Chelifer longimanus Kollar, 1848: a nomen nudum corresponding to Neobisium spelaeum (Schiödte, 1847) (Pseudoscorpiones: Chelonethi: Neobisiidae)

2012·3.3 MB·Latin

by  Mark L I Judson

Arachnologische Mitteilungen44:47-50 Nürnberg,Dezember2012
Cheliferlongimanus Kollar, 1848:a nomen nudum corresponding to Neobisium
spelaeum (Schiödte, 1847) (Pseudoscorpiones: Chelonethi: Neobisiidae)
Mark L.l.Judson & Christoph Hörweg
doi:10.5431/aramit4408
Abstract:ThemanuscriptnameCheliferlongimanusKollar,1848,mostoftencitedasObisiumlongimanumKollar,wasfirst
introduced ina notebyKollar(1848)thathasbeenoverlooked inthetaxonomicliteratureon pseudoscorpions.
No description or indication has been associated with this name,which is therefore a nomen nudum.It corre-
spondstothevalid pseudoscorpion speciesNeobisiumspelaeum (Schiödte, 1847),having beenfound atoneofthe
typelocalitiesofthelatter(PostojnaCave,Slovenia).TwospecimensoriginallyidentifiedasO.longimanum(probably
byV.Kollar)arepresentinthecollectionsoftheNaturhistorischesMuseumWien.
Keywords: Nomenclature,Postojnacave,pseudoscorpion,Slovenia
Theearlyliteratureonkarstanimalscontainsfrequent other pseudoscorpions. It was not being proposed
references to a pseudoscorpion with the manuscript as a diagnostic character and it did not define the
name ObisiumlongimanumKollar(KHEVENHÜLLER- species because other eyeless pseudoscorpions were
METSCH 1852, 1853, POKORNY 1854, SCHINER known by that time. The “Herr Schmid” credited
1854,1870,HalidayinWright1857,Low1862, withthediscoveryofthe speciesisF.J. Schmidt,who
FRIES 1874). Thereafter, this name was generally first mentioned it in a talk given to the Eighth As-
ignored, except for the catalogue ofWOLF (1938). sembly ofHungarian Physicians and Naturalists in
Ithas notbeen mentionedin the specialistliterature Oedenburg on 16 August 1847.The name Schmidt
on pseudoscorpions, being absent from the lists of proposed there, Chelifer troglodytes, was mentioned
nominanudaprovidedbyBEIER(1932)andHARVEY (as a nomen nudum) in reports ofthe meeting by
(1991,2011).Hereweclarifythestatusofthisname, Hammerschmidt (1847, p. 196) and Zipser
based on a literature survey and an examination of (1847). SCHMIDT (1848) later described the species
two surviving specimens originally attributed to O. as Obisium troglodytes Schmidt, 1848, which is now
longimanum. considered ajunior synonym ofNeobisium spelaeum
(Schiödte, 1847) (seeJUDSON 2012). Kollar’s paper
IdentityofCheliferlongimanusKollar wasreadtotheAustrianAcademyduringitsmeeting
The name Chelifer longimanus was introduced by of30 March 1848, but he does seem to have been
KOLLAR (1848),whowrote: awareofSchmidt’sdescriptionofO.troglodytes,which
“Auch aus der Classe derArachniden entdeckte Herr had been published in the supplement (Illyrisches
Schmid eine ausgezeichnete Art derAfterscorpione Blatt) ofa local newspaper (Laibacher Zeitung) on
Chelifer, welche ich Chelifer longimanus nenne, bei 8 January 1848. Because KOLLAR (1848) did not
demebenfallskeineAugensichtbarsind.”[Alsofrom mention 0 troglodytes by name, C. longimanus can-
.
theclassofarachnidsMrSchmiddiscoveredadistinc- not be considered a nomen novum for that species.
tive species of Chelifer false-scorpions, which I call The simple mention of Schmidt’s discovery is too
Cheliferlongimanus,inwhichalsonoeyesarevisible.] vague to constitute an indication in the sense ofthe
KOLLAR(1848) onlymentioned the absence ofeyes International Commission on Zoological
withreferenceto othercave dwellinganimals,notto NOMENCLATURE (1999), which requires “a biblio-
graphicreferencetoapreviouslypublisheddescription
MarkJUDSON,Museumnationald'Histoirenaturelle, or definition” (Article 12.2.1). Thus, in the absence
DepartementSystematiqueetEvolution,CNRSUMR7205,57
rueCuvier,C.P.53,75005Paris,France;E-Mail:[email protected] ofa description or indication, Cheliferlongimanus is
ChristophHÖRWEG,NaturhistorischesMuseumWien,3. anomennudum. KOLLAR(1848) also seemsto have
ZoologischeAbteilung,Burgring7,1010Wien,Austria; been unaware ofSCHIÖDTE’s (1847) description of
E-Mail:Christoph,[email protected] BlothrusspelaeusfromPostojnacave,whichhadbeen
eingereicht:28.8.2012,akzeptiert:9.11.2012;onlineverfügbar:28.12.2012 published on 12 August 1847 (JUDSON 2012).
48 A4.Judson&C.Hörweg
August 1850. SCHINER(1852)
also reported evidence that
this pseudoscorpion fed on the
beetle Leptodirus hochenwar-
i
tii Schmidt, 1832, and stated
that this confirmed Schmidt’s
suspicions on this subject. No
reference is given, but this may
be an allusion to SCHMIDT’s
(1848) article, where he writes
“DasThierlebtallemAnschein
nach gleich seinen Stammver-
wandten von Insecten, und
ich habe allen Grund zu ver-
muthen, daß ihm der etwas
träge Leptodirus nicht selten
zur Beute wird, nachdem ich
an einigen Orten, wo mir das
Obisium troglodytes zu Theil
wurde, Ueberreste von Hohenwart Höhlerkäfern
’s
fand.” [This animal seems to live on insects like its
relatives,andI have everyreason to suppose thatthe
somewhat sluggishLeptodirusis often the prey,since
inplaceswhere Obisiumtroglodytesoccurred,I found
remains ofHohenwarts cave beetle.]
KHEVENHÜLLER-METSCH (1852) referred to
the pseudoscorpion he had collected from Postojna
cave as “Obisium longimanum Koll. {Blothrusspelaeus
Schiödtey.Thiswas the firsttime thatthe identityof
C. longimanuswith B. spelaeus had been recognized.
However, the way in which it was presented led to
some confusion. FRIES (1874) mistakenlytreated 0.
longimanum as aseniorsynonymofB. spelaeus,while
other authors, such as POKORNY (1854), MÜLLER
(1857:as C.longimanus)andSCHINER(1870),treated
itasavalidname,withoutmentioningthesynonymy.
HALIDAY (in WRIGHT 1857) even listed O. longi-
manum and B. spelaeus as distinct species in separate
genera.Theseerrorscouldhavebeenavoidedbecause
Fig.i:TwospecimensofNeobisiumspelaeumintheNaturhis- SCHINER (1854: 264) had clearly summarized the
torischesMuseumWien previouslyidentifiedas'Obisium situationwhen he w—rote “Blothrusspelaeus. (Obisium
longimanum'(nomen nudum),conserveddryin box(8x6.5 troglodytesSchmidt. ObisiumlongimanumKollarin
x5cm;glasslid removed),with Beier'sidentification label
pinnedaboveoriginal label. litt.)”in a standard reference on the karstfauna.
Fig.2:OneofthetwospecimensofNeobisiumspelaeuminthe It is not clear why KHEVENHÜLLER-METSCH
NaturhistorischesMuseumWien previouslyidentifiedas (1852) decided that the combination Obisium longi-
'Obisiumlongimanum'(nomennudum). manum shouldbe used,given that Obisiumwas used
intwodifferentsenses duringthe 19thcentury(JUD-
“Chelifer longimanus Koll” was later mentioned by SON2012).Ifthegenusintendedwas ObisiumIlliger,
SCHINER (1851), who noted that three specimens 1798 (a synonym of Chelifer Geoffroy, 1792), this
had been found in Adelsberg cave (now Postojna would simply indicate a lack offamiliaritywith the
cave, Slovenia) by KHEVENHÜLLER-METSCH, in taxonomicliteratureonpseudoscorpions.If,however,
Cheliferlongimanus 49
Obisium auct. was intended, this
wouldberemarkablyperspicacious
becauseitwasnotuntilmuchlater
that Blothrus Schiödte, 1847 was
recognized to be a polyphyletic
assemblage of cavernicolous spe-
cieswithinNeobisiumChamberlin,
1930 (= Obisium auct.).
Khevenhüller-Metsch
stated that he had visited Pos-
tojna cave in September 1850,
August and December 1851, and
May 1852 (KHEVENHÜLLER-
METSCH 1852, 1853), and men- FigN.a3t:uOrrhiigsitnoarlislcahbeelsaMcucsoemupmanWyiienng,tphreevsipouescliymeidnesntoiffiNeedobaiss'iOubmisspieulmaleounmgiinmatnhuem'
tioned collecting five specimens (nomen nudum).
ofO. longimanum, three ofwhich
werepreservedinalcoholandtwodry.Thelattertwo an available name and either adopted as the name of
specimens probablycorrespondto thoselistedunder a taxon or treated as a senior homonym, it is made
thename O. longimanumbyLÖW(1862,p.57,table) available thereby but dates from its first publica-
A
asbeinginthecollectionsoftheKaiserlich-königliche tion as a synonym.” literal reading ofArticle 11.6
zoologisch-botanische Gesellschaft. These are still mightsuggestthatitonlyapplies to the firstworkin
preserved dry in the collections ofthe Naturhistor- which the name appeared, but the entry for‘nomen
isches Museum Wien (Figs 1—2), labelled “Obisium nudum’in the glossarymakes it clearthatthis is not
longimanus [sic] gestiftet imJ[ahre] 1851 oder 1852 the case: “A nomen nudum is not an available name,
von Hr Fürstvon Khevenhüller, ... [illegible], 14/2” and therefore the same name maybe made available
(oldhandwrittenlabel;Fig.3)and“Obisium(Blothrus) later for the same or a different concept; in such a
spelaeum Schiödte, det. Dr. Beier” (label in Beier’s case itwould take authorship and date from that act
handwriting; Fig. 1). These specimens were listed ofestablishment, not from anyearlierpublication as
amongst the material ofN. spelaeum examined by a nomen nudum.”
BEIER (1928),who did not mention the manuscript It could be argued that KHEVENHÜLLER-
name. Because Kollarwas the curator ofthe natural METSCH(1852)published O.longimanumasajunior
historycollections ofthe Kaiserlich-königliche zoo- synonymofBlothrusspelaeusSchiödte, 1847andthat
logisch-botanische Gesellschaft (THALER 8c GRU- this name was adopted as the name ofthe species
—
BER2003) hence the references to“Kustos Kollar” by POKORNY (1854), MÜLLER (1857), SCHINER
inSCHINER(—1852) andKHEVENHÜLLER-METSCH (1870) andFRIES (1874),thusmakingitanavailable
(1852, 1853) he must have seen these specimens name in accordance with Article 11.6. However,we
and maywell have been responsible for theiridenti- do not think that this would be correct.There is an
fication.Thus theyprovide an indirect confirmation ambiguity in Article 11.6.1, due to the unqualified
N
that C. longimanus and spelaeum refer to one and use oftheword“adopted”.Does this meangenerally
the same species. adopted, orjust adopted by at least one author?We
think it unlikely that this article was intended to be
Was Obisiumlongimanummadeavailable used to allownomina nuda to be treated as available
underArticle 11.6 ofthe Code? names simply through subsequent erroneous usage,
Article 11.6 oftheInternational Code ofZoological as inthe case ofthe authors cited abovewhoused O.
Nomenclature states that“A name whichwhen first longimanum as ifitwere avalid name.We therefore
publishedinanavailableworkwastreatedas ajunior interpretArticle 11.6 as applyingonlyto names that
synonym ofa name thenused asvalid is not thereby were generallyadoptedbytaxonomists familiarwith
made available”. However, Article 11.6.1 goes on to the group. Because the great majority of authors
specifytheconditionsunderwhichsuchanamecould have always recognized Blothrus spelaeus (and later
laterbe made available: “ifsuch a name published as combinations) as the valid name for the species, we
a junior synonym had been treated before 1961 as do not consider O. longimanum to have been made
50 M.Judson&C.Hörweg
availablefromKHEVENHÜLLER-METSCH(1852)by 1930 (Arachnida: Chelonethi).-Zootaxa3475:21-35
anysubsequentwork. KHEVENHÜLLER-METSCHR.Fürstzu(1852):Briefliche
NachrichtderDurchforschungderAdelsbergerGrotte
Potentialvalueofnominanuda d[eascczoouonltopgriesscehn-tbeodtabnyisScChHeInNVEeRr,eiJn.Rs.i].nW-iVeernh1a:n1d0l5u-n1g0e8n
From a strictlynomenclaturalpointofview, nomina KHEVENHÜLLER[-]METSCH R. Fürst zu (1853): [En-
nuda are nothingmore than anuisance andoughtto tomologische Untersuchung der Adelsberger Höhle.]
be avoided. Nevertheless, once created they should - Verhandlungen des zoologisch-botanischen Vereins
not be entirely ignored, since pertinent information inWien2:42-44
concerning a species may be associated with such KOLLAR [V] (1848): Uber ein neues sehr merkwürdiges
Crustaceum aus den unterirdischen Gewässern von
namesintheliterature.InthecaseofO. longimanum, Krain,welchesHerrCustosH.Freyerandask.k.Hof-
forexample,KHEVENHÜLLER-METSCH (1852) and Naturalien-Cabineteingesendethat.-Sitzungsberichte
SCHINER(1852, 1854) reportedindirectevidence of derKaiserhchenAkademiederWissenschaften(Mathe-
predation on the cave beetle Leptodirushochenwartii matisch-Naturwissenschaftlichen Classe) 1: 137-138
Schmidt, 1832 (Leiodidae) and SCHINER (1870) LÖWF.(1862):DieTypensammlungderk.k.zoologisch-
botanischen Gesellschaft.-Verhandlungenderkaiser-
observedapparentavoidanceofthepseudoscorpionby
lich-königlichen zoologisch-botanischen Gesellschaft
thebeetle. Becauseverylittleisyetknown about the inWien 11 [1861]: 48-57
biologyofcavernicolous pseudoscorpions,even such MÜLLER H. (1857): Ueber die Lebensweise der augen-
anecdotal observations still have someworth. Other losen Käferinden KrainerHöhlen.-Entomologische
typesofinformation,suchasdistributionrecords,may Zeitung 18: 65-74
also be associated with nomina nuda, so it is useful POKORNY A. (1854): [Zoologische Ausbeute der Karst-
to keep trackofthem and,whenpossible,to identify höhlen.] -Verhandlungendeszoologisch-botanischen
VereinsinWien3 [1853] (Sitzungsberichte):24-27
themwithvalid names. SCHINER [J.]R. (1851): [seltene,oderfürdieWienerGe-
gend neue Käfer...]. - Oesterreichisches Botanisches
Acknowledgements Wochenblatt 1 (34):275
WearegratefultoTheoBlickandananonymousrefereefor SCHINERJ.R. (1852):Neue KäferfürdieFaunaaustriaca;
comments andcorrectionsthatimprovedthetext. über Leptodirus und Cymindis. — Verhandlungen des
zoologisch-botanischenVereinsinWien 1: 46-50
References SCHINERJ.R. (1854): Fauna der Adelsberger-, Lueger-
BEIERM.(1928):DiePseudoskorpionedesWienerNatur- und Magdalenen-Grotte. In: SCHMIDL A. (Ed.): Zur
hdiesstNoartisucrhheinstMoursiescuhmesn.MIu.sHeemuimctseninodWaicteynli4.2:-2A8n5n-a3l1e4n WHiöshsleennsckhuanfdteend,eWsiKeanr.stpe.s.23K1a-i2se7r2liche Akademie der
BEIliEfRerMin.ea(.1-93T2i)e:rPrseeicuhdo5s8c:oir-pxixio,ni1d-e2a94II.Subord.C.Che- SCHdIerNhEeRitJe.nR.de(r18I7n0s)e:ctEeingweenltt.hü-mliScchhrkiefitteennduensdVeBreesionne-s
zurVerbreitung naturwissenschaftlicher Kenntnisse in
FRIES S. (1874): Die Falkensteiner Höhle, ihre Fauna Wien 10:47-88
undFlora.-Jahreshefte des Vereins fürvaterländische
HAMNaMtEuRrkSuCnHdMeIinDWTüKr.tt(1e8m4b7)e:rgBe3r0i:ch8t6ü-b1e6r4diediesjährige SCjHoIrÖdiDsTkEeFJa.uC.na(1i8H4u7l)e:rn[UenideKrrsaöigneolgseIrstorvieenr].d-enOvuenrdseirg-t
over det Kongelige danske Videnskabernes Selskabs
VIII. Versammlung ungarischer Naturforscher und
AerzteinOedenburg.-BerichteüberdieMittheilungen Forhandlinger 1847 (6): 75-81
v1o7n9-F2r0e8unden derNaturwissenschaften inWien 3 (2): SCH-MIIllDyrTisFc.h(e1s8B4l8a)t:tN1at8u4r8hi(s3)t:or1i0schesausKrain[Schluß].
HARdoVsEcoYrpMi.oSn.ida(.19M9a1)nc[h“e1s9t90e”r]:UnCiavt.alPorgesuse,oMfantchheesPtseeur-, ThaArlaecrhnoKl.og&iceJ.inGrÖustbeerrrei(c2h00137)5:8-Z1u9r55G.es-chDiecnhitseiade8r:
139-163
HAvRsiiVo+En7Y2.20M6..WpS.e.s(t2e0r1n1)A:usPtsreauldioasncMourpsieounms,oPfetrhteh.Wo-rIlndt,ervneert-: WOVLoFluBm.en(1I9I3I8:)A:nAinmiamlailumiuCmatCaalovgeursn.aDrrumW.CatJaulnokg,us’s.-
http://www.museum.wa.gov.au/catalogues/pseudoscor- Gravenhage. 918 p.
pions (accessedinAug.2012) WRIGHT E.P. (1857): Notes ofa visit to Mitchelstown
International Commission on Zoological No- caves.With supplemental notes on the blind fauna of
menclature(1999):InternationalCodeofZoological Europe,byA.H.Haliday.-NaturalHistoryReview4:
Nomenclature. Fourth edition, InternationalTrust for 231-241,pi.XVIII
JUDZSooOlNogMi.cLal.IN.om(e2n0c1l2a):tuNroe,meLnocnldaotnu.raXlXpIrXob+le3m0s6pa.sso- ZlPuSnEgRarCi.scAh.er(1A8e4r7z):teBeurnidchNtatüubrefrodrisechaecrhtienVOeerdesnabmumrlgu.ng-
Korrespondenz-Blatt des zoologisch-mineralogischen
ciated with the generic names Obisium Leach, 1814,
Blothrus Schiödte, 1847 and Neobisium Chamberlin, Vereinsin Regensburg 1: 134-137