Taxacom: Questions of homonymy of three genus names

[Francisco Welter-Schultes]

Very good question.

Ochsenheimer did not use the name in the spelling Setia, he used the 
spelling Sesia for the name and only suggested that Setia would be a 
more correct spelling.
This was not a synonymy, but only a discussion of a spelling issue. Art. 
11.6 requires that the name must have been treated as a junior synonym 
of a name then used as valid. A synonym is a separate name.

Glossary:
synonym, n. Each of two or more names of the same rank used to denote 
the same taxonomic taxon.

junior synonym. Of two synonyms: the later established, (...)

"Established" means "made available". Only available names qualify as 
synonyms.

Setia was not a separately available name, it was the same available 
name Sesia in a different spelling variant.

A variant spelling can be an available name only if it satisfies the 
criteria of an unjustified emendation (Art. 33.2.3). In 1808 these 
requirements were not met. Setia did not qualify for an emendation 
because Art. 11.5 was not met, Setia was not used for the taxon. 
Ochsenheimer cited both spellings, but did not adopt Setia in place of 
Sesia (requirement of Art. 33.2.1).

When Meigen (1830, true date 1829, thanks Neal for clarifying) proposed 
to use the name in the spelling Setia this established a new name at 
this occasion, the criteria of Arts. 33.2.1 and 11.5 were satisfied.

An author who established a new name as an unjustified emendation before 
1961 cannot validate a previously mentioned synonym because by 
definition a previous author could not have first published this 
spelling as a junior synonym in the sense of the Code.

Very tricky. I hope I did not overlook something in this chain.

For the Code revision we are grateful for such tricky examples.

Best wishes
Francisco



Am 05.07.2024 um 10:25 schrieb Laurent Raty via Taxacom:
> 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%7C08fb1e83114c476db87d08dc9ce2f7f8%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638557746821445555%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=v5WH1URax7p%2B5gBdx7osat0T04vYYd8R83MEEkIW6rc%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%7C08fb1e83114c476db87d08dc9ce2f7f8%7C3c176536afe643f5b96636feabbe3c1a%7C0%7C0%7C638557746821445555%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Iuv04TnBxB%2FmEKRLAWtphouU%2FBLxBkUmX2yBE%2Bcr10A%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.
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
> 
>