[Taxacom] taxonomic question concerning naming of unique species known only from painting of lost type
John Grehan
calabar.john at gmail.com
Fri Mar 2 01:48:57 CST 2018
Thanks for the additional observations. I'm currently inclined to use the
form P. mairi Buller [unassigned, type lost, indeterminable].
If my understanding is correct, Porina Walker,1856 was first proposed for a
New Zealand ghost moth (and later included this and others now in the genus
Wiseana), but Porina d'Orbigny, 1852 was already in existence for Bryozoa.
John Grehan
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon>
Virus-free.
www.avast.com
<https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
<#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 2:22 AM, Geoff Read <gread at actrix.gen.nz> wrote:
> Orphan names in an invalid genus are difficult. Where did the type
> species of the invalid genus go, if anywhere? In theory that's where
> Porina mairi could be newly recombined (and marked incertae sedis or
> indeterminable).
>
> Alternatively leave the name unchanged. Stephen's suggestion is okay, but
> for the purposes of easy tracking the name might be better put after the
> other Porina of the valid Porina genus but marked off with a gap.
> Something like:
>
> Porina [of Y, junior homonym, not Porina X]
> P. mairi Buller [unassigned, type lost, indeterminable]
>
> In a database there is no problem as every combination should have its own
> entry. A flat list is more difficult.
>
> Geoff
>
> On Fri, March 2, 2018 7:47 pm, John Grehan wrote:
> > And to add, I now see that the species is listed as incertae sedis in
> John
> > Dugdale's (1994) revision of NZ Hepialidae. Nice to have that
> conclusively
> > settled.
> >
> > John Grehan
> >
> > On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 12:13 AM, John Grehan <calabar.john at gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I should have thought of that! (it's late at night, my excuse). We have
> >> an
> >> incertae sedis section already, so that looks like the best option.
> >> Thanks.
> >>
> >> John Grehan
> >>
> >>
> >> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_
> source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon>
> >> Virus-free.
> >> www.avast.com
> >> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_
> source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
> >> <#m_-6347131162824088972_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> >>
> >> On Fri, Mar 2, 2018 at 12:08 AM, Stephen Thorpe <
> >> stephen_thorpe at yahoo.co.nz> wrote:
> >>
> >>> It should be cited under the heading Hepialidae incertae sedis, as the
> >>> original combination, i.e. Porina mairi. The main thing is just to make
> >>> it
> >>> clear that the correct generic placement is unknown. Saying "incertae
> >>> sedis" should be clear enough. Alternatively, just state that the
> >>> correct
> >>> generic placement is unknown.
> >>>
> >>> Stephen
> >>>
> >>> --------------------------------------------
> >>> On Fri, 2/3/18, John Grehan <calabar.john at gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Subject: [Taxacom] taxonomic question concerning naming of unique
> >>> species known only from painting of lost type
> >>> To: "taxacom" <taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu>
> >>> Received: Friday, 2 March, 2018, 5:47 PM
> >>>
> >>> Dear colleagues,
> >>>
> >>> I would be interested in opinions
> >>> regarding what to do about the genus name
> >>> of a ghost moth for which the type has
> >>> been lost and for which the original
> >>> genus name is preoccupied. The only
> >>> record of its existence is a painting
> >>> made by the collector. Kiwi
> >>> entomologists on this list will be familiar
> >>> with this case.
> >>>
> >>> The moth was originally named as Porina
> >>> mairi. The genus Porina was
> >>> originally applied to a number of New
> >>> Zealand ghost moths but since it was
> >>> preoccupied these species have been
> >>> assigned to other genera. The mairi
> >>> species has been listed on the web
> >>> under the genus Aoraia but there is not
> >>> a shred of evidence for that assignment
> >>> as the moth looks nothing like any
> >>> known species of Aoraia (actually not
> >>> specifically much like any known
> >>> ghost moth other than in a general way
> >>> for some of the wing pattern [other
> >>> parts of the wing pattern being
> >>> anomalous]).
> >>>
> >>> So the question for me is how to list
> >>> this species in a world catalog of
> >>> ghost moths. Should I just list it as
> >>> 'Porina' mairi, or assign it to a new
> >>> genus? Which approach would be
> >>> considered most 'professional' if that could
> >>> be said? Please post views to the list
> >>> so others may respond if
> >>> appropriate. There may not be a 'right'
> >>> answer, but at least opinions on
> >>> this might help me decide which choice
> >>> to make. Below is a description of
> >>> the history of this specimen. A photo
> >>> for the curious is at
> >>> http://musicmusic.tripod.com/forgotten-fauna/forgotten-faun
> >>> a-moth-cicada.html
> >>>
> >>> Many thanks,
> >>>
> >>> John Grehan
> >>>
> >>> Web site history note: New Zealand's
> >>> largest moth may well be rarer than
> >>> the black robin or the kakapo. Buller's
> >>> moth, a relative of the
> >>> agricultural pest species the porina,
> >>> is known only from a single specimen
> >>> caught in the Ruahine Ranges by Sir
> >>> Walter Buller (the famous Victorian
> >>> ornithologist) and his brother-in-law,
> >>> Captain Gilbert Mair, while they
> >>> were searching for huia during summer
> >>> of 1867.
> >>>
> >>> The moth was reported to have a
> >>> wingspan of almost 6 inches (150
> >>> millimetres), being as large as the
> >>> huge bright green puriri or ghost moth
> >>> which is occasionally attracted to
> >>> house and street lamps on moist nights
> >>> mainly during spring. The moth was
> >>> described by Buller and illustrated in
> >>> the Transactions of the Royal Society
> >>> of N.Z. of 1872, and the specimen
> >>> then lay for over 20 years in his son's
> >>> collection. In 1890, the moth was
> >>> reportedly sent to the British Museum
> >>> on the barque Assaye, which sank
> >>> during the voyage. However, we now know
> >>> that the Assaye sank not on its way
> >>> to England, but on the return journey,
> >>> and so the present location of the
> >>> specimen (if it still exists) remains a
> >>> mystery.
> >>>
> >>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_sourc
> >>> e=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon>
> >>> Virus-free.
> >>> www.avast.com
> >>> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_sourc
> >>> e=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
> >>> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Taxacom Mailing List
> >>> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu,
> >>> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >>> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be
> >>> searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >>>
> >>> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions
> >>> to taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >>> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the
> >>> Web, visit: http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-
> bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> >>> You can reach the person managing the
> >>> list at: taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >>>
> >>> Nurturing Nuance while Assaulting
> >>> Ambiguity for 31 Some Years, 1987-2018.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> > Taxacom Mailing List
> > Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu,
> > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> > The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
> > http://taxacom.markmail.org
> >
> > Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> > To subscribe or unsubscribe via the Web, visit:
> > http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> > You can reach the person managing the list at:
> > taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> >
> > Nurturing Nuance while Assaulting Ambiguity for 31 Some Years, 1987-2018.
> >
>
>
> --
> Geoffrey B. Read, Ph.D.
> Wellington, NEW ZEALAND
> gread at actrix.gen.nz
>
>
More information about the Taxacom
mailing list