Bionomina https://mapress.com/bn <p><strong>Bionomina</strong> is an international journal of biological nomenclature and terminology.</p> en-US adbionomina@gmail.com (Alain Dubois) zhangz@landcareresearch.co.nz (Zhi-Qiang Zhang) Wed, 08 Jun 2022 15:46:44 +1200 OJS 3.3.0.6 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss 60 <p><strong>Type species of genera in zoological nomenclature</strong></p> https://mapress.com/bn/article/view/bionomina.26.1.1 <p>A basic concept of zoological nomenclature is that of onomatophore, called ‘name-bearing type’ in the <em>Code</em>. Onomatophores allow objective allocation of the nomina to taxa through specimens or nominal taxa. In the genus-series (i.e., for nomina of genera and subgenera), this allocation is made through nominal species, the so-called ‘type species’. The latter are involved not only in the taxonomic allocation of nomina to taxa, but also in the nomenclatural availability and validity of nomina. Failure to designate validly type species for genus-series nomina have therefore deleterious consequences, as illustrated here through several examples. Close attention given by taxonomists to the criteria allowing valid designation of type species, both in ancient works and in future ones, is therefore important. In order to improve the work of taxonomists in this respect, a few suggestions of changes in the <em>Code</em> are provided.</p> ALAIN DUBOIS Copyright (c) 2022 https://mapress.com/bn/article/view/bionomina.26.1.1 Wed, 08 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +1200 <p><strong>On some grammatical errors in the nomenclature of longhorn beetles and on nomenclatural anarchy in the <em>Catalogue of Life</em> (Insecta, Coleoptera, </strong><br><strong>Cerambycidae)</strong></p> https://mapress.com/bn/article/view/bionomina.26.1.2 <p>Several authors working on the coleopterous family <em>Cerambycidae</em> consider the gender of generic nomina ending with the noun -<em>chroma</em> as feminine or masculine, instead of neuter. The error has been overtaken in major, widely used databases, <em>Titan</em> and <em>Catalogue of Life</em>. In addition, the <em>Catalogue of Life</em> refers erroneously to subsequently cited species-group nomina transferred to other subgenera or genera, or changed in rank, as to available, invalid synonyms.</p> MEI-YING LIN, IVAN LÖBL Copyright (c) 2022 https://mapress.com/bn/article/view/bionomina.26.1.2 Wed, 08 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +1200 <p><strong>The proper authorship of the nomen <em>Ololygon heyeri</em> (Amphibia, Anura, Hylidae)</strong></p> https://mapress.com/bn/article/view/bionomina.26.1.3 <p>The new frog nomen <em>Ololygon heyeri</em> was inadvertently first published by Weygoldt (1986) associated with characters that could make it nomenclaturally available under Article 13 of the <em>Code</em>, but the epithet <em>heyeri</em> was consistently written there between quotation marks, which makes it unavailable under Articles 8.3 and 11.5. This nomen was made available in the formal description of the species by Peixoto &amp; Weygoldt (1987). Under Article 73.1.1, the designation in the latter work of a ‘lectotype’ for this nominal species should be interpreted as a holotype designation.</p> ULISSES CARAMASCHI, JOSÉ P. JR. POMBAL, ALAIN DUBOIS Copyright (c) 2022 https://mapress.com/bn/article/view/bionomina.26.1.3 Wed, 08 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +1200 <p><strong><em>Lygosoma megalops</em> Annandale, 1906 (Squamata, Scincidae): a junior synonym of <em>Lankascincus fallax</em> (Peters, 1860)</strong></p> https://mapress.com/bn/article/view/bionomina.26.1.4 <p>Annandale (1906) described <em>Lygosoma megalops</em>, now in the genus <em>Lankascincus</em>, based on two syntypes collected from Kitulgala and Puttalam in Sri Lanka. These syntypes have not been recognized since the original description. In 2019, Batuwita designated a neotype, WHT 6545, for <em>Ly. megalops</em> from Kitulgala. The number WHT ‘6545’ does not exist in the registers of either WHT or NMSL. The neotype designation also fails to conform to several Articles of the <em>Code</em>: 75.3.1, 75.3.3, 75.3.5 and 75.3.7. Given that it does not appear to exist, it makes the designation of ‘WHT 6545’ as the neotype of <em>Ly. megalops</em> void<em> ab initio</em>. Further, based on the description provided in Batuwita (2019), it is clear that the species he conceived as <em>Ly. megalops</em> was in fact morphologically similar to several other <em>Lankascincus </em>species. We show that, as characterized by Annandale (1906), <em>Ly. megalops</em> cannot be assigned to any scincid species in Sri Lanka. The locality data Annandale disclosed for <em>Ly. megalops</em>—Puttalam and Kitulagala—make it almost certain that the two syntypes belonged to different species or to <em>La. fallax</em>. Therefore, unless resolved, the nomen <em>La. megalops</em> will continue to threaten the nomenclatural stability in the genus <em>Lankascincus</em>, as well as in the genus <em>Eutropis</em>. In order to address this problem, we invalidate the neotype designated by Batuwita (2019) and show that <em>Ly. megalops</em> is a synonym of <em>La. fallax</em>.</p> A. A. THASUN AMARASINGHE, A. DINETH DANUSHKA, A. SUNETH KANISHKA, PATRICK D. CAMPBELL, IVAN INEICH, JAKOB HALLERMANN, OLIVIER S. G. PAUWELS Copyright (c) 2022 https://mapress.com/bn/article/view/bionomina.26.1.4 Wed, 08 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +1200 <p><strong>Another new, unavailable nomen (Squamata, Gekkonidae) from Indian herpetological taxonomy</strong></p> https://mapress.com/bn/article/view/bionomina.26.1.5 <p>In a recent paper, Shameer <em>et al.</em> (2021) erected a new species of gecko, referred to the genus <em>Dravidogecko </em>Smith, 1933 from the Nilgiris mountains in the southern Western Ghats of India. Regrettably, the specific nomen <em>coonoorenis/coonoorensis</em>, which they provided for this species, is nomenclaturally unavailable and cannot be valid unless and until properly published in adherence to the <em>Code</em> (Anonymous 1999, 2012). The erection of this species violates the following criteria laid out by the <em>Code</em> with respect to the availability of new specific nomina:</p> R. CHAITANYA Copyright (c) 2022 https://mapress.com/bn/article/view/bionomina.26.1.5 Wed, 08 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +1200 <p><strong><em>Alvininia</em>, a replacement name for <em>Alvinia</em> Sytchevskaya, 1999 (Osteichthyes, </strong><strong>Actinopterygii, Perleididae), preoccupied</strong></p> https://mapress.com/bn/article/view/bionomina.26.1.6 <p>The generic name <em>Alvinia </em>(type species <em>Alvinia</em> <em>serrata</em> Sytchevskaya, 1999, by original designation) was proposed by Sytchevskaya (1999: 462) for a new perleidid genus (<strong>Actinopterygii</strong>) from the Middle Triassic (Ladinian) Madygen Formation, Kyrgyzstan, central Asia. However, this name was preoccupied by <em>Alvinia</em> Monterosato, 1884 (<strong>Gastropoda</strong>).</p> ARTEM M. PROKOFIEV Copyright (c) 2022 https://mapress.com/bn/article/view/bionomina.26.1.6 Wed, 08 Jun 2022 00:00:00 +1200