[Taxacom] is different ending for gender a synonym

Fri Jan 3 07:11:06 CST 2020

Dear John,

I agree essentially with Tony.

We have different concepts of synonymy in the science of naming organisms.
The question about a name in the genus Gazoryctra is about the name of a 
lepidopteran animal which could complicate the answer (because in 
lepidopterology the required mandatory change of the gender agreement of 
the ICZN Code is usually not followed).

 From the point of view of nomenclature animals and plants follow 
different rules, established in independent Codes that can probably not 
be merged in the near future in this point.
For names of species, in botany different genus-species combinations are 
considered synonyms, while in zoological nomenclature most experts 
regard only the specific name to judge the synonymy. The ICZN Code is 
currently not sufficiently clear on this point.

Wikipedia (as mentioned by Gurcharan Singh) does not differentiate and 
WP authors may consider any different spelling and genus-species 
combination no matter if plant or animal as a synonym. Even the same 
name in the same spelling combined with a different author and year 
(nomenclaturally taken a subsequent use of a name) can be considered a 
synonym in WP. This matter is treated arbitrarily and inconsistently, it 
differs among various language versions of WP and also within a language 
version.

A changed ending following a mandatory change (ICZN Code Arts. 31.2 and 
34.2) produces the same name with a changed ending (provided that the 
change is correctly performed). So it would not fall under the 
Glossary's definition of a "synonym" which is defined as a term to 
denote the relationship between two names (not two spellings of the same 
name).

If the ending was erroneously changed under the assumption it would be 
mandatory under the currently valid rules, then this should be judged an 
incorrect subsequent spelling. This falls under Art. 33.3, it is a 
different spelling of the same name. Also this is not an available name 
standing for itself (other than an emendation), and the two versions of 
the name are not synonyms under the Glossary's definition of a synonym.

In Lepidoptera the experts usually apply a convention by which the 
mandatory change as required by Art. 34.2 is set aside and no change in 
the ending is performed. The next edition of the ICZN Code might 
eventually add some new rules to provide a legal frame for this 
practice, so it can be useful for our considerations to act as if this 
was already correctly applied nomenclature.
In any case such a subsequent change of an ending in a lepidopteran 
specific name, no matter if following Art. 34.2 correctly or not, would 
be an incorrect subsequent spelling of the original name, so the two 
spelling versions would not be synonyms in zoological nomenclature.

Taxonomic websites like funet.fi provide useful information for people 
interested in animals. So if these website providers record that a name 
of a species is poking around in the internet in two different gender 
endings, it is useful to inform the user about this, so that those who 
like to find information on this species are alerted to look for the 
name in both endings. They might call these versions "synonyms".

I consider it very useful to provide such information for the public.

If you are compiling a taxonomic nomenclator you might eventually have a 
different scope, so the selection of the term "synonym" may depend on 
the intention. So if you intend to be more attached to the ICZN Code you 
might differentiate between "nomenclatural synonyms", "different 
genus-species combinations" and "different spellings of the same 
specific name".

Hope this helps a little, Happy New Year and the best for 2020

Francisco

Am 03.01.2020 um 07:52 schrieb Gurcharan Singh via Taxacom:
> I would say all objective synonyms based on same type (which obviously they
> are), with same epithet (subject to change linked with gender of generic
> name). One would be accepted name based taxonomic judgement (to which genus
> species should be assigned), others listed as its synonyms.That is a common
> practice in plant names also.
> 
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gazoryctra_hyperboreus
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dr. Gurcharan Singh
> Retired  Associate Professor
> SGTB Khalsa College, University of Delhi, Delhi-110007
> Res: 932 Anand Kunj, Vikas Puri, New Delhi-110018.
> Mob: 9810359089
> https://sing96.wixsite.com/mysite-1
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jan 3, 2020 at 10:56 AM Tony Rees via Taxacom <
> taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> wrote:
> 
>> Hi John,
>>
>> Technically it is not a synonym (in zoology, that would have to be a
>> different epithet entirely, or perhaps the same one with a different
>> authority and based on a different type) but a variant or incorrect
>> orthography (according to the Code only the one that is in gender agreement
>> would be correct). However you could include it in a synonyms list in my
>> view, with an appropriate note - along with other things that may not
>> technically be synonyms such as nomina nuda, alternative combinations,
>> etc., which often also appear in "synonyms" lists (as other names that have
>> been applied to this taxon) but are not synonyms in the strict sense. Just
>> my 2 cents of course...
>>
>> Regards - Tony
>>
>> Tony Rees, New South Wales, Australia
>> https://about.me/TonyRees
>>
>>
>> On Fri, 3 Jan 2020 at 15:16, John Grehan via Taxacom <
>> taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm compiling synonyms for species in a taxonomic list and I am curious
>> to
>>> know if there is a standard view of what happens with different
>>> gender endings - whether they are considered synonyms that should be
>>> listed. For example, Moschler 1826 named Epialus hyperboreus which was
>>> later transferred to Gazoryctra as hperborea - presumably to match the
>>> gender, but then later the species was listed by the same author along
>> with
>>> some others (Nielsen et al 2000) as  Gazoryctra hyperboreus,
>>> reflecting their view that species endings should stay with the original.
>>> I'm not worried about arguments over that choice, but whether these names
>>> are formal synonyms. Nielsen et al (2000) did not list hyperborea as a
>>> synonym, but I noticed that it was listed as a synonym on a taxonomic
>>> website  https://ftp.funet.fi/
>>>
>>> So, is there any formal criterion or is it just a matter of personal
>>> viewpoint as to whether the different endings constitute synonyms?
>>>
>>> Thanks for any input on this.
>>>
>>> John Grehan
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>>
>>> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>>> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, 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
>>> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
>>> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>>>
>>> Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for 32 some years, 1987-2019.
>>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Taxacom Mailing List
>>
>> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, 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
>> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at:
>> http://taxacom.markmail.org
>>
>> Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for 32 some years, 1987-2019.
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> 
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, 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
> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
> 
> Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for 32 some years, 1987-2019.
> 