Taxacom: A nomenclatural puzzle - genus Galea Meyen,
1833 (mammal), preoccupied or not?
Francisco Welter-Schultes
fwelter at gwdg.de
Thu Dec 1 18:20:15 CST 2022
2022
The availability of a work for nomenclatural purposes can only be judged
from either the work itself, or from a ruling published by the
Commission. Subsequently published views by authors can be taken into
account, but I would not regard them as decisive.
The use of italics did not follow commonly accepted conventions in these
times. In the French text the genera abbreviations were given in italics.
To me it seems unlikely that Meuschen intended to regard only the
specific name alone as the name to be used for a species. If so,
Meuschen would have used uninominal names for the species. In such an
approach Meuschen would not have repeatedly used the same specific names
(ater, flavus etc.) in different genera.
See also p. 90, in the insect chapter Meuschen occasionally compared his
species with similar species of different genera (No. 305 Rhagium
Ornatum = Rhagium ornatum Fabricius, 1775, No. 314 Chrysomela Polygina
(sic) = Chrysomela polygoni Linnaeus, 1758). At these occasions Meuschen
used binominal names unambiguously.
> Page 478: B. Cucullus planus
this would read Balanus cucullus planus, with reference to "Linn. 13.",
= Linn? 1767: 1108, No. 13 Lepas diadema. Meuschen explained that this
species differed from the previously listed species Balanus diadema,
hence Meuschen intended B. cucullus planus as a new name. It was not
intended to represent a subspecies (no species B. cucullus was known),
and the two words cucullus and planus referred obviously to Balanus. The
French name was given as G. [Gland de Mer] Turban de Mer platte, where
"platte" referred clearly to the generic name, not to "Turban de Meer".
So Balanus cucullus planus was a polynominal name.
> Page 480: A. Bardana maxim?
Should read maxima, the "a" is not well printed, but for ? ligature
which would cover more space see p. 481 No. 1873.
Anadema bardana maxima, looks like a polynominal name to me. Not a
variety or subspecies because there was no name A. bardana.
> Page 485: C. Ovum Marinum
486.
The word marinum seems to refer to ovum, = marine egg, this meaning is
also suggested by the French translation, single entity, should be
binominal, Cordiformis ovummarinum.
> Page 496: M. Pileus Neptuni
Single entity, see the French translation, Bonnet de Neptune, to be
united to Madrepora pileusneptuni. Binominal name, no violation of the
Code. Taken from Seba 1761, as cited by Linn? 1767: 1273, Seba had given
that name Pileus neptuni to the species, Meuschen took this name as a
single entity and placed it as a specific name in the genus Madrepora.
Valid procedure.
> Page 508: M. Rotundo stellata
Compound name, with connecting vowel -o-, to be united to
rotundostellata, name should be binominal.
Some other candidate polynominal names I found:
p. 288 Trochus
T. Solaris verus, T. Solaris spurius
Referred to Trochus solaris Linn?, 1764, both names not listed by
Sherborn 1902, but could be interpreted as two distinct subspecies (or
varieties) of T. solaris.
p. 314
P. Grana punctulata
p. 318 Muriciformis
M. Cornutus tuberculatus
Could be regarded as a subspecies/variety of Murex cornutus Linnaeus, 1758.
No. 694 M. Ficus Tarnatanus, No. 695 M. Tarnatanus, both refer to "Linn.
556" = Murex aruanus. Sherborn (1902) listed this name as Muriciformis
ficus-tarnatanus.
No. 698, 699 M. Clava muricata, obviously polynominal and not a
subspecific name, there was no name M. clava.
p. 324 Murex
M. Sjanko perversus, M. Sjanko ramosus, M. Sjanko tuberculatus,
Sherborn 1902 interpreted these as a species Murex sjanko with 3 varieties.
p. 326 Murex
M. Musicus granulatus
Taken from Voluta musica as listed by Linn? 1767: 1194, No. 427. Could
have referred to a subspecies or variety.
p. 334 Murex
M. Mitra Cardinalis, M. Mitra Epicopalis
Meuschen used these names for subspecies, or varieties, Murex mitra
cardinalis was a new name, Murex mitra epicopalis was a subsequent usage
of Voluta mitra episcopalis Linnaeus, 1758, established originally as a
subspecies.
the example shows that Meuschen seems to have understood the difference
between a species and a subspecies/variety.
See also p. 330, Murex papalis with reference to Linn? 1767: 1194, No.
426, there presented as Voluta mitra papalis (a subspecies). Here
Meuschen elevated the Linnean subspecies to species rank.
p. 424: Ostrea
O. Crista Galli, subsequent usage of Mytilus cristagalli Linnaeus, 1758,
original spelling M. Crista galli. Compound name, single entity.
O. Crista ramosa, new. It is obvious that Meuschen misunderstood the
Linnean name, and thought either that it was a subspecies or a third
name could be selected to denote a species. Polynominal name.
p. 442: Cardium
C. Fragum granulatum, could have referred to a subspecies of Cardium
fragum Linnaeus, 1758. Listed by Sherborn (1902) as Cardium
fragum-granulatum.
p. 462 Tellina
No. 1766 T. Rosea pallida, could have been intended as a subspecies of
T. Rosea (No. 1765), but looks rather like an error.
p. 474 Solen
No. 1854 S. Siliqua punctata, Meuschen compared with No. 1653 S. Siliqua
and explained that this was probably a variety.
I see only relatively few clearly polynominal names. The proportion
seems very low, compared to the number of correctly formed binominal names.
Also several clearly binominal works of this epoch contain some few
polynominal names inside long accounts of species.
If names are currently in use from this work, I would not talk of
unavailable names. The work is not on the Official Index. I would talk
of different opinions in the community concerning its availability for
nomenclature. Unless the Commissiomn publishes a ruling, both approaches
seem to be tenable.
So for me the answer to Tony's question would be:
If Galea Meuschen, 1787 is the oldest homonym, and is neither suppressed
nor its work on the Official Index, a new replacement name for a junior
homonym would be justified from this point. An author after 1999 however
could have applied (or could still apply) Art. 23.9 if the conditions
were satisfied, and could have declared (could declare) Galea Meuschen,
1787 as a nomen oblitum.
Best wishes
Francisco
> I suppose the instances of two specific names could be interpreted as falling within binominal nomenclature because to the extent that they both refer descriptively to the generic name, but only the specific name (or names) is (are) put in italics, which perhaps is an indication that Meuschen did not apply a binominal system where species are denoted by a combination of two names.
> I still think Meuschen (1787) is to be interpreted as not consistently binominal.
>
> /Thomas
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Taxacom <taxacom-bounces at lists.ku.edu> On Behalf Of Laurent Raty via Taxacom
> Sent: 1. december 2022 10:40
> To: taxacom at lists.ku.edu
> Subject: Taxacom: [KU SUSPECT SPAM] Re: A nomenclatural puzzle - genus Galea Meyen, 1833 (mammal), preoccupied or not?
>
> Meuschen did not use fully consistently uninominal names for his genera.
> In particular, his "GENUS LVIII. DISCI TRANSFIXI." (p. 490) is the plural of "Discus transfixus", meaning "the Pierced Disks". (All of Meuschen's genus names occur only in the plural in headers, and reduced to an initial letter in species names.) Pretending that the plural ending of the adjective in a nominal group like "Disci transfixi" can be "corrected" to the singular, while leaving the plural noun (which this adjective agrees with) untouched -- thereby producing an improbable "Discitransfixus" --, is... well, odd.
>
>
> An analysis of the ornithological part of Meuschen's work (pp. 38-65) was published in 1926 by Gregory Mathews (who did not discuss Meuschen's application of binominal nomenclature, and may indeed not have had a very close look at the rest of the work) -
>
> Mathews GM. 1926. Another new book, which necessitates changes in nomenclature. Austral Avian Record, 5: 81-100.
>
> Mathews' opinions on some of Meuschen's names were since (partly) followed. One of Meuschen's species names, Rallus cinereus Meuschen 1787 (p. 40), was used to displace Gracula carunculata Gmelin 1788, and is now Creatophora cinerea (Meuschen 1787). Another name, Tanagra atra Meuschen 1787 (p. 52), was used to displace a junior primary homonym, Tanagra atra Gmelin 1789, which gave way to Tanagra melanopis Latham 1790, now Schistochlamys melanopis (Latham 1790). However, despite Mathews' suggestion that it had to, Trochilus smaragdinus Meuschen 1787 (p. 48) did not displace Trochilus smaragdinus Gould 1846, which remains used as Aglaiocercus kingii smaragdinus (Gould 1846).
>
>
> Cheers,? Laurent -
>
>
>
> On 12/1/22 02:09, Francisco Welter-Schultes via Taxacom wrote:
>> Dear Thomas,
>> From where exactly did you extract the impression that Meuschen (1787)
>> did not consistently apply the Principle of Binominal Nomenclature?
>>
>> Best wishes
>> Francisco
>>
>> Am 30.11.2022 um 23:23 schrieb Thomas Pape via Taxacom:
>>> ?From looking at the work by Meuschen (1787), I get the impression
>>> that he did not consistently apply the Principle of Binominal
>>> Nomenclature, and that means that any names in that work are outside
>>> of zoological nomenclature (i.e., they are unavailable).
>>>
>>> /Thomas
>>>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
>
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at lists.ku.edu For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit: https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.ku.edu%2Flistinfo%2Ftaxacom&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C0e75cdc93aff4e43e96d08dad3faf880%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638055372131821019%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=nDbzJXdUousRkemmkp3Bvz0o9qYlrbRT9FMSBo5I06M%3D&reserved=0
> You can reach the person managing the list at: taxacom-owner at lists.ku.edu The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at: https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C0e75cdc93aff4e43e96d08dad3faf880%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638055372131821019%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=p%2FUupzZQVMrWde3DrwrJxv9d%2FnOKHzsWHcoNzWIUNcE%3D&reserved=0
>
> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity and admiring alliteration for about 35 years, 1987-2022.
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
>
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at lists.ku.edu
> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit: https://lists.ku.edu/listinfo/taxacom
> You can reach the person managing the list at: taxacom-owner at lists.ku.edu
> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at: https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Ftaxacom.markmail.org%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C0e75cdc93aff4e43e96d08dad3faf880%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638055372131821019%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=p%2FUupzZQVMrWde3DrwrJxv9d%2FnOKHzsWHcoNzWIUNcE%3D&reserved=0
>
> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity and admiring alliteration for about 35 years, 1987-2022.
>
More information about the Taxacom
mailing list