Problems with nomenclature^

Thu Sep 28 12:59:36 CDT 1995

Dear neters,
I'm working with phylogeny and taxonomy of Parastenocarididae, a
groundwater family of Harpacticoida, Copepoda, Crustacea.
The family contained tradicionaly only one genus Parastenocaris, and
this genus had different "groups" (groups of species). So NOODT (1963)
in a paper writen in german, created the- so call-  "forficata-
group" within the genus Parastenocaris. In the original publication
NOODT wrote:

Familie Parastenocarididae Chappuis
Genus Parastenocaris Kessler
forficata-Gruppe nov.
Diagnose: ...

and species belonging: 3 species + Parastenocaris forficata sp. n.

In other papers NOODT cited the group as "forficata-Gruppe Noodt"

Another author, JAKOBI (1972) published a revision of the family. In
this revision the author spilts the genus Parastenocaris in 27 new
genera. One of these genera is FORFICATOCARIS with the type species
Parastenocaris forficata Noodt  (i.e. Forficatocaris forficata
My question is which name is valid and who is the autor of the genus
containing P. forficata as type species?

Some authors have used in the 90's the genus Forficatocaris Jakobi to
accomodate some new species.

I think the paper of Noodt contains a nomenclatorical act, as he
created a new subdivision of a genus in a paper considered a
publication, gives a diagnosis and belonging species.
Can NOODT's forficata-Gruppe be considered a valid name of the genus-
Should "Forficatocaris Jakobi" be considered a synomym of "Forficata
Noodt" ?
Would "Forficata" be a correct spelling for a name of the genus-group?

I would be very greatful for any help. At least half of Jakobi's new
genera had as type species, a species that gives name to an existing
"group" of species.

Many thanks in advance
Sorry for my poor english.

Pedro Martinez Arbizu
FB7/Ag. Zoomorphologie
Universitaet Oldenburg
e-mail: martinez at

More information about the Taxacom mailing list