[Taxacom] Family Chilodontidae - unresolved homonym

Kenneth Kinman kennethkinman at webtv.net
Sun Apr 25 20:47:54 CDT 2010

Hi Doug and Gary,
       Doug, although there is clearly no totally  non-disruptive
solution in this case, I am skeptical that "Chilodontaidae" might be the
least disruptive.  I suspect that Chilodidae is indeed the best choice
for the fish family, given that taxon's original description and naming.
       The Commission needs to make a final determination in such a
case, but if I was a fish taxonomist, I would tend to follow a moderate
path, continuing to use Chilodontidae, but also noting that its name may
well soon change back to Chilodidae.  That would perhaps prepare the way
for the transition in the least disruptive manner.  
      IN ANY CASE, what is  probably even more important is that the
protist (ciliate) family Chilodontidae, being the oldest, be formally
rejected.  Although it has been informally rejected, it apparently has
not been done formally.  Might as well clean up the situation with all
three Chilodontidae taxa in one decision.  
                      Ken Kinman                                
Doug Yanega wrote: 
     Gary Rosenberg wrote: 
>Chilodontidae is a justified emendation, so it dates from >the 
>original publication as Chilodidae in 1912 (ICZN Code >Article 19.2). 
>Chilodidae should not be used for the fish family, because >it is not 
>in prevailing usage (Article 29.5). Chilodontidae should be >used for 
>both families; resolution of the homonymy in this set of 
>circumstances requires an ICZN ruling (Article 55.3). 

I agree with Gary's interpretation of this case, exactly as stated
above. While the Code does not operate on precedent, a recent case
involving two family names "Dasypodidae" ended up being resolved by
taking the junior name and declaring the entire genus name to be the
"stem", so the genus Dasypoda is now the type genus of the family
Dasypodaidae (the other genus was Dasypus). A similar approach in this
case would lead the mollusc family to become Chilodontaidae. That might
be the least disruptive approach.  
It will require some interested parties to take time to carefully
document the history of the usage of both names, and prepare a formal
submission to the ICZN, but it's necessary. Gary's already done a fair
bit of the crucial stuff above. ;-) 
Doug Yanega  

More information about the Taxacom mailing list