[Taxacom] ZooBank Progress
fwelter at gwdg.de
Sun Apr 28 09:20:03 CDT 2013
If it's done manually it might be worth to correct some other names that
were linked by ZooBank to the Linnean 1758 work.
My understanding is that ZooBank is a data resource where available names
are contained. Unavailable names should probably not be contained at all,
and if yes, they should clearly be marked as such.
I am not sure how names should be treated which were initially made
available and later suppressed.
Acarus telarius Linnæus, 1758 - this name should somehow be marked as
suppressed (ICZN Op. 968).
There were many other such names established in the 1758 work, which were
totally or partly suppressed by the Commission.
Gryllus (Acheta) Linnæus, 1758 - is currently marked as a subgenus. This
is probably incorrect, the name was regarded as unavailable in ICZN Op.
The same problem (name unavailable because of having been mentioned as an
intermediate term between genus and species in the Linnean work) applies
to the following names:
Papilio (Barbarus) Linnæus, 1758 - ("Barbari", spelled Barbarus in the
running head p. 486).
Gryllus (Bulla) Linnæus, 1758
Papilio (Danaus) Linnæus, 1758 ("Danai", spelled Danaus in the running
head p. 468)
Papilio (Equitis) Linnæus, 1758 - ("Equites", spelled Eques in the running
head p. 458) - I do not understand where was written a name Equitis. The
style of the 1758 work suggests that the nominative forms were printed in
the running head.
Papilio (Heliconius) Linnæus, 1758 - ("Heliconii" pp. 458 and 465, spelled
Heliconius in the running head p. 466)
Papilio (Nymphalis) Linnæus, 1758 - ("Nymphales" pp. 458 and 472, spelled
Nymphalis in the running head p. 473)
Papilio (Plebejus) Linnæus, 1758 - ("Plebeji" pp. 458 and 482, spelled
Plebejus in the running head p. 483)
Aphis craccae Linnæus, 1758
This name was not made available in the 1758 work because it had no
description or indication as required by Art. 12.1.
The same applies to the following names:
Aphis populi Linnæus, 1758
Aphis tanaceti Linnæus, 1758
Chermes pyri Linnæus, 1758 - in ZooBank with a dot behind?
Chermes salicis Linnæus, 1758
Coccus salicis Linnæus, 1758
This name Cardium muricatum from p. 679 was corrected on p. 824, its
correct name should be Cardium aculeatum which should be added to the data
resource. For Cardium aculeatum two page links should be given, p. 679
(the description) and p. 824 (the name).
Columbus Linnæus, 1758 - incorrect original spelling of Colymbus Linnæus,
1758 (ICZN Direction 38)
The same problem applies to the following names:
Echeneis neucrates Linnæus, 1758 - incorrect original spelling of Echeneis
naucrates Linnæus, 1758 (ICZN Op. 242)
Isis ocracea Linnæus, 1758 - incorrect original spelling of Isis ochracea
Linnæus, 1758 (ICZN Op. 1304)
Lacerta stincus Linnæus, 1758 - incorrect original spelling of Lacerta
scincus Linnæus, 1758
Musca heraclii Linnæus, 1758 - incorrect original spelling of Musca
heraclei Linnæus, 1758 (ICZN Op. 1645)
Staphylinus erytropterus Linnæus, 1758 - incorrect original spelling of
Staphylinus erythropterus Linnæus, 1758 (ICZN Op. 546)
Tringa ocrophus Linnæus, 1758 - incorrect original spelling of Tringa
ochropus Linnæus, 1758 (ICZN Direction 17)
Vultur perenopterus Linnæus, 1758 - incorrect original spelling of Vultur
percnopterus Linnæus, 1758 (ICZN Op. 411)
Aranea diadema Linnæus, 1758 - unavailable name: Incorrect subsequent
spelling of Araneus diadematus (Clerck 1757, p. 25) because Linnæus 1758:
619 referred bibliographically to Clerck 1757.
Maybe some other systematic things could be fixed.
- Remove the long s throughout the original spellings, and replace it at
all instances by the short s. Example Musca Linnæus, 1758, this name was
spelled Musca with long s at some occasions and MUSCA at others, MUSCA is
usually converted to Musca with short s. So all specific names should
correctly be combined with Musca with short s.
Also, the long s is not cited consistently. Example:
Ostrea Puſio Linnæus, 1758 - here Pusio with long s and Ostrea with
short s, both had the long s in the original source.
- Consider presenting a field "original spelling" and another field
"correct spelling". This would probably reduce confusion. In the correct
spelling field the species would not appear capitalised, and diacritics
would be removed.
- I am confused by the statement "Fossil: No" in the ZooBank data result set.
Is this nomenclaturally relevant?
Is there an exact definition for the term "fossil"? Since when does a
taxon need to be extinct for obtaining the attribute "fossil"?
Can we be sure that all molluscs and brachiopods named in the early
Linnean works were recent?
Would it not be better to remove the statement, to avoid running the risk
to give an incorrect information?
Anomia Gryphus Linnæus, 1758. Here a fossil species was described, and in
Zoobank it was marked as "Fossil: No".
Zoologisches Institut, Berliner Str. 28, D-37073 Goettingen
Phone +49 551 395536
More information about the Taxacom