[Taxacom] Formation of family names e.g. Diplogasteridae vs. Diplogastridae in Nematoda (and similar)

Tony Rees tonyrees49 at gmail.com
Mon Nov 2 01:08:58 CST 2015


Dear all,

I am trying to reach a decision which form of the family Diplogast[e]ridae
in Nemataoda, based on the genus Diplogaster, I should use in my database.
In his treatment of Nematoda down to level of family, Hodda (2011, in Zhang
et al.) includes the following two notes on this aspect:

<snip>
Note 189. There is ongoing controversy over the rendering of names ending
in "gaster" with a suffix. See note [196, regarding] Suborder
Diplogasterina Paramonov 1952 (2 superfamilies) : cited as either
Chronogastridae (Siddiqi 2003, Holovachov 2004, Mountport 2005, Holovachov
& De Ley 2006), or Chronogasteridae (Ettema et al. 2000, Gagarin 1993,
Gagarin et al. 2003, Hodda 2003, 2007, Lorenzen 1981, Poinar & Sarbu 1994,
Zullini et al. 2002).

Note 196. There is controversy over the correct rendering of names based on
the genus name Diplogaster, resting on formation of Latin adjectives and
the form of nouns (Sudhaus & von Lieven 2003). The original use as a
suborder was the form Diplogasterata n. subord (Paramonov 1952). Here, the
most frequently used form [i.e. Diplogasterina] is adopted.
</snip>

On the other hand, Kiontke & Sudhaus in Nematologica, 1996 state: "Baker &
Sanwal (1969) showed that the spelling is "Diplogastridae" instead of
"Diplogasteridae".

For reference, more recent refs on Google Scholar tend to
favour Diplogastridae, older ones Diplogasteridae so far as I can see,
contrary to the view expressed in Hodda's treatment.

Does anyone have additional light to throw on this matter? Advice would be
appreciated...

Regards - Tony

Tony Rees, New South Wales, Australia
https://about.me/TonyRees


More information about the Taxacom mailing list