[Taxacom] gender of genus "Creobroter"

[andrew at flyevidence.co.uk]

Doug,

broter, brotos is masculine, meaning eater; hence Creo-broter is 
"flesh-eater".


-----o0o-----

Andrew Whittington

FlyEvidence

2 Newhouse Terrace

Queen's Road

Dunbar EH42 1LG

SCOTLAND


Mobile: 077 3400 6866

SKYPE: Flyevidence

Phone: +44 (0)1368 869 722

Email: andrew at flyevidence.co.uk <mailto:andrew at flyevidence.co.uk>


http://www.flyevidence.co.uk <http://www.flyevidence.co.uk/>

http://www.catch-fly.com <http://www.catch-fly.com/>





Honorary Fellow of the School of Molecular and Clinical Medicine,College 
of Medicine and Veterinary Science, University of Edinburgh



taxacom-request at mailman.nhm.ku.edu wrote:
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to
> 	taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> 	http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> 	taxacom-request at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> 	taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Taxacom digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>    1. gender of genus "Creobroter" (Doug Yanega)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 17 Dec 2007 15:19:40 -0800
> From: Doug Yanega <dyanega at ucr.edu>
> Subject: [Taxacom] gender of genus "Creobroter"
> To: TAXACOM at MAILMAN.NHM.KU.EDU
> Message-ID: <f05100306c38cb1ea1aee@[138.23.134.119]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
>
> Hi. I can't seem to track down a meaning (and therefore a gender) for 
> "-broter". From the online references to the genus, there are names 
> in present use formed both ways (e.g., Creobroter gemmatus and 
> Creobroter elongata) - this is plainly impossible, but see 
> http://tolweb.org/Creobroter/12627 - evidently, when the genus was 
> created in 1838, it only included previously-described taxa (i.e., 
> Serville apparently did not name any new species to thereby give an 
> indication of intended gender). I can't easily get ahold of 
> Serville's description to check how he formed the names of the 
> included species. Does anyone here happen to know for certain whether 
> it's masculine or feminine?
>
> Thanks,
>