ebook img

Opinion 1710 J. C. Megerle's (1801-1805) Auction Catalogues of Insects: suppressed for nomenclatural Purposes, with the specific names of Saperda albogiittata Megerle, 1803 (currently Apomecyna Alboguttata; Coleoptera) and Hippobosca variegata Megerle, 18 PDF

4 Pages·1993·0.86 MB·English
Save to my drive
Quick download
Download
Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.

Preview Opinion 1710 J. C. Megerle's (1801-1805) Auction Catalogues of Insects: suppressed for nomenclatural Purposes, with the specific names of Saperda albogiittata Megerle, 1803 (currently Apomecyna Alboguttata; Coleoptera) and Hippobosca variegata Megerle, 18

) BulletinofZoologicalNomenclature50(1)March1993 79 OPINION 1710 J.C. Megerle's(1801-1805) auction cataloguesofinsects: suppressed for nomenclatural purposes, with the specific names ofSaperda albogiittata Megerle, 1803 (currently Apomecynaalboguttata; Coleoptera) and Hippobosca variegata Megerle, 1803 (Diptera) conserved Ruling (1 Undertheplenarypowers: (a) the works entitled Catalogus insectorum..., Appendix ad catalogum tnsec- toruin... and CatalogusduarumcollectiotiemEleuteratorum... publishedby Megerle(1801-1805)areherebysuppressedfornomenclaturalpurposes; (b) the following specific names are hereby ruled to be availabledespite having beenpublishedinasuppressedwork: (i) alboguttataMegerle, 1803,aspublishedinthebinomenSaperdaalbogut- tata; (ii) variegataMegerle, 1803,aspublishedinthebinomenHippobosca varie- gata. (2) ThefollowingnamesareherebyplacedontheOfficialListofSpecificNames inZoology: (a) alboguttata Megerle, 1803, aspublished in thebinomen Saperdaalboguttata andasconservedin(l){b)(i)above; (b) variegata Megerle, 1803, as published in the binomen Hippobosca variegata andasconservedin(l){b)(ii)above. (3) The works entitled Catalogus itisectorutn.... Appendix ad catalogum insec- torum... and Catalogus duarum collectionem Eleuteratorum published by Megerle (1801-1805)andsuppressedin(l)(a)aboveareherebyplacedontheOfficialIndexof RejectedandInvalidWorksinZoology. HistoryofCase2671 AnapplicationforcataloguesbyJ.C.Megerle(1801-1805)toberuledunavailable fornomenclaturalpurposes,togetherwiththeconservationofthespecificnamesof SaperdaalboguttataandHippoboscavariegata,bothofMegerle(1803),wasreceived from Dr I.M. Kerzhner {ZoologicalInstitute, Academy ofSciences, St Petersburg. Russia)on 12July 1988. Aftercorrespondence thecase was pubhshed in BZN 48: 206-209(September 1991). Noticeofthecasewassenttoappropriatejournals. ItwasnotedonthevotingpaperthattheapplicationhadthesupportofMrR.D. Pope (Coleoptera) and Dr R.W. Crosskey (Diptera) (both ofTheNaturalHistory Museum,London. U.K.)andDrHansSilfverberg(UniversitetetsZoologiskaMuseum, Helsingfors, Finland). DecisionoftheCommission On 1 September 1992themembersoftheCommissionwereinvitedtovoteonthe proposalspublishedinBZN48:208.Atthecloseofthevotingperiodon1 December 1992thevoteswereasfollows; 80 BulletinofZoologicalNomenclature50(1)March1993 — Affirmativevotes 27: Bayer, Bock, Bouchet, Cocks, Cogger, Corliss, Dupuis, Hahn, Halvorsen, Holthuis, Kabata, Kraus, Lehtinen, Macpherson, Mahnert, MartinsdeSouza,Minelli,Nielsen,Nye.Ride,Savage,Schuster.Starobogatov,Stys, Trjapitzin,Ueno,—Willink Negativevotes 1:Thompson. NovotewasreceivedfromHeppell. Bayercommented:Twouldopposethesuppressionofanybonafidescientificwork thatmayhavehadthemisfortunetobecomerare,butIbelievethatagoodcasecan be made for rejecting auction catalogues such as those ofMegerle. Even though producedbyconventionalprintinganddoubtlessissuedinsubstantialnumbers,their obvious purpose was to sell the items listed rather than 'to provide a permanent scientificrecord"(Article8oftheCode).ItseemslikelythatMegerle,eventhoughhe was a curator of the Wiener Hofmuseum, was more concerned with selling the catalogueditemsthanwithadvancingscientificknowledge. Itseemstomethatthis andotherauctioncataloguescouldveryreasonablyberejectedasunavailableonthe groundsofnotbeingintendedforscientificrecord'. MartinsdeSouzanotedthatS.Breuning(1960;Cataloguedeslamiairesdumonde, p. 131)gaveApomecynahislrioFabricius, 1792asaseniorsubjectivesynonymoiA. albogutlala(Megerle, \SO'i). Thompson commented as follows: 'Kerzhner requested the suppression of Megerle'scatalogsastheacceptanceofthenamesestablishedtherein"wouldgreatly disturb the stability ofnomenclature". Unfortunately, few data were provided to substantiatethisclaim.Thetworeferencescitedinpara.7(Schenkling, 1935;Horn, 1937)arearticlesaboutMegerle,thecatalogs,andoldauctionsanddidnotaddress nomenclatural issues. No documentation is provided for the "no less than 20 currentlyusedspecificnames"that"wouldbeinvalidasjuniorprimaryhomonyms". Dataareprovidedonlyfortwogenericnamesandinbothofthesecasesthesituation isnotexactlyasstatedbyKerzhner(para.7).Forthebeetlegenusthereneedsonly be a change in date (1803 instead of 1807) and spelling (Doriphora instead of Doryphora) as Megerle attributed the name to lUiger. As for Centrotus, Megerle attributed the name to Fabricius. On the problem oftype species no details are provided. However, in thecase ofboth thesenames, the Commissioncould easily correctthedetailswithouthavingtosuppresstheworkasawhole. Kerzhner proposed the conservation of two specific names from Megerle but argued(para.9)thattwootherspecificnamesthathavebeenrecentlynotedasvalid should not be conserved as such action is not "substantiated by usage or to be appropriate". When has the principle ofpriority become inappropriate and been supersededbythatofusage?Neitherofthesetwonamesiswidelyused. Accepting PyrgotaundatafromMegerle(asWiedemanndidhimselOdoesnotinvolveachange ofanameincurrentuse:thejuniornameXylotachalybeaWiedemannhasonlybeen usedafewtimesinthelast50yearssoitcannotbearguedthatitis"substantiated byusage",evenifusagewasaprinciplethattheCodeendorsed! The use ofthe names published in Megerle's catalogs may "greatly disturb the stabilityofnomenclature"inthefuture,butsofarnoevidencehasbeenpresentedfor BulletinofZoologicalNomenclature50(1)March1993 81 suchinstability.TheCommissionisaskedtosuppresspublicationscontainingmany namesbecausethereappeartobeproblemswithtwogenericnames,buttoconserve two specific names which are being used currently. The Commission should not suppress works simply because theywaypose problems and, in thecase ofactual problems,itshoulddealwiththenames,nottheworks.TheCommissionsuppressed Geoffrey's 1762 Histoireabregeedesinsectes... buteventuallyhas had to ruleon eachnameinthatwork.IftheCommissionhaddealtwiththenamesinsteadofthe work in the first place much effort would have been saved. So, the Commission shoulddealwithonlythe Megerlenamesthatposerealproblems. Sofartherehas been no evidence presented that any Megerle name presents a serious problem to stabilityofnomenclature". Editorialnote. As noted in para. 2 ofthe application, only one original set of Megerle'scataloguesisknown toexist. In submittingthecaseDrKerzhnerwrote: 'With current techniques for making copies these catalogues, which are extreme bibliographicrarities,mayreceivewidedistribution.Thisrepresentsaseriousthreat to stability ofnomenclature. Proponents ofstrict priority mayfind the catalogues grounds for changing dozens of currently used names, although this would of courseviolatetheCode.Arecentpublicationseemstomearealforerunnerofthis situation;thereforeImakehastetosubmitthisproposal,which I havelonghadin mind". Thecomment from DrR.W. Crosskey(DepartmentofEntomology. TheNatural History Mu.wiim. London), noted on the voting paper, said (in part): 'We in the Diptera Section aretotally/octheapplication. It is necessary toconserve Megerle authorshipforHippohoscavariegata,averywellknownOldWorldectoparasite.The Commission should immediately support Kerzhner"s proposal to head ofT any diggingout ofpointless old names froma "work"" not intended to bemainstream scienceandaboutasobscureastheycome". InhiscommentaboveDrThompsonmentionsthattherejection(notsuppression) in 1954bytheCommissionofGeofrroy"s 1762workinitsentiretywasunfortunate andthatitwouldhavesavedmuchsubsequentefforthadthegenericnamestherein been considered individually. There is, however, an essential difference between Geoffroy"svolumesandthe Megerlecatalogues:40ofthe 59newgenericnamesin theformerwereandareusedasvalid(seeBZN48: 107),whereasthegreatmajority ofMegerle"smanynewnameshaveneverbeen used. Kerzhner(para. 7) remarked that 20accepted specific names arejuniorprimary homonyms ofunused Megerle namesandthatothersmaywellbejuniorsynonymsofcataloguenames;toreviewthe latter category individually is not feasible, and to do so for the former would be withoutobviousbenefittostabilityofnomenclature. TheconservationoiDoryphoraandCentrotus,thetwogenericnamesmentionedin the application and in DrThompson"s comment, was not Dr Kerzhner"s primary purposi. Under"Doriphora111."Megerle(1805,p. [8];seepara. 7oftheapplication) listed three nominal species, none of them being among the eight included in DoryphoraIlliger, 1807.ThetypespeciesofDoryphorais Chrysomelapunctatissima Olivier, 1790by thedesignation ofLatreille (1810). The "Centrotus F.' ofMegerle (1802b, p. [14]) would have Membracis clavata Fabricius, 1787 (now placed in CyphoniaLaporte, 1832)asthetypebymonotypy,whereasthetypespeciesofthe . 82 BullelinofZoologicalNomenclature50(1)March1993 accepted Centrotus Fabricius, 1803 is Cicada cornuia Linnaeus, 1758 by the designationofCurtis(1830). Originalreferences ThefollowingaretheoriginalreferencestothenamesplacedonanOfficialListbytheruling giveninthepresentOpinion: albogutlala,Saperda,Megerle,[1803].Appendixadcatahguminseclorum,quaemenseNovem- brisMDCCCIIViennaeAustriaeauclionislegevendilafuere,p.[10]. variegata, Hippobosca. Megerle, [180j]. Appendix ad catahgum insectorum, quae mense NovembrisMDCCCIIViennaeAuslriaeauclionislegevenditafuere,p.[17]. Thefollowingaretheoriginalreferencestotheworks,allwiththeauthorship[J.C.Megerle], placedonanOfficialIndexbytherulinggiveninthepresentOpinion: [1801]. Calalogus inseclorum, quae Viennae Austriae die XIV et sequentibus Decembris MDCCCIauclionislegedislrahunlur. [1802a].Appendixadcatahguminseclorum.quaemenseDecembrisMDCCCIViennaeAuslriae auctionilegevenditafuere [1802b]. Calalogus insectorum, quae Viennae Auslriae die IX et sequentibus Novembris MDCCCIIauclionislegedislrahunlur. [1803a]. Appendix ad catahgum insectorum, quae mense Novembris MDCCCII Viennae Austriaeauclionislegevenditafuere. [1803b]. Calalogus insectorum, quae Viennae Austriaedie28 Novembris 1803auclionis lege dislrahunlur. [1804a].Appendixadcatahguminseclorum.quaemenseNovembrisMDCCCIIIauclionislege vendilafuere. [1804b]. Calalogus duarum collectionem Eleuleralorum die XIV Maji MDCCCIV Viennae Auslriaeauctionelegevendendarum. [1804cl. Calalogus insectorum, quae Viennae Austriae die XX el sequentibus Seplembris MDCCCIVauclionislegedislrahunlur. [1804d]. Appendix ad catahgum insectorum. quae mense Seplembris MDCCCIV Viennae Auslriaeauclionislegevenditafuere. [1805a].Calalogusinsectorum,quae ViennaeAuslriaedie[daynotindicated]JuniiMDCCCV auclionislegedislrahunlur. [1805b]. Appendix adcatahgum insectorum. quaemenseJuniiMDCCCV Viennae Austriae auclionislegevenditafuere.

See more

The list of books you might like

Most books are stored in the elastic cloud where traffic is expensive. For this reason, we have a limit on daily download.