[Taxacom] Can the type species of a genus be a synonym within its own genus?

[David Campbell]

The name in use for the type species of a genus can certainly be a senior
synonym of the name originally designated as the type species.  However,
nomenclaturally the type species is the junior synonym, if that's the name
that was cited in designating the type.  For example, the type species of
*Bellamya* Josseaumme, 1886 is *Bellamya bellamya* Jousseaume, 1886.  It
has been treated as a junior synonym of *Bellamya unicolor* (Olivier,
1804).  The species would then be reported as *B. unicolor*, but a
nomenclatural treatment of *Bellamya* should identify the type as *B.
bellamya* and then note that it is a subjective synonym of another
species.  (Article 67.1)

On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 6:19 PM, Tony Rees <tonyrees49 at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Taxacomers,
>
> I was looking again at the various taxonomic treatments that have been
> proposed for the domestic dog, Canis (or Canis Lupus) familiaris, and by
> extension the dingo as mentioned a little while back. There seems to be
> general agreement that the dog is derived from the gray wolf Canis lupus by
> domestication, or perhaps from an extinct subspecies of the latter (as
> briefly discussed on Taxacom a few years back, see
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/pipermail/taxacom/2013-December/126549.html and
> successive messages). Both the epithets familiaris and lupus are on the
> ICZN Official list, by virtue of Direction 22 (which dealt with familiaris
> as the type specis of Canis) here:
> https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/34652714 , and Opinion 2027 (
> https://biodiversitylibrary.org/page/34357823) which dealt with the names
> of wild forms versus domesticated forms of the same taxon (thereby placing
> lupus on the list).
>
> The influential "Mammal Species of the World" (MSW) , 2005 edition seems
> largely responsible for the present prevalence of treating familiaris as a
> subspecies of lupus. My question is, if familiaris is the type species of
> the genus, this treatment effectively synonymizes familiaris with lupus at
> species level, which I am thinking should not be possible under relevant
> nomenclatural rules.
>
> It is quite likely that I am wrong in this regard but I would be happy to
> educated further with respect to the question as posed, namely, can the
> type species of a genus be a synonym (at species level) within its own
> genus, or should in fact the wolf become Canis familiaris if the two taxa
> are not separated at species level (irrespective of what  Opinion 2027 has
> to say).
>
> Looking forward to your comments,
>
> Regards - Tony
>
> Tony Rees, New South Wales, Australia
> https://about.me/TonyRees
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: 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
> 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.
>



-- 
Dr. David Campbell
Associate Professor, Geology
Department of Natural Sciences
Box 7270
Gardner-Webb University
Boiling Springs NC 28017