Taxacom: Questions of homonymy of three genus names

Fri Jul 5 03:25:01 CDT 2024

Although the spelling adopted as valid there was still Sesia, the first 
proposal of an emendation to Setia seems to have appeared in 
Ochsenheimer 1808 : https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.biodiversitylibrary.org%2Fpage%2F34447379&data=05%7C02%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C6db38ca401d247f5f8c508dc9ccbfc5a%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638557648105704755%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C40000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=jS%2FO%2Fq9whwaQkGkTuw9%2F5GulbBTf0qtCAuuSmk7LS4A%3D&reserved=0 .

Shouldn't this name be available from there under 11.6.1 ?

Cheers, Laurent -

On 7/5/24 03:13, Francisco Welter-Schultes via Taxacom wrote:
> Case 2:
> As Doug said:
> Haplota Dunning & Pickard, 1858 is an unjustified emendation of Aplota 
> Stephens, 1834, und thus an available name that enters into homonymy. 
> Very clear case.
> Haplota Marcus, 1940 (I did not see the original publication, I assume 
> the name was made available there) is a junior homonym.
>
> Case 3:
> Setia Meigen, 1830 (why 1829?, volume 2 has the date 1830 on its title 
> page) is an unjustifed emendation for Sesia Fabricius, 1775, and thus 
> an available name that enters into homonymy.
> Meigen explained that the spelling must be Setia and not Sesia, 
> because he considered Setia to be correct Latin. So the change in the 
> spelling was demonstrably intentional, hence, an emendation.
> Setia Adams & Adams, 1852 is a junior homonym. As David said, this is 
> a relatively important name in current usage. The malacologists are 
> apparently not aware of the homonymy. The Index Rocroi (master list of 
> molluscan genus-group names) does not mention Meigen's name.
>
> Oken's 1815 name was not suppressed. It was the entire work by Oken 
> 1815 that was placed on the Official Index of Rejected Works. For 
> nomenclature this has only more or less the effect as if Oken's 1815 
> work had never been published. So any subsequent author could propose 
> and make available names that Oken had mentioned in his suppressed 
> 1815 work.
>
> If this helps.
>
> Best wishes
> Francisco
>
>
>
> Am 05.07.2024 um 01:35 schrieb Douglas Yanega via Taxacom:
>> On 7/4/24 12:07 PM, Tony Rees via Taxacom wrote:
>>> Hi Markku,
>>>
>>> continuing consideration of the other 2 cases you raise:
>>>
>>>> 2) ... NHM says "Haplota Dunning & Pickard, 1858" is "unjustified
>>> emendation" [of Aplota Stephens, 1834]
>>>
>>> This appears to be correct, in which case Haplota Dunning & Pickard, 
>>> 1858
>>> would be unavailable, and Haplota Marcus, 1940 not a homonym
>>
>> Unfortunately, under ICZN Article 33.2.3, this is not true:
>>
>> "33.2.3. Any other emendation is an "unjustified emendation"; the 
>> name thus emended *is available* and it has its own author and date 
>> and is a junior objective synonym of the name in its original 
>> spelling; *it enters into homonymy* [snip]"
>>
>> This is perhaps one of the most difficult bits in the entire Code - 
>> Article 33, in which emendations are available names, but incorrect 
>> spellings are unavailable - and the only difference between the two 
>> is whether the change in spelling was intentional (an emendation) or 
>> not (a misspelling).
>>
>> If it is clear from reading Dunning & Pickard that they changed the 
>> spelling of Aplota on purpose, then Haplota Marcus IS a homonym.
>>
>> That said, *the dates are important*. Dunning & Pickard's name was 
>> published in 1858. If it was never used as a *valid* name after 1899, 
>> then it can be declared a nomen oblitum, and Haplota Marcus, 1940 can 
>> be declared a nomen protectum, as long as it has been used as valid 
>> frequently (see Article 23.9.1).
>>
>> In this and many such cases, you can't tell which names are valid, 
>> available, emendations, misspellings, or homonyms, without knowing 
>> ALL of the relevant literature. Nomenclators, aggregators, human or 
>> automated, are going to have trouble getting these things right.
>>
>>>> 3) Setia Adams & Adams, 1852 vs Setia Meigen, 1829 vs Setia Oken, 1815
>>> I guess this trickier issue? "Setia Oken, 1815" is suppressed, but is
>>> "Setia Meigen, 1829" true original emendation Sesia or just subsequent
>>> usage of suppressed Oken name?
>>>
>>> My guess would be that Setia Adams & Adams, 1852 (in Mollusca) in the
>>> available name in this case. Setia Meigen is simply an incorrect
>>> [?=unjustified] emendation according to Pühringer, F. and Kallies, A.,
>>> 2004. Provisional checklist of the Sesiidae of the world (Lepidoptera:
>>> Ditrysia). *Mitteilungen der Entomologischen Arbeitsgemeinschaft
>>> Salzkammergut*, *4*, pp.1-85. (
>>> https://nam10.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.sesiidae.net%2Fliterature%2FMitteilungen_2004_001-085.pdf&data=05%7C02%7Ctaxacom%40lists.ku.edu%7C6db38ca401d247f5f8c508dc9ccbfc5a%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638557648105704755%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C40000%7C%7C%7C&sdata=eB0lY0VtacsIZd4C0TKp5AQ9Y0po%2FUXkPj1A4IPO6gs%3D&reserved=0) who
>>> state:
>>>
>>> Sesia FABRICIUS 1775:547 [[Sphinx] apiformis CLERCK 1759, subsequent
>>> designation by LATREILLE 1810:440]
>>>    Setia OKEN 1815:745; rejected name (Opinion Nr. 417 ICZN)
>>>    Setia MEIGEN 1829:103; incorrect emendation
>>>    Sometia MEIGEN 1829:115; incorrect original spelling (unavailable)
>>>    (+ more...)
>>
>> This case appears to be the same exact situation. Setia Meigen is an 
>> emendation, and available. Setia Adams & Adams is a homonym *unless* 
>> (1) Meigen's name is a nomen oblitum, and (2) Adams & Adams' name 
>> qualifies as a nomen protectum.
>>
>> In both of these cases, I'd be a little surprised if either of the 
>> junior names qualified as a nomen protectum. The first is a monotypic 
>> bryozoan genus, the latter is a subgenus name for a group of small 
>> marine snails, and might only rarely appear in print (though probably 
>> more likely than the bryozoan).
>>
>> Peace,
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
>
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at lists.ku.edu
> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit: 
> https://lists.ku.edu/listinfo/taxacom
> You can reach the person managing the list at: taxacom-owner at lists.ku.edu
>
> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 37 years, 1987-2024.
>
>