Taxacom: nomen nudum and synonymy question

Fri Jan 27 08:00:45 CST 2023

Dear all,

Thank you John for the request.

As Adam said, the name would not be available from either source because 
it was consistently treated as an abberation, thus deemed to be 
infrasubspecific (Art. 45.6.2) and excluded from the provisions of the 
Code (Art. 1.3.4).

P. 272 in Krulikowsky's article in Deutsche Entomologische Zeitschrift, 
Iris 21 (4) was published 14 April 1909, the article in Societas 
Entomologica 23 on 01 April 1908. So even if the taxon had been treated 
as a subspecific name, the usage in 1909 would just have been a 
subsequent usage of the name that would have been introduced in 1908 
(and there in 1908 it would have been made available, as Stephen 
confirmed), not a nomen nudum.

Best wishes
Francisco

Am 27.01.2023 um 09:07 schrieb Adam Cotton via Taxacom:
> John,
> 
> Since Hepialus hecta L. ab ? decorata Krulikowsky was introduced 
> (described in one publication, not in the other, it seems) as an 
> aberration it is automatically an unavailable name under ICZN Code 
> article 45.6.2 and cannot be used as a species-group taxon name.
> 
> If a subsequent author treated it as a species/subspecies and included a 
> description before 2000 it may have been made available with author/date 
> of that subsequent publication even if that author treated Krulikowsky 
> as the author of the name. After 2000 the name must expressly be stated 
> as new for it to be available.
> 
> Adam.
> 
> 
> 
> On 27/01/2023 12:35, John Grehan via Taxacom wrote:
>> Thanks. I checked Nielsen et al and saw that they cited only the Deutsche
>> Entomologische Zeitschrift article which did not include a description of
>> the taxon. It was only by pure chance that I saw reference to the  
>> Societas
>> Entomologica? article where a description is present.? Would it make any
>> difference if the name was first published without the description, even
>> though both are in the same year? I'll try to sort that out 'tomorrow'
>> (it's just after midnight here).
>>
>> On Fri, Jan 27, 2023 at 12:19 AM Stephen Thorpe 
>> <stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Yes, that should make it an available name, with priority over any later
>>> synonyms
>>>
>>> Cheers, Stephen
>>>
>>> On Friday, 27 January 2023 at 05:17:23 pm NZDT, John Grehan <
>>> calabar.john at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks Stephen,
>>>
>>> Following my email, I happened to see another reference to 
>>> Krulikowsky which
>>> gave reference to the 'decorata' name in another article of virtually 
>>> the
>>> same title: "Krulikowsky, L. 1908 Einige neue Variet?ten und 
>>> Aberrationen
>>> der Lepidopteren des ?stlichen Russlands Societas Entomologica 23: 18."
>>>
>>> In this article he does give a formal (brief) description as follows
>>> (original German then my Google translation)
>>>
>>> 32 Hepialus hecta L. ab ? decorata. Am Saume der Vorderfl?gel steht eine
>>> dritte Reihe kleinerer Silberflecken. Auch die Hinterfl?gel sind am 
>>> Saume
>>> unter den Rippen mit l?nglichen Spuren solcher Flecke versehen. Sehr 
>>> selten.
>>>
>>> Hepialus hecta L. ab ? decorata. At the edge of the fore wings there 
>>> is a
>>> third row of smaller silver spots. The hind wings also have elongated
>>> traces of such spots on the edge under the ribs. Very rare.
>>>
>>> So is this description (but without reference to a depository) 
>>> adequate to
>>> treat the name as valid (as a subspecies or infrasubspecies name) for 
>>> the
>>> date of publication under the code [yes I could look it up, but 
>>> sometimes
>>> the feedback faster and reliable]? i.e. not a nomen nudum?
>>>
>>> John Grehan
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jan 26, 2023 at 11:09 PM Stephen Thorpe <
>>> stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz> wrote:
>>>
>>> It depends on the details of the specific case. Often the term "nomen
>>> nudum" is used to mean an unavailable name for any reason, so the 
>>> species
>>> may still be recognisable. Also, if the specimens forming the basis of a
>>> nomen nudum can be traced and examined, then the species may also be
>>> recognisable.
>>> Cheers, Stephen
>>>
>>> On Friday, 27 January 2023 at 04:53:26 pm NZDT, John Grehan via 
>>> Taxacom <
>>> taxacom at lists.ku.edu> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Dear colleagues,
>>>
>>> ?? Krulikowsky 1908 (ref below)? listed under the species name Hepialus
>>> hectus, a subspecific name as ''ab. [aberration] male decorata Krul. 
>>> K. 1
>>> Ex'
>>>
>>> Nielsen et al (2000) in their world catalog of Hepialidae, listed 
>>> decorata
>>> under Phymatopus hecta as a junior synonym, but also as a nomen nudum.
>>> Would I be correct to understand that if the name 'decorata' is a nomen
>>> nudum (having no description or illustration), then it cannot be 
>>> listed as
>>> a synonym since there is no way to know if it were really a form of
>>> Phymatopus hecta or even of any other Hepialidae? (and that's 
>>> assuming the
>>> individual were competent at least to recognize whether a moth was a
>>> hepialid or not.
>>>
>>> Feedback, if any, greatly appreciated.
>>>
>>> John Grehan
>>>
>>> Krulikowsky, L. 1908 Neues Verzeichnis der Lepidopteren des 
>>> Gouvernements
>>> Kasan (?stl. Russland). Deutsche Entomologische Zeitschrift 'Iris' 21:
>>> 202-272.
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Cca44a0bb4cb747f03a0608db006ee1b4%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638104248478290790%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Nu0bIG1PRNt02b2NxXpP%2BcYDZ6PVW3tMIVbEO755pdM%3D&reserved=0 
>>>
>>> (use the 'visit archived web site'
>>> link, then the 'Ghost Moth Research page' link.
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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%7Cca44a0bb4cb747f03a0608db006ee1b4%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638104248478290790%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Mf30GvuFfhIhWlumMlvdI2Qy0LozxlKtXXkOBZl0tQ4%3D&reserved=0 
>>>
>>>
>>> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity and admiring alliteration for
>>> about 36 years, 1987-2023
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fhepialidsoftheworld.com.au%2F&data=05%7C01%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7Cca44a0bb4cb747f03a0608db006ee1b4%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638104248478290790%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Nu0bIG1PRNt02b2NxXpP%2BcYDZ6PVW3tMIVbEO755pdM%3D&reserved=0 
>>> (use the 'visit archived web site'
>>> link, then the 'Ghost Moth Research page' link.
>>>
>>
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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%7Cca44a0bb4cb747f03a0608db006ee1b4%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638104248478290790%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C3000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Mf30GvuFfhIhWlumMlvdI2Qy0LozxlKtXXkOBZl0tQ4%3D&reserved=0
> 
> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity and admiring alliteration for 
> about 36 years, 1987-2023