens, 1878, Palinurellus .. a ee a st oO. icarus Rottemburg (S.A. von), 1775, Papilio ae a ad an ae (iv) inopinata Baird, 1843, Cythere a a ate ite Fam Lia leptodactyla von Willemoes- Suhm, 1873, Deidamia .. es an Pa Bi 139 leydigi Schédler, 1863, Alona .. oh ae on ea er .. 364 limosus Rafinesque, 1817, Astacus ie < ae me a a ot ana longicarpus Say, 1817, Pagurus a oe es ah te oe ie sem ae aiS) longipes Risso, 1816, Portunus .. or Ne Ys A a ies ie i) lunulata Risso, 1816, Maia ; A 5 eee OAS madagascarensis Milne Edwards (H.) & Audouin, 1839, Astacus .. - a 141 mandibulare Lucas, 1846, Theridion .. : Et: yc 24 48 montezumae de Saussure, 1857, Cambarus .. ae oe te ade ie 139 nasutus Lacépéde, 1789, Coluber v5 a 54 wee 204 nuncius Lindstrom & Thorell, 1884, Palaeophoneus [sic] ae *. Ee ae 251 orientalis Lund, 1793, Scyllarus a ae ae ce a mY ae 141 ovatus Clerck, [1758], Araneus .. an Be Ss a 48 pandora [Denis (M.) & Schiffermiller (I. Me 1775, Papilio ~ ee A ae Gy) paradoxus Ortmann, 1906, Cambarus (Paracambarus) Be i ai .. 140 pellucidus Tellkampf, 1844, Astacus .. ah os ae es ee i lat penelope Schaufuss (L.W.), 1870, Castnia .. af x Me xe oe (iv) peronii Leach, 1815, Ibacus S aur ae Ss he 3 .. 140 picta Walckenaer, 1802, Aranea me Wy. ~~ a ms aie aS 48 pictus Gmelin (J. F), [1789], Coluber .. ay as ap sie tee “2t9 pictus Milne Edwards (A.), 1862, Enoplometopus sn Pa ae aA .. 140 422 Opinions and Declarations Official List of Specific Names in Zoology, names placed on (contd.) : pilimanus von Martens, 1869, Astacus planifrons White, 1842, Paranephrops . pugnax Smith, 1870, Gelasimus.. ais quadrangularis Miiller (O.F.), 1776, Lynceus eh rectangula Sars, 1862, Alona .. its reptans Baird, [1836], Cypris ringens Linnaeus, 1767, Sabella scambus Fallén, 1823, Dolichopus ; septemguttata Kieffer, 1894, Lestodiplosis seticaudata Risso, 1816, Melicerta sisyphius Clerck, [1758], Araneus spilomma Cope, 1877, Hyla spinosus Leach, 1815, Crangon .. spinosus Risso, 1827, Stenopus symmysta Linnaeus, 1758, Cancer talpoida Say, 1817, ‘Hippa 3% trigonus von Siebold, 1824, Palinurus .. truncatus Milne Edwards (A. ), 1880, Palinustus typhlops Heller, 1862, Polycheles pe: venulosa Laurenti, 1768, Rana .. verrucosa Sars, 1901, Alona wrzesniowskii Miers, [1878], Euryrhynchus zaleucus Thomson, 1873, Astacus Official List of Specific Names in Zoology, name already on, amendment to entry relating to: hispidus Olivier, 1811, Palaemon Official List of Works Approved as Available for Zoological Nomenclature, titles of works placed on : Cramer (P.), [1775]-[1790], De Uitlandsche Kapellen voorkomende in de drie Waereld-Deelen Asia, Africa en America, and supplement thereto by Stoll (C.).. [Denis (M.) & Schiffermiiller (1.)] [pre-8th December] 1775, Ankiindung po eines systematisches Werkes von den Schmetterlinge der Wiener Gegend Fabricius (J.C.), 1775, Systema Entomologiae. . 3 ay ae Fuessly (J.C.), 1775, Verzeichniss der ihm bekannten schweizerischen Insekten Rottemburg (S.A. von), 1775, “Anmerkungen zu den Gur Tabellen ”’ published in Vols. 6 & 7 of Der Naturforscher eS -oides, generic names ending in, determination of gender to be attributed to... Orconectes Cope, 1872 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1283, with Orconectes inermis Cope, 1872, as type species me we % a - Hf gender of name orientalis Lund, 1793, as published in the combination Scyllarus orientalis (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), Blea on the pay List eh Specie) Names in Zoology with Name No. 1548 : ovatus Clerck, [1758], as published in the combination Araneus ovatus (Class Arach- nida), placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 1522 216 5—6 Volume 19 Palaeophoneus Lindstr6m & Thorell, 1884 (Class Arachnida), rejection of, under the Plenary Powers, as an Invalid Original Spelling of Palaeophonus. . placed on the Official Index 2 Aes and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1202 PALAEOPHONIDAE (correction of PALAEOPHONOIDAE) Thorell & Lindstrém, 1885 (Class Arachnida), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology with Name No. 246, with RE CORo nts ene: of REP ROP TOOLS) Lindstrém & Thorell, 1884, as type genus : PALAEOPHONOIDAE Thorell & Lindstr6m, 1885 (an Invalid Original Spelling for PALAEOPHONIDAE), placed on the Official Index of Nanas and Invalid en Group Names in Zoology with Name No. 280.. : Ba 5 Palaeophonus, emendation to, of Palaeophoneus Lindstrom & Thorell, 1884 (Class Arachnida), validation of, under the Plenary Powers : te ae aes gender of name placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1307, with Palaeophoneus [sic] nuncius Lindstrom & Thorell, 1884, as type species . Palinurellus von Martens, 1878 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1284, with Palinurellus gundlachi yon Martens, 1878, as type species. : gender of name PALINURIDAE (correction by Samouelle (1819) of PALINURINI) Latreille, [1802-1803] (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology with Name No. 238, with Palinurus Weber, 1795, as type genus PALINURINI Latreille, [1802-1803] (an Invalid Original Spelling for PALINURIDAE), placed on the Official Index of eg and Invalid Hag oe? Names in Zoology with Name No. 274 .. Palinurus, emendation to, of Pallinurus Weber, 1795 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), validation of, under the Plenary Powers gender of name placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1285, with Astacus elephas Fabricius, 1787, as type species .. ae Palinurus Fabricius (J.C.), 1798 (a junior objective synonym of, and a junior homo- nym of, Palinurus Weber, 1795), placed on the Official Index a Roceed and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1177... Palinurus De Kay, 1842 (a junior homonym of Palinurus Weber, 1795), placed on the Official Index os Roecied: a and Invalid Generic Names in OES with Name No. 1178 . Palinustus Milne Edwards (A.), 1880 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1286, with Palinustus truncatus Milne Edwards (A.), 1880, as type species gender of name 423 Page 251 252 253 252 251 251 251 136 136 145 145 135 LS 137 142 142 137 137 424 Opinions and Declarations Pallinurus Weber, 1795 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), rejection of, under the Plenary Powers, as an Invalid Original ‘Spelling for Palinurus placed on the Official Index of a and Invalid Generic Names in Zooloey with Name No. 1179 .. : pandora [Denis (M.) & Schiffermiiller (1.)], 1775, as published in the combination Papilio pandora (Class Insecta, Order Lepidoptera), ruled to take pe over maja Cramer (P.), [1775], as published in the combination Papilio maja. 4 placed on the Official List of peor Names in Bey with Name No. 1514, with endorsement to above effect . Pandoriana Warren (B.C.S.), 1942 (Class Insecta, Order Lepidoptera), placed on the Officlal List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1270, with a Per maja Cramer (P.), [1775], as type species gender of name Paracambarus Ortmann, 1906 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1287, with Cambarus (Paracambarus) paradoxus Ortmann, 1906, as type species .. : gender of name paradoxus Ortmann, 1906, as published in the combination Cambarus (Paracambarus) paradoxus (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), pee on the One List os Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 1536 Paranephrops White, 1842 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1288, with Par rane Lies Pe White, 1842, as type species gender of name PARASTACIDAE Huxley, [1879] (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology with Name No. 239, with Para- stacus Huxley, [1879], as type genus : Parastacus Huxley, [1879] (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with ‘Name No. 1289, with Astacus Meese von Martens, 1869, as type species ae : gender of name Parribacus Dana, 1852 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic "Names in Zoology with Name No. 1290, with See antarcticus Lund, 1793, as type species : aa i Bh gender of name Passerita Gray (J.E.), 1825 (a junior objective synonym of Ahaetulla Link, 1807), placed on the Official Index of Poa and Inyalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1208 .. Page 135 142 (iii) (iv) (v) (v) 137 137 140 137 137 145 137 137 137) 137 265 Volume 19 pelagica Rafinesque, 1817, as published in the combination Nectoceras pelagica (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy ns a placed on the Official Index a eee and Invalid ee Mele Names in AMS with Name No. 550 .. pellucidus Tellkampf, 1844, as published in the combination Astacus pellucidus (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), pee on the ae List oF gee Names in Zoology with Name No. 1547 penelope Schaufuss (L.W.), 1870, as published in the combination Castnia penelope (Class Insecta, Order Lepidoptera), pieced on the Pee List ap SURGE Names in Zoology with Name No. 1516 peronii Leach, 1815, as published in the combination [bacus peronii (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed, on the mn OEaL List Pel ae Names in seal with Name No. 1537 .. Phrynohyas Fitzinger, 1843 (Class Amphibia), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1298, with Rana venulosa Laurenti, 1768, as type species : 5 : gender of name Phyllonethis Thorell, 1869 (Class Arachnida), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy oe be ne Ae 0 she a oe oe placed on the Official Index a ad and Invalid Generic Names in ones with Name No. 1158 ; picta Razoumowsky, 1789, as published in the combination Aranea picta (Class Arachnida), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy .. ae ae We ne placed on the Official Index ay nae and Invalid eas Names in Zooey with Name No. 527 .. picta Walckenaer, 1802, Aranea (Class Arachnida), designation of, under the Ee Powers, to be the type species of Theridion Walckenaer, 1805 placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 1520 pictus Gmelin (J.F.), [1789], as published in the combination Coluber pictus (Class Reptilia), ruled to take precedence over boiga Lacépéde, 1789, as published in the combination Coluber boiga, both being names published in different works on unknown dates in the same year Se on Ae ae of za placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 1574 pictus Milne Edwards (A.), 1862, as published in the combination Enoplometopus pictus (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), amie on the peas! List oF ae Names in Zoology with Name No. 1538 pilimanus yon Martens, 1869, as published in the combination Astacus pilimanus (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), Bee on the Oita List of Spee) Names in Zoology with Name No. 1539 425 Page 212 219 141 (iv) 140 172 M2, 47 48 47 49 47 48 279 279 140 140 426 Opinions and Declarations planifrons White, 1842, as published in the combination Paranephrops planifrons (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), pee on the Ghee List of pee Names in Zoology with Name No. 1540 Polycheles Heller, 1862 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1291, with mane Ones Heller, 1862, as type species gender of name Polycheles Brady & Robertson, 1870 (a junior homonym of Polycheles Heller, 1862), placed on the Official Index oy eG and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1180 .. POLYCHELIDAE Wood-Mason, 1874 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Family- Group Names in Zoology with Name No. 240, with Polycheles Heller, 1862, as type genus : Pontophilus Leach, [1817] (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1304, with Ce spines Leach, 1815, as type species : gender of name portunoides Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Cancer portunoides (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy. . Bs ; placed on the Official Index oF gee and Invalid BesaIes Names in Zeorey with Name No. 551 .. Procambarus Ortmann, 1905 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1292, with Cambarus digueti Bouvier, 1897, as type species .. ; : gender of name proserpina [Denis (M.) & Schiffermiiller (1.)], 1775, as published in the combination Papilio proserpina (Class Insecta, Order Lepidoptera), ruled to take precedence below circe Fabricius (J.C.), 1775, as published in the combination Papilio circe . . Puer Ortmann, 1891 (a junior homonym of Puer Lefebvre, 1842), placed on the Official Index 3 ROE and Invalid Generic Names in ey with Name No. 1181 . Puerulus Ortmann, 1897 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with ‘Name No. 1293, with Panulirus angulatus Page 140 137 137 142 145 214 214 212 219 187 137 (iii) 142 Bate, 1888, as type species Aa nye j nes 137-138 gender of name pugnax Smith, 1870, as published in the combination Gelasimus pugnax (Class. Crustacea, Order Decapoda), peur on the Ones List He Specie Names in Zoology with Name No. 1561... 137 215 Volume 19 pulchra Hellich, 1874, as published in the combination Alona pulchra (Class Crustacea, Order Cladocera), 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 of, Peiseicd and Invalid Secs Names in eres, with Name No. 562 ... pusilla Rafinesque, 1817, as published in the combination Ocypoda pusilla (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy.. Be As placed on the Official Index oh Reicced and Invalid eRe Names in Saale with Name No. 552 .. quadrangularis Miller (O.F.), 1776, as published in the combination Lynceus quadrangularis (Class Crustacea, Order Cladocera), plavedl © on the es has List us Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 1584 is quadrangularis Leydig, 1860, as published in the combination Lynceus quadrangularis (a junior homonym of quadrangularis Miller (O.F.), 1776, as published in the combination Lynceus quadrangularis), placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 564.. : a Le quadricolor Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Peneus quadricolor (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy 3 placed on the Official Index oli Rojecsed and Invalid fe Names in Sopiey with Name No. 553 .. quadricornis Weber, 1795, as published in the combination Pallinurus quadricornis (a junior objective synonym of elephas Fabricius (J.C.), 1787, as published in the combination Astacus elephas), placed on the pices Index of poet and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 531 : : ; quadricornis Fabricius (J.C.), 1798, as published in the combination Palinurus quadricornis (a junior objective synonym of elephas Fabricius (J.C.), 1787, as published in the combination Astacus elephas, and a junior homonym of, and a junior objective synonym of, quadricornis Weber, 1795, as published in the combination Pallinurus quadricornis), placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 532 .. aps dai rectangula Sars, 1862, as published in the combination Alona rectangula (Class Crustacea, Order Cladocera), wee on the tee List oh Le Ae Names in Zoology with Name No. 1583 .. Régles Internationales de la Nomenclature Zoclogique. interpretation of provisions in : Article 3, determination of nomenclatorial status of terms used as zoological names, when formed according of provisions of the poles in works pup in the Latin language (Declaration 41) Be a : é i é Article 14, determination of gender to be attributed to generic names having the terminations “-cheilus’’ (and “ -chilus’’) ;° “‘-gnathus”’; “-rhamphus”’ ; “* -rhynchus ”’ ; “‘ -stathus”’ ; “‘ -cera’”’ ; “‘ -metopa”’ ; and “‘ -soma”’ respectively (Declaration 39) Ai By Ss ae ona bs i Article 14, determination of gender attributable to generic names having the terminations “*-ides”’, ‘‘ -ites”’ or ‘‘ -oides’’ (Declaration 40) .. 427 Page 363 365 212 219 364 365 212 219 143 143 364 XXXI ili-iv Xxi 428 Opinions and Declarations reptans Baird, [1836], as published in the combination Cypris reptans (Class Crustacea, Ore Ostracoda), pase on the eas List ade Speevias Names in ene with ame No i -rhamphus, generic names ending in, determination of gender to be attributed to -rhynchus, generic names ending in, determination of gender to be attributed to ringens Linnaeus, 1767, as published in the combination Sabella ringens (Class Rue placed o on the eae List @ Specie Names in noc with Name o. 15 ie Rottemburg (S.A. von), 1775, “Anmerkungen zu den Hufnagelischen Tabellen ” published in Vols. 6 and 7 of Der Naturforscher, accorded precedence, under the Plenary Powers, over Fuessly (J.C.), Verzeichniss der ihm bekannten schweizer- ischen Insekten, ‘and over [Denis (M.) & Schiffermiiller (I.)], Ankiindung [sic] eines systematisches Werkes von den pon der Wiener Gegend, both works published in the same year 25 : : ae = : determination of Petes of, relative to other works publics in the same year te os Ws tk aA 3 ste ae Sed addition of title of, to the Official List of Works Approved as Available for Zoo- logical Nomenclature with Title No. 35, with endorsement to above effect rugosus Rafinesque, 1817, as published in the combination Nectylus rugosus (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy. . th: id placed on the Official Index ay ge and Invalid pegs Names in Mae with Name No. 554 .. scaber Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Byzenus scaber (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the Purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy. . s ae a placed on the Official Index oh Relies and Invalid Bee Names in Fooly with Name No. 555 scambus Fallén, 1823, as published in the combination Dolichopus scambus (Class Insecta, Order Diptera), Pier dss on the eee List ay pecs Names in ee with Name No. 1580 . SCYLLARIDAE (correction by White (1847) of ScYLLARIDES) Latreille, 1825 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology with Name No. 241, with Tae Fabricius oe ve 1775, as OES genus SCYLLARIDES Latreille, 1825 (an Invalid Original Spelling for SCYLLARIDAE), placed on the Official Index of laa and Invalid eu Names in Rees) with Name No. 275 Ws Scyllarus Fabricius (J.C.), 1775 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in eoorosy with Name No. 1294, with Cancer arctus Linnaeus, 1758, as type species gender of name Page 380 iii-iv ili-iv 216 212 219 PANS) 219 351 145 145 138 138 Volume 19 septemguttata Kieffer, 1894, as published in the combination Lestodiplosis septem- guttata (Class Insecta, Order Diptera), eee on the Pee List of Vas Names in Zoology with Name No. 1575 seticaudata Risso, 1816, as published in the combination Melicerta Seti Caudata [sic] (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), peed on the Opies List Boh RPGC Names in Zoology with Name No. 1562 .. sisyphius Clerck, [1758], as published in the combination Araneus sisyphius (Class Arachnida), placed on the eee List Bo, uate Names in Dorie with Name No. 1523 spilomma Cope, 1877, as published in the combination Hyla spilomma (Class Amphibia), pee on the yeah. List of SReeine Names in te Zo0ley with Name No. 1550 spinosus Leach, 1815, as published in the combination Crangon spinosus (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), pee on the a dee List ach Bae Names in Zoology with Name No. 1563 . : spinosus Risso, 1827, as published in the combination Stenopus spinosus (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), paced on the alge List a pei Names in Zoology with Name No. 1564 .. -stathus, generic names ending in, determination of gender to be attributed to STENOPIDAE Huxley, [1879] (an Invalid Original Spelling for STENOPODIDAE), placed on the Official Index of Poeees and Invalid ey are Names in Pooley with Name No. 277 BS STENOPODIDAE (correction of STENOPIDAE) Huxley, [1879], (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in » Zoology with Name No. 244, with Stenopus Latreille, 1819, as type genus. Stenopus Latreille, 1819 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic ‘Names in Zoology with Name No. 1305, with Palaemon ES Olivier, 1811, as type species ; gender of name Stichocera Hine, 1920 (a junior objective synonym of Elaphella Bezzi, 1913), placed on the Official Index of Ree | and Invalid Generic Names in n Zoology with Name No. 1215 .. Stoll (C.), Aanhangsel van het Werk, de Uitlandsche Kapellen voorkomende in de drie Weereld-Deelen Asia, Africa en America, door den Heere Pieter Cramer, dates to be assigned to, see Cramer (P.) striata Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Aglaope striata (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy oe Bi placed on the Official Index of Rages and Invalid vende Names in Feeley with Name No. 556 .. Syllarus Rafinesque, 1815 (a junior objective synonym of Scyllarus Fabricius, 1775), placed on the Official Index a eReieeted and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1195... 429 Page 293 215 48 172 215 215 ili-iv 220 220 214 214 337 213 219 PANT] 430 Opinions and Declarations Symathus Rafinesque, 1815 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling for Symethus Rafinesque, 1814), placed on the Official Index of eetied and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1196 se : Symethus Rafinesque, 1814 (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy ah ae a ee a At ae as ae placed on the Official Index of eee and Invalid Generic Names in me with Name No. 1189 . symmysta Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the combination Cancer symmysta (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), Merwe on the sage List ph mee Names in Zoology with Name No. 1565. .. Symnista Rafinesque, 1815 (a junior objective synonym of Albunea Weber, 1795), placed on the Official Index oF es and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1197... F Tachyophis Mertens, 1934 (a junior homonym of Tachyophis Rochebrune, 1884), placed on the Official Index a a a and Invalid Generic Names in mee? with Name No. 1205... j : : talpoida Say, 1817, as published in the combination Hippa talpoida (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), pla on the pies List Boh as Names in ook with Name No. 1566 .. Thaumastocheles Wood-Mason, 1874 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1295, with Astacus zaleucus Thomson, 1873, as type species gender of name Thelxiope Rafinesque, 1814 (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy oe ae a ae ds ss ue ie ae placed on the Official Index 2 aca and Invalid Generic Names in peg with Name No. 1190 : THELXIOPEIDAE Rathbun, 1937 (invalid because name of type genus suppressed under the Plenary Powers), placed on the Official Index of eae and Invalid fee Group Names in Zoology with Name No. 278. Be Thenus Leach, 1815 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic ‘Names in Aouee yas with Name No. 1296, with Thenus indicus Leach, 1815, as type species : 5 gender of name THERIDUDAE (correction of THERIDIIDES) Sundevall, 1833 (Class Arachnida), placed on the Official List of Family-Group Names in Zoology with Name No. 234, with Theridion Walckenaer, 1805, as type genus Page 217 211 api 7 215 2ilii 264 215 138 138 Zit pW 220 138 138 49 Volume 19 THERIDUDES Sundevall, 1833 (an Invalid Original Spelling for THERIDIIDAE), placed on the Official Index of ee le and Invalid a ala Names in eaten) with Name No. 272 3 Theridio Simon, 1864 (an Invalid Emendation of Theridion Walckenaer, 1805), placed on the Official Index gli ees and Invalid Generic Names in E ZocbRy with Name No. 1160 .. Theridion Walckenaer, 1805 (Class Arachnida), rejection of proposed emendation of spelling of, under the Plenary Powers, to Theridium Be ee ne all previous type selections for, set aside under the Plenary Powers, and eeeennen of Aranea picta Walckenaer, 1802, to be the type species of : : me gender of name placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1272 THERIDIONIDAE Simon, 1881 (an Erroneous Subsequent Spelling for THERIDIDAE), placed on the Official Index of Rocca and Invalid slataaes CIOee Names in pao les with Name No. 273 ale Theridium, rejection of proposed emendation to, under the Plenary Powers, of Theridion Walckenaer, 1805 (Class Arachnida) ve es wy a Theridium Leach (W.E.), 1824 (an Invalid Emendation of Theridion Walckenaer, 1805), placed on the Official Index nce pee and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1159 .... tibiatrix Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combination Hyla tibiatrix (Class Amphibia), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the DUEDOECS of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy. . : 3% placed on the Official Index a ee te and Invalid pepecilie Names in EE: with Name No. 538 .. tomentosus Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Inachus tomentosus (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the PURPOSES of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy : sts placed on the Official Index es pes and Invalid sale Names in Ree with Name No. 557 .. trigonus von Siebold, 1824, as published in the combination Palinurus trigonus (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), pee. on the Onea List gs Sree Names in Zoology with Name No. 1541 triodona Rafinesque, 1814, as published in the combination Squilla triodona (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy Se placed on the Official Index of hpee and Invalid meen Names in ine with Name No. 558 .. truncatulus Rafinesque, 1817, as published in the combination Pagurus truncatulus (Class Crustacea), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes of the Law of Priority but not for those of the Law of Homonymy. . ae a placed on the Official Index He ee and Invalid fee Names in ee with Name No. 559 .. 431 Page 49 49 47 47 48 48 49 47 49 171 172 218 219 140 213 219 213 219 432 Opinions and Declarations truncatus Milne Edwards (A.), 1880, as published in the combination Palinustus truncatus (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), Diag on the Opient List oy Specs Names in Zoology with Name No. 1542 ; tuberculata Hudendorff, 1876, as published in the combination Alona tuberculata (a junior homonym of tuberculata Kurz, 1874, as published in the combination Alona tuberculata), placed on the Official Index oe ees and Invalid a Names in Zoology with Name No. 563. Typhlocypris Vejdovsky, 1882 (Class Crustacea, Order Ostracoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1322, with Cypris eremita Vejdovsky, 1880, as type species (for use by any specialist who may regard Typhlocypris Veidovsky, 1882, as Pops HUnE a taxon distinct from Candona Baird, [1846]) ; : gender of name typhlops Heller, 1862, as published in the combination Polycheles typhlops (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), Pe on the NOES List es Specitie Names in Zoology with Name No. 1543 .. ursus Dana, 1852, as published in the combination Arctus ursus (a junior objective synonym of arctus Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the combination Cancer arctus), placed on the Official Index a Rejected and Invalid pes Names in coon Page 140 365 380 380 140 with Name No. 533 ae ; 143-144 ursusmajor Herbst, 1793, as published in the combination Cancer (Astacus) ursus- major (a junior objective synonym of antarcticus Lund, 1793, as published in the combination Scyllarus antarcticus), placed on the Official Index ey Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 534 Wr : a Es ursusminor Herbst, 1793, as published in the combination Cancer (Astacus) ursus- minor (a junior objective synonym of arctus Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the combination Cancer arctus), placed on the ee a Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 535 d ‘ ae By, venulosa Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combination Rana venulosa (Class Amphibia), rejection of request for suppression of, under the Plenary Powers interpretation of, under the Plenary Powers, » by reference to type specuney of Hyla zonata Spix, 1824 a oy : : placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 1549 verrucosa Lutz, 1879, as published in the combination Alona verrucosa (Class Crustacea, Order Cladocera), suppression of, under the Plenary Powers, for the purposes both of the Law of Priority and of the Law of Homonymy be placed on the Official Index a Boies and Invalid eae Names in Rae with Name No. 561 .. verrucosa Sars, 1901, as published in the combination Alona verrucosa (Class Crustacea, Order Cladocera), validation of, under the Plenary Powers ie placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 1582 144 144 171 171 172 363 365 363 364 Volume 19 vulgaris Latreille, [1802-1803], as published in the combination Palinurus vulgaris (a junior objective synonym of homarus Linnaeus, 1758, as published in the combination Cancer homarus), placed on the Official "Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 536 a ; : vulgaris Latreille, 1804, as published in the combination Palinurus vulgaris (a junior objective synonym of elephas Fabricius (J.C.), 1787, as published in the combina- tion Astacus elephas, and a junior homonym of vulgaris Latreille, [1802-1803], as published in the combination Palinurus vulgaris), placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Specific Names in Zoology with Name No. 537 aie on Walch (J.E.I.), 1768-1774, Die Naturgeschichte der Versteinerungen zur Erlduterung der Knorrischen Sammlung von Merkwiirdigkeiten der Natur, ae names published in, ruled to have no status in zoological nomenclature .. addition of title of, to the Official Index of ocd and Invalid Works in Zoo- logical Nomenclature with Title No. 60 ae Willemoesia Grote, 1873 (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), placed on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology with Name No. 1297, with Deidamia oN von Willemoes-Suhm, 1873, as type species gender of name wrzesniowskii Miers, [1878], as published in the combination Euryrhynchus wrzesniowskii (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), piace on the Se List of Specific Names in Zoology with ‘Name No. 1524 ‘ bes x zaleucus Thomson, 1873, as published in the combination Astacus zaleucus (Class Crustacea, Order Decapoda), pines on the ace List ooh eueie Names in Zoology with Name No. 1544 .. zonata Spix, 1824, as published in the combination Hyla zonata (a junior objective synonym of venulosa Laurenti, 1768, as published in the combination Rana venulosa), placed on the Official Index eee Beg ee and Invalid pogo) Names in Zoology with Name No. 539 .. Ee 433 Page 144 144 327 327 138 138 113 141 7/28) Volume 19 435 PARTICULARS OF DATES OF PUBLICATION OF THE SEVERAL PARTS IN WHICH THE PRESENT VOLUME WAS PUBLISHED Part No. 1 2 3 4 5) 6 a 8 9 10 Jat 12 13 14 IS 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 Page Nos. 1-44 ()}-(axiv) 45-110 i-XVili 111-132 133-168 169-200 201-208 209-248 249-260 261-276 277-290 291-300 XIX—XXVII1 XXIX—XXXVII1 301-314 315-324 325-332 333-348 349-360 361-376 377-394 395-436 Contents of Part Opinion 516 Direction 96 Opinion 517 Declaration 39 Opinion 518 Opinion 519 Opinion 520 Opinion 521 Opinion 522 Opinion 523 Opinion 524 Opinion S25 Opinion 526 Declaration 40 Declaration 41 Opinion 527 Opinion 528 Opinion 529 Opinion 530 Opinion 531 Opinion 532 Opinion 533 ( Indexes, T.P.-XII hee Table of Contents Date of Publication 16th May 1958 16th May 1958 30th May 1958 30th May 1958 30th May 1958 8th August 1958 8th August 1958 Sth August 1958 8th August 1958 8th August 1958 15th October 1958 15th October 1958 15th October 1958 15th October 1958 15th October 1958 15th October 1958 15th October 1958 29th October 1958 29th October 1958 29th October 1958 29th October 1958 29th October 1958 ) > 20th March, 1959 436 Opinions and Declarations INSTRUCTIONS TO BINDERS The present volume should be bound up as follows :—T.P.—XIi, i-xxxviii, 1-436, (i)-(xiv), coloured wrapper (cover) to Part 23.— 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 23, 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 23 should be bound in at the end of the volume. © 1959. THE INTERNATIONAL TRUST FOR ZOOLOGICAL NOMENCLATURE Printed in England by METCALFE & COOPER LIMITED, 10-24 Scrutton St., London E C 2 P 979- « a a COie im share 4 ie | iy ese iF 6 $ R ft is vi hi Wy fs bon y 4 4 4 1 i hil ‘ion teen ghia 7 aKiqat &) {i ge a hadi Hah. naa ey i BS noi ye Cate ees h i Piutek. wey bie mt i fh iyi 3 9088 015 mnt i