Anormogomphus kiritshenkoi Bartenev, 1913 (Odonata: Gomphidae): a literature review of the variable spelling of the species epithet, choice of the correct spelling and notes on the type locality of the species.

This work seeks to expose and clear up nomenclatural irregularities involving copepods of the order Monstrilloida, family Monstrillidae. The diagnostic text related to Monstrilla minuta Isaac, 1974 and four nominal species of Thaumaleus Krøyer, 1849 (now Cymbasoma Thompson, 1888) proposed by Isaac in 1974 is sufficient for all names to be available from their original description except for Thaumaleus similirostratus, which was proposed conditionally in 1974 and was first made available by Isaac in 1975; "similirostris" as used by Grygier in 1995 is an incorrect subsequent spelling. Four other specific names proposed in 1975 by Isaac, but disclaimed by him as nomina nuda (an action permitted retroactively by the Fourth Edition of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature) have never been made available. By quoting the necessary information from Isaac's doctoral dissertation, two of them are validated herein under the names Thaumaleus frondipes Isaac in Grygier Suárez-Morales, sp. nov., and Strilloma scotti Isaac in Grygier Suárez-Morales, sp. nov., and are immediately reassigned as new combinations to Cymbasoma and Monstrilla Dana, 1849, respectively. A fifth such name, Thaumaleus tumorifrons, has already been made available under the authorship of Suárez-Morales, 1999, but its females are excluded from the type series; the spelling of the specific name of the new species recently proposed for those females, Cymbasoma mediterranea Suárez-Morales, Goruppi, Olazabal Tirelli, 2017, is emended to mediterraneum to match the gender of the genus. For Cymbasoma bowmani Suárez-Morales Gasca, 1998, the "Form B" female mentioned in the original description is excluded from the type series. The authorship and date of availability of Haemocera (currently Cymbasoma) morii depends on which language version of Article 13.1.1 of the Code is followed; a ruling by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature under Article 87 of the Code is necessary to resolve the matter. The composition of the type series of Cymbasoma bullatum (Scott, 1909) in terms of both number and sex has become unclear; its type locality is restricted herein to the vicinity of Obi Island in the Moluccas. Despite a published statement to the contrary, the syntype series of Cymbasoma germanicum (Timm, 1893) included specimens from other localities than just Helgoland. The type series of Cymbasoma guerrerense Suárez-Morales Morales-Ramírez, 2009 consists only of the holotype, which was mistakenly reported under the wrong registration number. The supposed invalidity of Monstrilla capitellicola Hartman, 1961 is discussed. Monstrilla javensis Isaac, 1974, nomen nudum, has remained unavailable owing to lack of adherence to Article 16.1 of the Code by later authors; the specific name is made available herein, under Suárez-Morales' authorship, in the combination Cymbasoma javense sp. nov. The taxonomic (and eventual nomenclatural) question of the status of M. mariaeugeniae Suárez-Morales Islas-Landeros, 1993 vis à vis M. wandelii Stephensen, 1913, i.e. as a separate species or a subspecies of the latter, remains unsettled. Cymbasoma lenticula Suárez-Morales McKinnon, 2014 and Monstrillopsis boonwurrungorum Suárez-Morales McKinnon, 2014 are fixed herein as the correct original spellings of those two specific names. Resolution of the problem posed by assignment of the specific name reticulata to supposedly non-conspecific males and females in the genus Monstrillopsis Sars, 1921 requires the designation of a neotype by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature.

Biological type specimens are a particular kind of voucher specimen stored in natural history collections. Their special status and practical use are discussed in relation to the description and naming of taxonomic zoological diversity. Our current system, known as Linnaean nomenclature, is governed by the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. The name of a species is fixed by its name-bearing type specimen, linking the scientific name of a species to the type specimen first designated for that species. The name-bearing type specimen is not necessarily a typical example of the species, while establishment of the boundaries of a species requires empirical taxonomic studies. The International Code of Zoological Nomenclature allows for the naming of new species in the absence of preserved specimens. However, photos and DNA sequences should not function as primary type material, while new species should not be described and named without deposition of at least one type specimen in a collection. Philosophically, species are individuals, spatiotemporally restricted entities. Therefore, Linnaean species names are proper names, which do not define the taxon but serve as a label, providing an ostensive definition of a species. Paratypes have no name-bearing function but, nevertheless, are highly valued specimens in natural history collections. Paratypes should be restricted to those specimens originating from the same sample as the holotype. Diagnosis of a species taxon involves establishment of a connection between a Linnaean name and determination of the boundaries of the species. A first step in this process is the choice of an appropriate species concept. It is not the examination of holotypes and paratypes that necessarily provides the best estimate of the taxonomic boundaries of a species, but this is facilitated by a set of voucher specimens known as the hypodigm. Dissatisfaction with the present nomenclatural code led some researchers to propose emendations. Other taxonomists suggested abandoning Linnaean nomenclature and proposed the alternative PhyloCode, albeit that it relegates the naming of species taxa to the traditional nomenclatural codes.

NOMENCLATURE OF CULTIVATED PLANTS: A HISTORICAL BOTANICAL STANDPOINT

We are now over four decades into digitally managing the names of Earth's species. As the number of federating (i.e., software that brings together previously disparate projects under a common infrastructure, for example TaxonWorks) and aggregating (e.g., International Plant Name Index, Catalog of Life (CoL)) efforts increase, there remains an unmet need for both the migration forward of old data, and for the production of new, precise and comprehensive nomenclatural catalogs. Given this context, we provide an overview of how TaxonWorks seeks to contribute to this effort, and where it might evolve in the future. In TaxonWorks, when we talk about governed names and relationships, we mean it in the sense of existing international codes of nomenclature (e.g., the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN)). More technically, nomenclature is defined as a set of objective assertions that describe the relationships between the names given to biological taxa and the rules that determine how those names are governed. It is critical to note that this is not the same thing as the relationship between a name and a biological entity, but rather nomenclature in TaxonWorks represents the details of the (governed) relationships between names. Rather than thinking of nomenclature as changing (a verb commonly used to express frustration with biological nomenclature), it is useful to think of nomenclature as a set of data points, which grows over time. For example, when synonymy happens, we do not erase the past, but rather record a new context for the name(s) in question. The biological concept changes, but the nomenclature (names) simply keeps adding up. Behind the scenes, nomenclature in TaxonWorks is represented by a set of nodes and edges, i.e., a mathematical graph, or network (e.g., Fig. 1). Most names (i.e., nodes in the network) are what TaxonWorks calls "protonyms," monomial epithets that are used to construct, for example, bionomial names (not to be confused with "protonym" sensu the ICZN). Protonyms are linked to other protonyms via relationships defined in NOMEN, an ontology that encodes governed rules of nomenclature. Within the system, all data, nodes and edges, can be cited, i.e., linked to a source and therefore anchored in time and tied to authorship, and annotated with a variety of annotation types (e.g., notes, confidence levels, tags). The actual building of the graphs is greatly simplified by multiple user-interfaces that allow scientists to review (e.g. Fig. 2), create, filter, and add to (again, not "change") the nomenclatural history. As in any complex knowledge-representation model, there are outlying scenarios, or edge cases that emerge, making certain human tasks more complex than others. TaxonWorks is no exception, it has limitations in terms of what and how some things can be represented. While many complex representations are hidden by simplified user-interfaces, some, for example, the handling of the ICZN's Family-group name, batch-loading of invalid relationships, and comparative syncing against external resources need more work to simplify the processes presently required to meet catalogers' needs. The depth at which TaxonWorks can capture nomenclature is only really valuable if it can be used by others. This is facilitated by the application programming interface (API) serving its data (https://api.taxonworks.org), serving text files, and by exports to standards like the emerging Catalog of Life Data Package. With reference to real-world problems, we illustrate different ways in which the API can be used, for example, as integrated into spreadsheets, through the use of command line scripts, and serve in the generation of public-facing websites. Behind all this effort are an increasing number of people recording help videos, developing documentation, and troubleshooting software and technical issues. Major contributions have come from developers at many skill levels, from high school to senior software engineers, illustrating that TaxonWorks leads in enabling both technical and domain-based contributions. The health and growth of this community is a key factor in TaxonWork's potential long-term impact in the effort to unify the names of Earth's species.

Constraints in naming parts of the Tree of Life

TAXONVolume 63, Issue 4 p. 932-933 Proposals to Conserve or Reject NamesFree Access (2302) Proposal to reject the name Gonyaulax catenella (Alexandrium catenella) (Dinophyceae) Uwe John, Corresponding Author Uwe John uwe.john@awi.de Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research, Am Handelshafen 12, Bremerhaven, 27570 GermanySearch for more papers by this authorWayne Litaker, Wayne Litaker National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Ocean Service, National Centers for Coastal Oceans Science, Center for Fisheries and Habitat Research, 101 Pivers Island Road, Beaufort, North Carolina, 28516 U.S.A.Search for more papers by this authorMarina Montresor, Marina Montresor Stazione Zoologica Anton Dohrn, Villa Comunale, Napoli, 80121 ItalySearch for more papers by this authorShauna Murray, Shauna Murray Plant Functional Biology and Climate Change Cluster, University of Technology, Sydney, P.O. Box 123 Broadway, New South Wales, 2007 AustraliaSearch for more papers by this authorMichael L. Brosnahan, Michael L. Brosnahan Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, MS # 32, 266 Woods Hole Road, Woods Hole, Massachusetts, 02543 U.S.A.Search for more papers by this authorDonald M. Anderson, Donald M. Anderson Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, MS # 32, 266 Woods Hole Road, Woods Hole, Massachusetts, 02543 U.S.A.Search for more papers by this author Uwe John, Corresponding Author Uwe John uwe.john@awi.de Alfred Wegener Institute for Polar and Marine Research, Am Handelshafen 12, Bremerhaven, 27570 GermanySearch for more papers by this authorWayne Litaker, Wayne Litaker National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Ocean Service, National Centers for Coastal Oceans Science, Center for Fisheries and Habitat Research, 101 Pivers Island Road, Beaufort, North Carolina, 28516 U.S.A.Search for more papers by this authorMarina Montresor, Marina Montresor Stazione Zoologica Anton Dohrn, Villa Comunale, Napoli, 80121 ItalySearch for more papers by this authorShauna Murray, Shauna Murray Plant Functional Biology and Climate Change Cluster, University of Technology, Sydney, P.O. Box 123 Broadway, New South Wales, 2007 AustraliaSearch for more papers by this authorMichael L. Brosnahan, Michael L. Brosnahan Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, MS # 32, 266 Woods Hole Road, Woods Hole, Massachusetts, 02543 U.S.A.Search for more papers by this authorDonald M. Anderson, Donald M. Anderson Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, MS # 32, 266 Woods Hole Road, Woods Hole, Massachusetts, 02543 U.S.A.Search for more papers by this author First published: 01 August 2014 https://doi.org/10.12705/634.21Citations: 25AboutPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat No abstract is available for this article.Citing Literature Volume63, Issue4August 2014Pages 932-933 RelatedInformation

Thirty new species of benthic leptothecate hydroids were described and named from Patagonia in a 1991 PhD dissertation by Mohamed El Beshbeeshy. Although constituting nomina nuda under provisions of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN), the names of some species were used in several scientific publications between 1991 and 2011. In 2011, the dissertation of El Beshbeeshy was published in accordance with Article 8 of the ICZN. Several species-group names appearing in that work nevertheless fail to fully comply with certain articles of the code. The goal of this contribution is to review the nomenclatural availability of the names of those 30 new taxa, and to clearly establish the current status of El Beshbeeshy's material. Two of them were made available in 1999 as part of studies other than those of El Beshbeeshy, and correct authorship and date is here noted. Twenty-one of the nomina nuda were made available in a work published by El Beshbeeshy in 2011, although some constitute junior synonyms. Six of the new species-group names appearing in both the 1991 and 2011 works, established following a literature review of Patagonian species, were proposed without re-description, or designation of name-bearing types, or locations of such types. Most of them do not meet criteria of availability and remain nomina nuda. The status of each is discussed to avoid additional nomenclatural errors and continued taxonomic confusion.

This book inventories all available (and some unavailable) names in the family, genus, and species groups of extant members of orders Actiniaria and Corallimorpharia [cnidarian subclass Hexacorallia (Zoantharia) of class Anthozoa], providing a benchmark of names, their status, and taxon membership. I have attempted to make the compilation complete as of 2010; some names created after 2010 are included. The book is derived from a database I compiled that was available through a website. Most of the book is from the literature that defines taxa and documents their geographic distribution-primarily publications on nomenclature, taxonomy, and biogeography, but also some on ecology, pharmacology, reproductive biology, physiology, etc. of anemones (the common name for these groups); the reference section comprises 845 entries. As for previous anemone catalogs, this contains taxonomic as well as nomenclatural information, the former based on subjective opinion of working biologists, the latter objectively verifiable and unchanging (except by action of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature). Each family-group name, genus-group name, and original combination for species-group names has an entry. The entry contains the bibliographic reference to the publication in which each name was made available. This book contains for Corallimorpharia seven family names (four considered valid [57%]), 20 generic names (10 considered valid [50%] and one unavailable), and 65 species names (46 considered valid [70%]). It contains for Actiniaria 86 family names (50 considered valid [58%] and three unavailable), 447 generic names (264 considered valid [59%] and two unavailable), and 1427 species names (1101 considered valid [77%] and nine unavailable). Type specimens are inventoried from more than 50 natural history museums in Africa, Australia, Europe, New Zealand, and North America, including those with the largest collections of anemones; the geographic sources of specimens that were the bases of new names are identified. I resolve some nomenclatural issues, acting as First Reviser. A few taxonomic opinions are published for the first time. I have been unable to resolve a small number of problematic names having both nomenclatural and taxonomic problems. Molecular phylogenetic analyses are changing assignment of genera to families and species to genera. Systematics may change, but the basics of nomenclature remain unchanged in face of such alterations. All actions are in accord with the principles of nomenclature enunciated in the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. These include the type concept, the Principle of Coordination, and the Principle of Priority. Nomenclatural acts include the creation of new replacement names; seven actiniarian generic names and one species name that are junior homonyms but have been treated as valid are replaced and an eighth new genus name is created. I designate type species for two genera. Except for published misspellings, names are rendered correctly according to the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature; I have altered spelling of some species names to conform to orthographic regulations. I place several species that had been assigned to genera now considered junior synonyms in the genus to which the type species was moved; experts on these anemones should determine whether those generic placements, which follow the nomenclatural rules, are taxonomically appropriate. This inventory can be a useful starting point in assembling the literature and trying to understand the rationale for the creation and use of names for the taxonomic matters yet to be resolved. Some nomenclatural conundra will not be resolved until taxonomic uncertainties are. A taxonomist familiar with the animals needs to ascertain whether the published synonymies are justified. If so, the senior synonym should be used, which, in many instances, will involve determining the proper generic assignment of the species and the correct rendering of the name; if changing the name would be disruptive, retaining the junior name would require an appeal to the Commission (Code Article 23.11).

Utahraptor is the largest member of the dinosaur family DromaeosauriDae and represents one of the most remarkable discoveries in recent decades. In the original description, the specific epithet ostrommaysi was used for naming the species in honor of two different persons, but in subsequent years the spelling ostrommaysorum was often used without comment or explanation. In this paper, we review the historical uses of the specific epithet of Utahraptor and make clarifications on the status of six different subsequent spellings. The International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (1999) does not offer any provision for forming a genitive form from two persons having different names, so the original spelling ostrommaysi has to be regarded as an arbitrary combination of letters, and not a correctly formed genitive form. For this reason, it is deemed to be preserved unaltered and is not subject to a justified emendation; consequently, the subsequent spelling ostrommaysorum is erroneous and represents an unjustified emendation and shown not to be in prevailing usage. Therefore, the name to be used for the taxon is Utahraptor ostrommaysi, as originally introduced.

Because of confusion over the correct specific names, the following species have been redescribed with taxonomically serviceable drawings of both sexes: Branchinecta coloradensis Packard, 1874, B. lindahli Packard, 1883, and B. packardi Pearse, 1912. Type specimens of Packard's two species are nonexistent; neotypes have been deposited in the U. S. National Museum. The specific identity of B. coloradensis Pack., 1874 cannot be established from the original description. Packard's redescription of 1883 is invalidated by contradictions between it and the first description. Shantz (1905) redescribed Packard's species, his specimens certainly being identical with those of Packard's second description. He assumed that Packard's two descriptions were of the same species, which may or may not be the case, but by his redescription validated the name coloradensis for the species corresponding to Packard's second description. As the first reviser of Packard's obscure and conflicting descriptions, Shantz's identification of the species, and assignment of the specific name, have priority over later revisions. B. shantzi Mackin, 1952 is a junior synonym of B. coloradensis Pack., as reviewed by Shantz, 1905. B. lindahli Packard, 1883 was also insufficiently described. Shantz's revision (1905) adequately described as B. lindahli a species which is most likely identical with that of Packard. As the first reviser of Packard's deficient description, Shantz's identification of the species and his allocation of the specific name are entitled to recognition as valid. There is no positive evidence that B. coloradensis Pack., 1874 is identical with the B, lindahli of Shantz's redescription, therefore the B. coloradensis Pack. of Mackin, 1952 must be considered a junior synonym of B. lindahli Pack., as revised by Shantz, 1905. B. packardi Pearse, 1912 is a valid species. Comparison of specimens with Packard's description of B. lindahli fails to disclose any certain correspondences in the specific characters. Consequently, the B. lindahli Pack. of Mackin's revision (1952) is a junior synonym of B. packardi Pearse. In recent years uncertainty has arisen concerning the species of fairy shrimp to be identified as Branchinecta coloradensis Packard, 1874, B. lindahli Packard, 1883, and B. packardi Pearse, 1912. Throughout this paper these specific nanmes will be used in conformity with the usage in the keys of Pearse (1918), Creaser (1935), and with the descriptions of Shantz (1905). It is hoped that an analysis of Packard's work, accompanied by more exact illustrations of the disputed species, will enable a definite decision as to the correct name of each species which will be in agreement with the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. The primary responsibility for the confusions must be attributed to A. S. Packard, whose descriptions are not only deficient in requisite taxonomic detail, but are so filled with errors, contradictions, and 1 This study was supported by Grant No. G 17604 from the National Science Foundation.

Márquez & Asiain (2010) described three new species of the Philonthus furvus species group: P. navarretei and P. pollens from Mexico, and P. rufotibialis from Mexico and Guatemala. They also provided new state and locality records for P. hoegei, P. testaceipennis and P. yaqui, as well as a key for the identification of the species. In this work (Márquez & Asiain 2010) the depositories of the type material and material examined were indicated, except for the holotype of P. navarretei. Based on article 16 (names published after 1999) of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature 1999), which indicates that species names must be accompanied by the explicit fixation of a holotype (16.4.1), a statement of intent that this will be deposited in a collection and a statement indicating the name and location of that collection (16.4.2), the species name is considered as an "unavailable name". Navarrete-Heredia & Newton (2013) placed P. navarretei Márquez & Asiain, 2010 as a nomen nudum because the term "nomen nudum" is often used loosely for names that do not meet one or more of the conditions necessary for availability in the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature.

Anatomical examination of several specimens of Hexabranchus, collected from the extreme boundaries of its geographic range and other localities, revealed that there are two distinct species within this genus. One of these species is widely distributed throughout the tropical Indo-Pacific. The oldest available name for the Indo-Pacific species is Hexabranchus lacer (Cuvier, 1804). The study of the original type material of H. lacer confirmed that it is a senior synonym of other names introduced subsequently, including Hexabranchus sanguineus (Ruppell & Leuckart, 1830), which is the name most commonly used for this species. However, according to the provisions of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (Article 23.9.1), the name H. sanguineus has precedence over H. lacer, which has never been used as valid, except for the original description. Hexabranchus praetextus Ehrenberg, 1828 is also a senior synonym of H. sanguineus that has not been used as valid since its original description and it is also invalidated under the provisions of Article 23.9.1. The other species, Hexabranchus morsomus Ev. Marcus & Er. Marcus, 1962, appears to be endemic to the Caribbean Sea. Hexabranchus sanguineus and H. morsomus are clearly distinguishable by the morphology of the reproductive system and the radula. Hypotheses on the speciation process that took place in Hexabranchus, the possible origin of the two species and the geographic range of the genus are discussed.

Journal of Eukaryotic MicrobiologyVolume 65, Issue 2 p. 290-290 CorrigendumFree Access Corrigendum to ″Schmidingerothrix salinarum nov. spec. is the Molecular Sister of the Large Oxytrichid Clade (Ciliophora, Hypotricha) by Foissner et al. 2014″ This article corrects the following: Schmidingerothrix salinarum nov. spec. is the Molecular Sister of the Large Oxytrichid Clade (Ciliophora, Hypotricha) Wilhelm Foissner, Sabine Filker, Thorsten Stoeck, Volume 61Issue 1Journal of Eukaryotic Microbiology pages: 61-74 First Published online: December 10, 2013 First published: 20 November 2017 https://doi.org/10.1111/jeu.12481AboutSectionsPDF ToolsRequest permissionExport citationAdd to favoritesTrack citation ShareShare Give accessShare full text accessShare full-text accessPlease review our Terms and Conditions of Use and check box below to share full-text version of article.I have read and accept the Wiley Online Library Terms and Conditions of UseShareable LinkUse the link below to share a full-text version of this article with your friends and colleagues. Learn more.Copy URL Share a linkShare onFacebookTwitterLinkedInRedditWechat In the article: Foissner, W., Filker, S., and Stoeck T. 2014. Schmidingerothrix salinarum nov. spec. is the Molecular Sister of the Large Oxytrichid Clade (Ciliophora, Hypotricha). J. Eukaryot. Microbiol., 61(1): 61–74. https://doi.org/10.1111/jeu.12087, the ZooBank registration number was omitted. Foissner et al. (2014) described the morphology, ontogeny, and phylogeny of a new Schmidingerothrix species in this electronic-only journal. Since the electronic article does not contain ZooBank registration, it is not published (available) with respect to the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN 1999, 2012, Articles 8.5, 9.11). However, such work likely remains available as source for further purposes, similar to a suppressed work (ICZN 1999, Article 8.7.1). To become available, Schmidingerothrix salinarum must be registered in ZooBank (ICZN 2012). ZooBank registration http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:33751519-8DAB-42CD-814E-C72926D5E39F Schmidingerothrix salinarum nov. spec. (Table 2 and Fig. 1A–L, 2A–M, 3A–D, 4A–H, 5, 6A–F, 7A–I, 8A–D in Foissner et al. 2014) Diagnosis (from Foissner et al. 2014, p. 73). Size in vivo about 95 × 17 μm. Body slender (~5.5:1), usually widest in mid-portion, with short but distinct tail. Four macronuclear nodules, forming a series near right margin of cell; zero to two micronuclei. Cortical granules in loose rows, colorless, about 1 μm across. Three frontal cirri and three frontoventral cirral rows. Frontal cirrus 1 subapical close to ventral part of adoral zone of membranelles. Frontoventral row 1 composed of an average of four cirri; row 2 of 18 cirri; row 3 of five cirri. Right marginal row composed of an average of 23 cirri, left of 17. Adoral zone about 32% of body length, composed of an average of three frontal and 21 ventral membranelles. Endoral membrane 12 μm long on average. Type locality. Solar saltern in the Ria Formosa National Park near to the town of Faro, Portugal, W7°57′41.0684″, N37°00′29.4851″. Type material. The holotype slide and two paratype slides with protargol-impregnated specimens and two paratype slides with hematoxylin-stained cells have been deposited in the Biologiezentrum of the Oberösterreichische Landesmuseum in Linz (LI), Austria, reg. no. 2013/33–37. Relevant specimens have been marked by black ink circles on the coverslip. Etymology. See same section in Foissner et al. (2014, p. 74). Morphology of Schmidingerothrix salinarum nov. spec. See same section in Foissner et al. (2014, p. 63, Table 2, and Fig. 1A–L, 2A–M, 3A–D, 4A–H). Molecular phylogeny. See same section in Foissner et al. (2014). GenBank accession number. KC991098 (SSU rDNA; length 1,769 bp; GC content 45.11%). Ontogenesis of Schmidingerothrix salinarum nov. spec. See same section in Foissner et al. (2014, p. 67 and Fig. 6A–F, 7A–H, 8A–D). Discussion. For comparison of Schmidingerothrix salinarum Foissner et al., 2017 with S. extraordinaria Foissner, 2012, type of the genus, see same section in Foissner et al. (2014, p. 72). Remarks: In future, this species has to be cited as “Schmidingerothrix salinarum Foissner, Filker & Stoeck, 2017” (for justification, see introduction). Literature Cited Foissner, W. 2012. Schmidingerothrix extraordinaria nov. gen., nov. spec., a secondarily oligomerized hypotrich (Ciliophora, Hypotricha, Schmidingerotrichidae nov. fam.) from hypersaline soils of Africa. Eur. J. Protistol., 48: 237– 251. Foissner, W., Filker, S. & Stoeck, T. 2014. Schmidingerothrix salinarum nov. spec. is the molecular sister of the large oxytrichid clade (Ciliophora, Hypotricha). J. Eukaryot. Microbiol., 61: 61– 74. ICZN (International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature) 1999. International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature, London, 306 p. ICZN (International Commission of Zoological Nomenclature) 2012. Amendment of Articles 8, 9, 10, 21 and 78 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature to expand and refine methods of publication. Bull. Zool. Nom., 69: 161– 169. Volume65, Issue2March/April 2018Pages 290-290 ReferencesRelatedInformation

In the publication by Kaur et al. (2020), the depository for the holotype of Chimarra gangtokensis new species was given as "(NPC)", but no corresponding explanation for this acronym was provided in that publication. Therefore, the name of the species is unavailable (International Code of Zoological Nomenclature 1999, Art. 16.4.2). We clarify here that the holotype is a male deposited in the National Pusa Collection, Division of Entomology, Indian Agricultural Research Institute, Pusa, New Delhi (NPC). The purpose of this note is to validate the name of the new species from the publication date of this erratum by a reference to the original description and diagnosis as an indication (International Code of Zoological Nomenclature 1999, Art. 13.1.2).

Contrary to common perception, the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature does not contain provisions that turn (ichno)specific names into nomina dubia if their holotype is lost or destroyed. Such names are only nomina dubia if the original diagnosis and/or description is insufficient to recognise the taxon. For this reason, there is no need to introduce a category “axiotype” to be recognized in the Code as a possible name-bearing type, as proposed recently. The designation of neotypes is tied to a formalized process that can be the ultima ratio under certain conditions only.