Dromiina (was: Taxonomic Search Engine)

[Jason at]

Dear Ken,

Entomologists may think otherwise and rather have the Dromiidae emended -
which would be the "correct" way to go around if we were to stick with the
Code stringently. Rather, it depends on who asks first.

Best

Jason

>From: Ken Kinman <kinman2 at YAHOO.COM>
>Reply-To: Ken Kinman <kinman2 at YAHOO.COM>
>To: TAXACOM at LISTSERV.NHM.KU.EDU
>Subject: Re: [TAXACOM] Dromiina (was: Taxonomic Search Engine)
>Date: Sat, 30 Oct 2004 10:15:47 -0500
>
>Instead of "is to be", this should read "has been" referred to the ICZN.
>This case was referred to the ICZN in December 2003 (Case No. 3291).  The
>proposal is that the beetle taxon Dromiina be emended to "Dromieina" to
>solve this homonym problem.  This seems the best thing to do, since the
>crustacean taxon Dromiidae is used a lot more (and is even the nominal type
>of an entire Superfamily of crustaceans).
>              ----- Ken
>***************************************************
>Wolfgang Lorenz wrote:
>      Dromiidae DeHaan, 1833 in Crustacea (type genus: Dromia Weber, 1795)
>is a junior homonym of Dromiina Bonelli, 1810 in Insecta Coleoptera
>Carabidae (type genus: Dromius Bonelli, 1810) resulting from similar
>generic names. Since both names are in use as valid names, the case is to
>be referred to the ICZN Commission for a ruling (Art. 55.3.1., ICZN 4th
>ed.).