Bionomina https://mapress.com/bn <p><strong>Bionomina</strong> is an international journal of biological nomenclature and terminology.</p> Magnolia Press en-US Bionomina 1179-7649 <strong>The taxonominal status of the nomina <em>Lesueuria</em> Milne Edwards, 1841 and Lesueuriidae Chun, 1880, and introduction of a new genus and a new family for <em>Lesueuria pinnata</em> Ralph & Kaberry, 1950, as well as an additional new species of the new genus (Ctenophora, Lobata)</strong> https://mapress.com/bn/article/view/bionomina.36.1.1 <p align="justify"><span style="color: #000000;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span lang="en-GB">The nomenclatural problems posed by the nomen of the ctenophore species </span><span lang="en-GB"><em>Lesueuria vitrea </em></span><span lang="en-GB">Milne Edwards, 1841, type species of the genus </span><span lang="en-GB"><em>Lesueuria</em></span><span lang="en-GB"> Milne Edwards, 1841 which is type genus of the family </span><span lang="en-GB"><em>Lesueuriidae</em></span><span lang="en-GB"> Chun, 1880, and by a few other species long referred to this genus and family, are addressed, and new solutions are proposed for some of them. For the species </span><span lang="en-GB"><em>Lesueuria pinnata</em></span><span lang="en-GB"> Ralph &amp; Kaberry, 1950, an unusual ‘finned’ lobate ctenophore from the southern Pacific Ocean, a new genus and a new family</span> <span lang="en-GB">are introduced. It is shown that the nomenclatural problems discussed in this paper raise difficulties for four distinct reasons, related to four different basic concepts of zoological nomenclature: those of ‘name-bearing type’ or onomatophores, of ‘type species’ of genera or nucleospecies, of availability, validity and </span><span lang="en-GB"><em>nomen dubium</em></span><span lang="en-GB">, and of ‘nomenclatural stability’. The fact that specimens of this group are ‘fragile’ and difficult or impossible to fix and keep in collections requires recourse to indirect methods (detailed description, good iconography and molecular sequencing) applied to ‘ephemeral’ type specimens (holotypes or neotypes) to objectify and</span> <span lang="en-GB">stabilize the nomenclature in this group. </span></span></span></span></p> CLAUDIA E. MILLS ALAIN DUBOIS Copyright (c) 2023 2023-12-29 2023-12-29 36 1 1 35 10.11646/bionomina.36.1.1 <strong>The nomenclatural status of <em>Agama cristata</em> Merrem, 1819 and <em>Corytophanes</em> Schlegel, 1826 (Squamata, Corytophanidae) and of other tropical lizard nomina, with comments on some tricky issues of zoological nomenclature</strong> https://mapress.com/bn/article/view/bionomina.36.1.2 <p align="justify"><span style="color: #000000;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span lang="en-GB">The nomenclatural status of the nomina </span><span lang="en-GB"><em>Agama cristata</em></span><span lang="en-GB"> and </span><span lang="en-GB"><em>Corytophanes</em></span><span lang="en-GB"> (</span><span lang="en-GB"><strong>Squamata</strong></span><span lang="en-GB">, </span><span lang="en-GB"><em>Corytophanidae</em></span><span lang="en-GB">) are examined. The former should be credited to Merrem (1819), not Merrem (1820), and the latter to Schlegel (1826</span><span lang="en-GB"><em>a</em></span><span lang="en-GB">), not H. Boie </span><span lang="en-GB"><em>in</em></span><span lang="en-GB"> Schlegel (1826</span><span lang="en-GB"><em>b</em></span><span lang="en-GB">). The nomen </span><span lang="en-GB"><em>Iguana superciliosa</em></span><span lang="en-GB"> Latreille </span><span lang="en-GB"><em>in</em></span><span lang="en-GB"> Sonnini &amp; Latreille, 1801 is shown to be a senior synonym of </span><span lang="en-GB"><em>Agama cristata</em></span><span lang="en-GB"> Merrem, 1819. Article 23.9 is used here to protect the latter through reversal of precedence. Several other nomenclatural problems related to these nomina and related ones are explored. Updated synonymies and aponymies are provided for all the nomina of the genus </span><span lang="en-GB"><em>Corytophanes</em></span><span lang="en-GB"> currently considered valid and for the family, the valid nomen of which is </span><span lang="en-GB"><em>Corytophanidae</em></span><span lang="en-GB"> Fitzinger, 1843 [Frost &amp; Etheridge, 1989] based on Article 35.4.1 and through reversal of precedence. Attention is drawn to several nomina and spellings present in the literature but forgotten by all or most authors until now.</span></span></span></span></p> WOLFGANG DENZER ALAIN DUBOIS THIERRY FRÉTEY ANNEMARIE OHLER Copyright (c) 2023 2023-12-29 2023-12-29 36 1 36 63 10.11646/bionomina.36.1.2 <strong>The original description, authorship and typification of <em>Hapsidophrys</em> <em>smaragdina</em> (Serpentes, Colubridae)</strong> https://mapress.com/bn/article/view/bionomina.36.1.3 <p align="justify"><span style="color: #000000;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span lang="en-GB">In the current herpetological literature, the original authorship of </span><span lang="en-GB"><em>Hapsidophrys smaragdina</em></span><span lang="en-GB"> is assigned to Schlegel (1837). In this note, evidence is produced that the authorship needs to be attributed to H. Boie </span><span lang="en-GB"><em>in</em></span><span lang="en-GB"> F. Boie, 1827. Furthermore, an earlier lectotype designation is proven invalid and the possible designation of a neotype is suggested.</span></span></span></span></p> WOLFGANG DENZER Copyright (c) 2023 2023-12-29 2023-12-29 36 1 64 68 10.11646/bionomina.36.1.3 <strong>Evaluating nomina of the phylum Ciliophora: examples for increasing work load of serious taxonomists</strong> https://mapress.com/bn/article/view/bionomina.36.1.4 <p align="justify"><span style="color: #000000;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span lang="en-GB">Thirteen examples mainly taken from ciliatology illustrate the increasing work load of serious taxonomists interested in the reliability of nomenclatural information and trying to be </span><span lang="en-GB"><em>Code</em></span><span lang="en-GB">-compliant. Weaknesses of the “Amendment” of five articles to expand methods of publication of the </span><span lang="en-GB"><em>Code </em></span><span lang="en-GB">resulted in the increasing vagueness of dating a nomen (and/or even authorship). The statuses of periodicals with two ISSNs (Print and Online), online-only versions not being or incompletely registered in </span><span lang="en-GB"><em>Zoobank</em></span><span lang="en-GB"> and Corrigenda are often questionable. It is necessary to check in detail the nomenclatural availability of novelties included in them. The </span><span lang="en-GB"><em>Zoobank</em></span><span lang="en-GB"> registration of works published on ciliates is of little help in this respect. There was also retrieval inefficiency and bias of the search engine </span><span lang="en-GB"><em>Global Biodiversity Information Facility </em></span><span lang="en-GB">(GBIF) tested for a subset of ciliate nomina (nearly 350 nomina and/or spellings) involved in unavailability, mainly objective synonymy and homonymy. The results clearly indicate that the taxonomic status is privileged and nomenclatural revisionary work, which often is spread over three or more decades, is very fragmentarily recognised. Moreover, the main subcategories of synonymy (including alloneonymy) and the correctness of information on senior and junior homonyms are disregarded. Recent monographies are not adequately represented in online databases and websites, forcing genuine taxonomists (after the promulgation of the revisionary work) to check a second time and often to correct each single record in the internet.</span></span></span></span></p> ERNA AESCHT Copyright (c) 2023 2023-12-29 2023-12-29 36 1 69 96 10.11646/bionomina.36.1.4 <strong>LTH 1. <em>Literatura Taxonomica Herpetologica</em>.1. Presentation</strong> https://mapress.com/bn/article/view/bionomina.36.1.5 <p align="justify"><span style="color: #000000;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span lang="en-GB">This paper is the first of a series devoted to the analysis of the early classifications of amphibians and reptiles published from 1758 onwards, and of the nomenclatural status of all the nomina of herpetological taxa established in these works. In this introductory paper, we present the new methodology and the terminology used for these analyses, which propose a new approach to the understanding of the hierarchy of nomina and taxa in taxonomic publications. The hierarchical relationships between the taxa in these works have strong nomenclatural implications and consequences on the understanding of the nomenclatural status (nominal-series assignment, nomenclatural availability; taxonomic allocation; nomenclatural validity and nomenclatural correctness) of all early nomina, and in particular those of the higher nominal-series (family- and class-series), which have so far been misinterpreted in many cases.</span></span></span></span></p> ALAIN DUBOIS THIERRY FRÉTEY Copyright (c) 2023 2023-12-29 2023-12-29 36 1 97 117 10.11646/bionomina.36.1.5 <strong>LTH 2. <em>Literatura Taxonomica Herpetologica</em>.2. Glossary</strong> https://mapress.com/bn/article/view/bionomina.36.1.6 <p align="justify"><span style="color: #000000;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span lang="en-GB">The present paper presents the etymologies, definitions and bibliographic references of the technical nomenclatural and other terms used in the LTH series of papers, as well as their equivalent terms used for the same concepts in the </span><span lang="en-GB"><em>Code</em></span><span lang="en-GB"> in the rather rare cases when they exist.</span></span></span></span></p> ALAIN DUBOIS THIERRY FRÉTEY Copyright (c) 2023 2023-12-29 2023-12-29 36 1 118 151 10.11646/bionomina.36.1.6 <strong>LTH 3. <em>Literatura Taxonomica Herpetologica</em>.3. Year 1758</strong> https://mapress.com/bn/article/view/bionomina.36.1.7 <p align="justify"><span style="color: #000000;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span lang="en-GB">This paper presents the analysis of six works by five authors (Linnaeus, Borlase, Gesnerus, Roesel von Rosenhof and Vogel) published in 1758 that contain classifications of amphibians and reptiles. The nomenclatural status of the herpetological nomina in these works, particularly regarding their availability and taxonomic allocation, is clarified.</span></span></span></span></p> ALAIN DUBOIS THIERRY FRÉTEY Copyright (c) 2023 2023-12-29 2023-12-29 36 1 152 178 10.11646/bionomina.36.1.7 <strong>LTH 4. <em>Literatura Taxonomica Herpetologica</em>. 4. Year 1759</strong> https://mapress.com/bn/article/view/bionomina.36.1.8 <p align="justify"><span style="color: #000000;"><span style="font-family: Times New Roman, serif;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><span lang="en-GB">This paper presents the analysis of the single work published in 1759 that contains classifications of amphibians and reptiles, by Linnaeus. The nomenclatural status of the herpetological nomina in this work, particularly regarding their availability and taxonomic allocation, is clarified.</span></span></span></span></p> ALAIN DUBOIS THIERRY FRÉTEY Copyright (c) 2023 2023-12-29 2023-12-29 36 1 179 185 10.11646/bionomina.36.1.8