Zoological Nomenclature Research Articles

(228–232) Proposals on orthography: Diacritical signs

(228–232) Proposals on orthography: Diacritical signs

(206) Proposal to guide the choice among grammatical forms in epithets with uncertain grammatical status

(206) Proposal to guide the choice among grammatical forms in epithets with uncertain grammatical status

(195) Proposal to amend the Preamble by adding a “potentially sensitive content disclaimer and limitation of liability”

Authors of several discussion articles (Gillman & Wright in Commun. Biol. 3: art. 609. 2020; Smith & Figueiredo in Taxon 71: 1–5. 2022; Wright & Gillman in Taxon 71: 6–10. 2022; Smith & al. in Taxon 71: 933–935. 2022; Thiele & al. in Taxon 71: 1151–1154. 2022) and formal proposals to amend the Code (Smith & Figueiredo in Taxon 70: 1395–1396. 2021; Hammer & Thiele in Taxon 70: 1392–1394. 2021) recently proposed to allow and endorse the rejection and/or replacement of scientific names of taxa that are considered to be “culturally offensive and inappropriate”, or even some other names, those supposedly not offensive and inappropriate but, e.g., reflecting the “colonial or imperialist past”. In my opinion, such proposals are mainly based on political, social, ethical and/or ethnocultural criteria, which are not currently considered as nomenclaturally decisive in the International Code of Nomenclature for algae, fungi, and plants (“Code”: Turland & al. in Regnum Veg. 159. 2018) and other Codes of biological nomenclature. These ideas and proposals were extensively discussed (Knapp & al. in Taxon 69: 1409–1410. 2020; Gillman & Wright in Bionomina 25: 93–97. 2021; Smith & al., l.c.; Thiele & al., l.c.) and/or criticised in scientific journals (see Heenan & al. in New Zealand J. Bot. 59: 291–322. 2021; Palma & Heath in Bionomina 22: 32–38. 2021; McGlone & al. in New Zealand J. Bot. 60: 215–226. 2022; Mosyakin in Taxon 70: 1379–1380. 2021; in Taxon 71: 249–255. 2022; in Taxon 71: 1141–1150. 2022; in Taxon, https://doi.org/10.1002/tax.12837. 2022). It is also worth considering that in its official communication on similar issues the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (Ceríaco & al. in Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 197: 283–286. 2023) concluded that “renaming taxa on ethical grounds threatens nomenclatural stability and scientific communication”. I understand and respectfully acknowledge that some vulnerable or emotionally sensitive people or groups of people consider some names of organisms governed by the Code as “offensive and/or inappropriate”. In such cases, a sensitive content disclaimer and a limitation of liability statement are desirable. In particular, I think that such an addition to the Code could be useful for safeguarding the authors and editors of the present Code, as well as all those who in good faith and for lawful purposes create, modify and/or use scientific names of organisms covered by this Code, against possible accusations and allegations. Similar content disclaimers are currently available in many publications and online resources, e.g. Wikipedia (General disclaimer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:General_disclaimer; Content disclaimer: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Content_disclaimer) and the Biodiversity Heritage Library (Acknowledgment of Harmful Content: https://about.biodiversitylibrary.org/about/harmful-content/). Further explanations and recommendations were provided by the International Federation of Library Associations and Institutions in their document of 2021 “Objectionable Third-Party Content: Library Responses” (https://repository.ifla.org/handle/123456789/1754). (All online resources accessed on 11 February 2023.) “Potentially sensitive content disclaimer and limitation of liability Scientific names of algae, fungi, and plants were created and modified over the centuries by many authors of various national, ethnic, cultural, religious, political, historical, and other backgrounds, identities, origins, and traditions. Such names reflect the rich but also complicated and sometimes controversial history of scientific explorations and biological nomenclature. Anyone using the scientific names of taxa governed by this Code should be aware that this Code is not intended for judging, evaluating, changing, rejecting, or censoring such names because of ethical, cultural, religious, political, social, ideological, and/or other principles, criteria, and procedures, except for those explicitly prescribed in this Code (see Preamble 1, 12, Art. 51.1). The authors and editors of this Code and anyone using scientific names of organisms in accordance with this Code in good faith and for lawful purposes shall not be held responsible for any discomfort, inconvenience, offense, mental and/or emotional distress, or other possible negative consequences potentially caused by some scientific names of taxa to any person or group of people who may consider such names objectionable, offensive, or inappropriate. The use of scientific names of taxa in accordance with this Code in good faith and for lawful purposes should not be viewed as manifestation, support, or endorsement of any cultural, religious, political, social, racial, or other views, concepts, prejudices, and/or ideologies that may be deemed objectionable, offensive, or inappropriate to some people or groups of people.” I am grateful to Nicholas J. Turland (Botanischer Garten und Botanisches Museum Berlin, Freie Universität Berlin, Germany) and John H. Wiersema (Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C., U.S.A.) for their useful comments and editing.

An Invited Reply to: A Comment on: An Eocene army ant (2022) by Sosiak CE et al.

An Invited Reply to: A Comment on: An Eocene army ant (2022) by Sosiak CE et al.

Retraction: An Eocene army ant

Retraction: An Eocene army ant

Proposals for unification and use of the Ukrainian national nomenclature for native and exotic species of the longhorn beetles (Coleoptera: Cerambycidae) in Ukraine. Part I: subfamilies Spondylidinae and Prioninae

Here, I presented the study on historical development and changes in the Ukrainian national nomenclature of the longhorn beetles, which traditionally named "Skrypuny". I collected and arranged the traditional Ukrainian names for the longhorn beetles, their regional variations, and historical attempts for their codifications. Since the middle of XIX century, vernacular names, collected in folklore expeditions, of certain groups of the longhorn beetles have been published in multiple scientific papers and school textbooks of zoology. On the beginning of XX century, most vernacular names of the longhorn beetles have been relevantly arranged in the dictionaries of the Ukrainian zoological nomenclature. The development of the Ukrainian national zoological nomenclature was forcibly stopped in the early 1930s. Due to the politics of "internationalization" and artificial "convergence of languages" in the USSR, the traditional Ukrainian vernacular names were withdrawn from the scientific use and replaced by "Vusachi" consonant with the Russian. In the second half of XX century, the Ukrainian vernacular names of the longhorn beetles were repeatedly replaced by Russian tracings and Latin transliterations in specialized zoological dictionaries and in the general dictionaries of Ukrainian language. In the current paper, I proposed methodological approaches to the derivation and standardization of Ukrainian vernacular names based on the Ukrainian Spelling. I also substantiated the reasons for choosing certain Ukrainian vernacular names for scientific use parallelly with the scientific Latin name. In the Part I, I presented Ukrainian names for 46 taxa, including 1 subfamily, 10 tribes, 17 genera, and 17 species.

A new Myxobolus (Cnidaria: Myxosporea: Myxobolidae) from the gills of the southern striped shiner, Luxilus chrysocephalus isolepis (Cypriniformes: Leuciscidae), from southwestern Arkansas, USA.

The southern striped shiner, Luxilus chrysocephalus isolepis (Hubbs & Brown) is a relatively large minnow belonging to the true minnow family Leuciscidae Bonaparte. Between May 2020 and January 2022, 55 L. c. isolepis were collected from watersheds in Montgomery (n = 6), Polk (n = 17) and Sevier (n = 32) counties, Arkansas, USA, and their gills, gallbladders, urinary bladders, fins, integument, other major organs, and musculature were examined for myxozoans. Gills of 11 (34%) individual southern striped shiners from Sevier County were infected with a new myxozoan, Myxobolus carlhubbsi n. sp. A qualitative and quantitative morphological description was based on formalin-fixed preserved myxospores, and molecular data consisted of a 1,970 base pair sequence of the partial small subunit rRNA gene from ethanol-preserved specimens. Histologically, plasmodia filled and expanded interlamellar troughs. Hyperplastic epithelial and goblet cells filled interlamellar troughs adjacent to plasmodia, but inflammatory response was limited to scattered lymphocytes. Phylogenetic analysis revealed that M. carlhubbsi n. sp. is a member of a clade of species with pyriform myxospores parasitizing North American Pogonichthyinae Girard and North American and Eurasian Leuciscinae Bonaparte. This is the first report of a myxozoan from L. c. isolepis. This article was registered in the Official Register of Zoological Nomenclature (ZooBank) as urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:D10D71C2-2C75-4A1C-80ED-B98FF36CB509.

Faunal richness and checklist of sandflies (Diptera: Psychodidae) in India

This review aims to fill the voids and to update the checklist of sandfly fauna along with its spatial distribution in India. Resource databases i.e. either online or offline were searched to deduce the information to systematize the Indian sandfly fauna. Articles/data retrieved were screened and analysed to further update the available latest checklist. The species name and authorship were given in accord with the International Code for Zoological Nomenclature. We compiled an updated checklist of reported Indian sandfly species along with their state-wise distribution till 2022 as per published literature. Kerala has maximum number of species reports when compared to other endemic states and states with pockets of transmission. Phlebotomus argentipes is the most widely distributed, recorded so far, followed by other Sergentomiya and Phlebotomus species in India. In this review, we have also described the vector and non-vector species of sandfly prevalent in different parts of the country. Phlebotoiella eoindianensis, an amber fossil sandfly species recorded from Gujarat might be older than other records of Indian sandfly fauna. So far 69 species (4 genera and 15 subgenera/groups) of Phlebotomine sandflies have been recorded in India. Proper knowledge of species diversity and its distribution is a prerequisite for planning a systematic vector control strategy and disease management.

Nec vero contemnendum vulgus interdum est: Vernacular animal names among Theodore Gaza’s Latin neologisms

The article discusses the origins of four Neo-Latin animal names, denoting a beetle, a bird, a fish and a mollusk, coined by the Greek scholar Theodore Gaza in the third quarter of the fifteenth century: two neologisms of form, or proper neologisms, gal(l)eruca and gallinago, and two neologisms of sense, cernua ‘inclined forwards, head foremost’ and patella ‘plate, pan’. These words, still valid in today’s zoological nomenclature, were first introduced in Gaza’s Latin version of Aristotle’s Historia animalium, where they stood, respectively, for μηλολόνθη, σκολόπαξ/ἀσκαλώπας, ὀρφώς/ὀρφός and λεπάς. Apparently, they owe their existence to Gaza’s acquaintance with Italian dialectal vocabulary, as can be deduced from two sixteenthcentury sources: Agostino Nifo’s commentary to Aristotle’s zoological writings and Ippolito Salviani’s encyclopedic work on aquatic animals. Gaza’s galleruca must have originated from the Lombard galeruca ‘rose chafer’ (the identification of μηλολόνθη with the latter probably due to the hapax legomenon χρυσομηλολόνθιον, Ar. Vesp. 1341), gallinago from the Emilian gallinazza ‘woodcock’ (since the only known characteristic of σκολόπαξ/ἀσκαλώπας is that it is similar to a hen, Arist. Hist. an. 617b24), cernua from the Calabrian cerna/cernia (identified with ὀρφώς/ὀρφός either due to Gaza’s use of a bilingual glossary or due to his own experience in the Calabrian bilingual milieu) and patella from the Calabrian or Roman patella ‘pan; limpet’ (perhaps identified with λεπάς because Gaza kept in mind the name of a vessel, λεπαστή/λεπάστη, considered deriving from λεπάς by Eustathius). All the said dialects correspond to the Italian regions where Gaza spent parts of his life.

New species and genera described by Dr. Márton Hreblay (1963–2000) in his monograph on North-Thailand noctuid moths (Lepidoptera: Noctuidae)

In an unpublished manuscript on Asian noctuid moths, primarily on the fauna of NorthThailand, illustrated richly by 341 original figures, Dr. Márton Hreblay (*1963–†2000) proposed 84 new species-group and four genus-group names, designated lectotypes for 23 nominal taxa, and established 14 new synonyms. The original manuscript is published here with the annotations of the authors, finding that one of the newly proposed genus-group names and 14 of the new speciesgroup names are identical with taxa established after the year 2000, hence these names are not available for any action in zoological nomenclature, and they have only historical interest. The remaining 74 species-group and three genus-group names became available in this work under the authorship of Márton Hreblay, Gergely Katona and Balázs Tóth with the publication date of the present paper. Seven of the lectotype designations are invalid or can be questioned; these cases are also annotated. With 190 figures.

Scientific collections of the Zoological Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Saint Petersburg

The Zoological Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences in St Petersburg is one of the oldest biological research institutions in Russia, housing the largest zoological collections in the country, both in terms of their size (number of specimens) and global diversity. It is also one of the largest zoological depositories in the world, with over 60 million specimens in its stores. In total, the Zoological Institute holds about 260,000 animal species, about a quarter of the world’s known diversity. The type collection includes several tens of hundreds of primary types, which are very important as the essential foundation for zoological nomenclature. The digitisation of scientific collections now plays an important role in ensuring the standardised accumulation and use of various data sets, as well as quick access to stored information. The digitised scientific collections of the Zoological Institute are published online for the public access. To date they have accumulated 146,695 taxa records and over 13,000 high quality images of invertebrate and vertebrate specimens and their original data labels. The Zoological Institute is not only a depository of animal specimens important for biodiversity inventories and studies, but also a unique bank of genetic resources of extant/extinct animals which can be studied using modern genetic technologies.

On the composition of the type series of the Kashgar Racerunner, Eremias buechneri Bedriaga, 1907 (Sauria, Lacertidae)

The Kashgar Racerunner Eremias buechneri Bedriaga, 1907 is a member of the taxonomically most complicated group, i.e. E. multiocellata – E. przewalskii complex, together with about a dozen of other species inhabiting predominantly arid landscapes of Central Asia. Eremias buechneri is one of the poorly studied representatives of this diverse group of species. This species was described in 1907 by Jakob von Bedriaga based on the study of specimens collected in Central Asia by N.M. Przewalsky and M.W. Pewzow. This species is practically not present in the collections of museums around the world and is known from a limited number of specimens. We clarify the composition of the type series used in in the original description of this species in accordance with article 72.4.1 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature and we propose to consider as a type series the specimens mentioned by the author in his description of 1907, with catalogue numbers in the collection of the Zoological Museum (since 1931, the Zoological Institute) clarified from the results of the N.M. Przewalsky expedition reported by Bedriaga (1912) and thus to expand the type series to 59 specimens (1 lectotype and 58 paralectotypes). Of these, four paralectotypes are lost (ZISP 7264.9, 7279.6, 7089.4 and 7264.4) and four specimens are in very poor condition, almost destroyed (ZISP 8286.1–4). Thus, the actual number of specimens currently stored at the Zoological Institute is 55. The paratype E. buechneri ZISP 9131 has been genotyped. Molecular genetic identification of specimens in the type series from different parts of the range appears promising as a future avenue of research.

Nomenclatural acts in zoological nomenclature

The present work proposes a precise formal definition and an expansion of the concept of ‘nomenclatural act’ which is present in the Code but not clearly delimitated from other related concepts, and provides a list of the published statements that correspond to this concept, a terminology for this and related acts, as well as for information affecting zoological nomenclature. These technical terms will be useful for unambiguous designation of the concepts of zoological nomenclature related to this concept, which are denoted in the Code by ‘common language’ terms having often widely different meanings. They will also be of great help for a future computerisation of the Rules of the Code, which will be possible only if distinct concepts are identified and pointed to by distinct terms. An important outcome of the present work is that genuine nomenclatural acts (onomatergies), as well as statements about nomenclatural status (cataphasy), acquire nomenclatural availability (i.e., existence) only if promulgated in paper or electronic publications complying with Article 8 of the Code, but cannot be made available online in electronic databases or other labile documents failing to comply with these Rules as revised in 2012.

An inordinate fondness for inconspicuous brown frogs: integration of phylogenomics, archival DNA analysis, morphology, and bioacoustics yields 24 new taxa in the subgenus Brygoomantis (genus Mantidactylus) from Madagascar

Malagasy frogs of the subgenus Brygoomantis in the mantellid frog genus Mantidactylus currently comprise 14 described species of mostly brown, riparian frogs. Data from DNA barcoding suggested that the diversity of this subgenus is dramatically underestimated by current taxonomy. We here provide a comprehensive revision of this subgenus. We use hybrid-enrichment based DNA barcode fishing to obtain mitochondrial DNA fragments from the name-bearing type material of 16 of the 20 available names for members of this subgenus, and integrate these into a genetic dataset consisting of 1305 individuals sampled across Madagascar. By thus assigning the nomina to genetic lineages, we can confidently establish synonyms, revalidate old names, and describe the remaining diversity. We take an integrative approach to our descriptions, drawing together genetics, morphometrics and morphology, and bioacoustics for assignment. We also provide a robust phylogenomic hypothesis for the subgenus, based on 12,818 nuclear-encoded markers (almost 10 million base pairs) for 58 representative samples, sequenced using a hybrid-enrichment bait set for amphibians. Those data suggest a division of the subgenus into eight major clades and show that morphological species complexes are often paraphyletic or polyphyletic. Lectotypes are designated for Rana betsileana Boulenger, 1882; Rana biporus Boulenger, 1889; Rana curta Boulenger, 1882; Mantidactylus ambohimitombi Boulenger, 1918; Mantidactylus tripunctatus Angel, 1930; and Rana inaudax Peracca, 1893. For several other nomina, previous authors had considered a certain syntype as holotype; this has been seen as lectotype designation by implication, which, however, is ambiguous according to the provisions of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Hence, we validate a previous lectotype designation by implication for Limnodytes ulcerosus Boettger, 1880 by explicitly designating the same individual as lectotype. In one other such case, that of Mantidactylus brauni Ahl, 1929, we deviate from previous authors and designate a different specimen as lectotype. We revalidate Rana inaudax Peracca, 1893 as Mantidactylus inaudax (Peracca, 1893) bona species, and Mantidactylus tripunctatus Angel, 1930 bona species. The identities of three further species (M. ambohimitombi, M. biporus, M. tricinctus) are largely redefined based on new genetic data. By designating the lectotype of Rana aluta (MZUT An725.1) as the neotype of Mantidactylus laevis Angel, 1929 we also stabilize the latter nomen (as junior synonym of M. alutus) whose original type material is lost. Based on DNA sequences of its lectotype, we consider Mantidactylus brauni Ahl, 1929 as junior synonym of M. ulcerosus (rather than M. biporus). We formally name 20 new species and four new subspecies: M. ambohimitombi marefo ssp. nov., M. ambohimitombi miloko ssp. nov., M. mahery sp. nov., M. steinfartzi sp. nov., M. incognitus sp. nov., M. jonasi sp. nov., M. katae sp. nov., M. kortei sp. nov., M. riparius sp. nov., M. fergusoni sp. nov., M. georgei sp. nov., M. jahnarum sp. nov., M. marintsoai sp. nov., M. grubenmanni sp. nov., M. gudrunae sp. nov., M. augustini sp. nov., M. bletzae sp. nov., M. brevirostris sp. nov., M. eulenbergeri sp. nov., M. glosi sp. nov., M. stelliger sp. nov., M. manerana sp. nov., M. manerana fotaka ssp. nov., and M. manerana antsanga ssp. nov. This leaves Mantidactylus subgenus Brygoomantis with 35 described species and six subspecies (including nominate subspecies). Based on our taxonomic revision, we discuss (i) the importance of definitive assignment of historical names via archival DNA analysis; (ii) the relevance of the subspecies category to name geographic variation within species; (iii) the value of molecular characters in formal species diagnoses in taxa with substantial individual variation of morphology; (iv) the use of phylogenomic approaches for taxonomy, by confirming that some morphologically similar taxa are not each other’s closest relatives, and in several cases belong to entirely different major subclades within Brygoomantis, thus facilitating lineage diagnosis; and (v) the need to interpret genetic distances in a probabilistic framework rather than using fixed thresholds, where higher distances confer a higher likelihood of genetic incompatibilities across the genome and thus completion of speciation.

A forgotten cirripedological gem: a new species of whale barnacle of the genus Cetopirus from the Pleistocene of the United States West Coast

ABSTRACTA small lot of fossil whale barnacles from the Upper Pleistocene of California and the Middle Pleistocene (Chibanian) of Oregon (United States West Coast), described in a 1972 unpublished MA thesis, are formally described and illustrated herein. In that thesis, a new genus and species name were proposed; however, according to the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, they have no taxonomic standing and are thus unavailable. Based on our reappraisal, two specimens in this lot belong to a new, extinct species that can be assigned to the purportedly extant genus Cetopirus. Cetopirus polysyrinx sp. nov. differs from congeners in that its secondary T-shaped flanges are multitubiferous internally, that is, they are perforated by a high number of irregularly-sized and irregularly-spaced tubules that result in a spongy aspect in transverse section. Whether or not this peculiar condition had any adaptive significance is difficult to determine. Considering that Cetopirus is currently known as an obligate epibiont of right whales (including the North Pacific form Eubalaena japonica (Lacépède 1818)), the host of C. polysyrinx sp. nov. was E. japonica or some other species of Eubalaena. The Plio-Pleistocene deposits of the Pacific coast of North America have yielded a rather idiosyncratic fossil whale barnacle fauna, inclusive of the genera Cetolepas, Cryptolepas and now Cetopirus, which seemingly contrasts with all other coeval assemblages worldwide, the latter being in turn dominated by Coronula spp.

Evolutionary theory, systematics, and the study of human origins.

Paleoanthropology's relationship with evolutionary theory has not been entirely happy. The anatomists who dominated paleoanthropology for its first century had little interest in biological diversity and its causes, or in hominins' place in that diversity, or in the rules and principles of zoological nomenclature - which they basically ignored entirely. When, as the twentieth century passed its midpoint, Ernst Mayr introduced theory to paleoanthropology in the form of the gradualist Modern Evolutionary Synthesis (in its most hardened form), he shocked students of human evolution not only into a strictly linear evolutionary mindset, but into a taxonomic minimalism that would for years obscure the signal of phylogenetic diversity and vigorous evolutionary experimentation among hominins that was starting to emerge from a rapidly enlarging hominin fossil record. Subsequently, the notion of episodic as opposed to gradualist evolution re-established phylogenies as typically branching, and species as bounded entities with births, histories, and deaths; but the implications of this revised perspective were widely neglected by paleoanthropologists, who continued to reflexively cram diverse new morphologies into existing taxonomic pigeonholes. For Pleistocene hominins, the effective systematic algorithm became, "if it isn't Australopithecus, it must be Homo" (or vice versa), thereby turning both taxa into wastebaskets. The recent development of the "Extended Evolutionary Synthesis" has only exacerbated the resulting caricature of phylogenetic structure within Homininae, by offering developmental/phenotypic plasticity as an excuse for associating wildly differing morphologies within the same taxon. Homo erectus has been a favorite victim of this foible. Biological species are indeed morphologically variable. But they are only variable within limits; and until we stop brushing diverse morphologies under the rug of developmental plasticity, paleoanthropology will remain at a major impasse.

Opinion 2484 (Case 3778) – Clausilia quadriplicata Schmidt, 1868 (currently Quadriplicata quadriplicata; Gastropoda, Stylommatophora, Clausiliidae): conserved by suppression of the senior homonym Clausilia ventricosa var. quadriplicata Fitzinger, 1833

The International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature has conserved current usage of the specific name of Clausilia quadriplicata Schmidt, 1868 (currently Quadriplicata quadriplicata) by suppressing its senior homonym Clausilia ventricosa var. quadriplicata Fitzinger, 1833.

Opinion 2483 (Case 3775) – Megaperidae Manter, 1934 (Platyhelminthes, Digenea): precedence re-established over Apocreadiinae Skrjabin, 1942

The International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature has re-established the precedence of Megaperidae Manter, 1934 over Apocreadiinae Skrjabin, 1942 for certain digenean trematodes of fish by suspending the application of Article 35.5 of the Code.

Calanoid Copepods Of China Seas

Calanoid copepods are a well-recognized taxonomic group of Crustacea. They were already placed, with one cyclopoid (Scribella) and five calanoid (Acartia, Calanus, Candacia, Euchirus (= Euchaeta), and Pontella) genera, under a single taxonomic unit, the Calanidae, by Dana [1]. Giesbrecht and Sars are the two early principal contributors to the taxonomy of Copepoda, including the Calanoida. Based on the location of the body articulation, Giesbrecht [2] divided copepods into two groups, the Gymnopleoden and Podopleoden. All copepods, characterized by an articulation between the fifth pedigerous (leg-bearing) somite and genital somite, separating the body into an anterior part (prosome) and a posterior part (urosome), were placed under the suborder Gymnoplea. Podoplea contained all other copepods having this articulation located between the fourth and fifth pedigerous somites. According to the structure of antennules in males, Giesbrecht further divided the Gymnoplea into two tribes, the Amphaskandria (males with both antennules similar) and Heterarthrandria (males with one of the antennules modified). Sars [3-9], on the other hand, suggested seven distinct types of copepods, Calanus, Harpacticus, Cyclops, Notodelphys, Monstrilla, Caligus, and Lernaea, respectively respresenting seven divisions (Suborders) of the Copepoda, i.e., Calanoida, Harpacticoida, Cyclopoida, Notodelphyoida, Monstrilloida, Caligoida, and Lernaeoida. The Calanoida in Sars [3-9], corresponding to the Gymnoplea in Giesbrecht [2], was divided into three sections: Amphascandria (both antennules in males are alike and only transformed slightly without any genicular structure, in the greater number of the genera the adult males are distinguished by a conspicuous transformation and great reduction in oral parts), Isokerandria (both antennules are without any conspicuous difference and oral part of much the same appearance in the two sexes), and Heterarthrandria (one of the antennules in male similar to that in female, the other peculiarly transformed into a powerful grasping organ). Modifications of classification within the Calanoida have then been proposed and were reviewed by Huy & Boxshall [10]. In 1974, Andronov [11] proposed the phylogenetic relationships of the higher taxa within the Order Calanoida, and included nine superfamilies: Augapatiloidea, Bathypontioidea, Centropagoidea, Eucalanoidea, Megacalanoidea, Platycopioidea, Pseudocyclopoidea, Pseudocalanoidea, and Riocalanoidea. As the results of Andronov’s [12] change of names of some superfamilies to conform with the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature and subsequently Boxshall and Halsey’s [13] amendment, the Order Calanoida now consists of ten superfamilies and 43 families (30 families, highlighted in red color, present in the China seas). 1. Superfamily Arietelloidea Sars, 1902 (changed from Augaptiloidea) (24, 134) Family Arietellidae

Resolution of the long-standing controversy over the type species of the genus Pseudotypotherium (Notoungulata, Typotheria, Mesotheriidae)

Mesotheres (Notoungulata: Typotheria) are among the most common mammals found in upper Miocene to Pliocene deposits of central Argentina, including the classic type Monte Hermoso locality, which defines the Montehermosan South American Land Mammal “Age”. Nevertheless, the correct name for the mesothere species from this site has been shrouded in uncertainty for well over a century due to questions of taxonomic priority, specimen provenance, and ontogenetic changes in dental formula. Since the mesotheres from Monte Hermoso were named, three distinct species have been formally considered as the type species of the genus: (1) Pseudotypotherium bravardi; (2) “Pseudotypotherium” maendrum; and (3) Pseudotypotherium exiguum. However, none of these species is a nominal species of the Pseudotypotherium genus; all three were originally referred to Typotherium. Article 67.2 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN, 1999) indicates that only species considered as nominal species are eligible to set the type; in the case of Pseudotypotherium, these include: P. pulchrum, P. carlesi, P. hystatum, and P. carhuense. We conclude that Pseudotypotherium pulchrumF. Ameghino, 1904 (holotype MACN A 10299, Museo Argentino de Ciencias Naturales “Bernardino Rivadavia”, Ameghino Collection), is the type species of the mesotheriid notoungulate genus from Monte Hermoso. According to Article 68.2, F. Ameghino fixed the type by original designation in 1904 when he described P. pulchrum and included “n. g., n. sp.”. Two of the other species previously considered species P. (= T.) bravardi and P. (= T.) exiguum are invalid as type species according to Article 70.2, since their designations overlooked the previous type fixation. The third species (M. (= T.) maendrum) represents a different mesothere genus (Mesotherium) that only occurs in younger (Pleistocene) deposits. Our analysis puts an end to a historical debate that has been ongoing for more than a century regarding the identity of this well-represented late Miocene–Pliocene mesotheriine genus (Pseudotypotherium). This study provides a solid taxonomic foundation for future studies on intraspecific and ontogenetic variation of Pseudotypotherium pulchrum.