EmilianiaSánchez, 1999 is not a homonym ofEmilianiaHay and Mohler, 1967

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

In the July issue of Journal of Paleontology, 84(4), Sánchez (2010) proposed the new genus nameEmiliodontafor the Ordovician bivalve genusEmilianiaSánchez, 1999 because of assumed homonymy withEmilianiaHay and Mohler, 1967 (in Hay et al., 1967). The supposed senior name, the genusEmilianiaHay and Mohler, belongs to the coccolithophores, a group of unicellular eukaryotic algae, which have traditionally been treated as plants (e.g., Glaessner, 1945; Tappan, 1980; see also Green and Jordan, 1994; Andersen, 2004 for modern classification) and to which the International Code of Botanical Nomenclature (ICBN) applies. In the original description ofEmilianiaHay and Molher the ICBN was used (Hay et al., 1967, p. 447) and the name was validly published under its rules. Animals such as the bivalveEmilianiaSánchez, 1999, in contrast, are treated under the International Code for Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN). Both codes are independent (ICBN, Principle I: Greuter et al., 1993, 2000; McNeill et al., 2006; ICZN Article 1: Ride et al., 1985, 1999), and therefore the same names (“homonyms” sensu lato) can coexist under different codes. Consequently,EmilianiaSánchez andEmilianiaHay and Molher are not homonyms in a taxonomic sense but are both legitimate names under the respective code. Furthermore, the nameEmiliodontaSánchez 2010 is superfluous and illegitimate, as “[…] the name of an animal taxon is not to be rejected merely because it is identical with the name of a taxon that is not animal.” (ICZN Article 1.4: Ride et al., 1999).