Taxacom: [KU SUSPECT SPAM] Family-level names question

[Francisco Welter-Schultes]

Dear Michael,

We are obviously dealing with a case for which Art. 35.5. applies.

Examplidae is older than Otheridae.
We should probably not say "there is no tribe named Examplini" but 
rather "there is a tribe named Examplini, but this name is not used for 
the tribe, instead the name Otherini is used for the tribe containing 
Examplus".
Normally the oldest available family-group name must be used, but in 
this case we have an exception in which we apply Art. 35.5 and the 
younger name Otherini is in prevailing usage for the tribe (= this has 
been a frequently used name in the past 50 years and Examplini has not 
been used in the recent past for that tribe).

For the subtribe Art. 35.5 cannot be applied, as far as I can see. The 
exception of Art. 35.5 applies to each rank individually, in this case 
only for the tribe, not for the family, not for the subfamily and not 
for the subtribe containing Examplus. For the subtribe the game is on 
again and the prevailing usage must be verified for the subtribe. As you 
said, this is going to be proposed for the first time, so there is no 
prevailing usage (because there is no usage at all in the recent past), 
the normal application of the Principle of Priority under Art. 23.1 
needs to be followed, the oldest available name is to be used, Examplina.

If I understood this case properly.

I hope this helps.

If you could pass me the real-life example once you published the 
subtribe name, I would be grateful. Such examples are useful to 
illustrate the application of Code Articles, and we are intending to 
provide real life examples in the next Code edition. Art. 35.5 is 
already equipped with an example (Halictidae, Hymenoptera), but your 
example has the spot on a new aspect in this context.

Best wishes
Francisco

Am 28.02.2023 um 02:25 schrieb Michael Oliver via Taxacom:
> The genus Examplus is (correctly) assigned to the
> tribe Otherini, with type genus Otherus.