[Taxacom] Formation of family names e.g. Diplogasteridae vs. Diplogastridae in Nematoda (and similar)
j.noyes at nhm.ac.uk
Thu Nov 5 05:39:15 CST 2015
According to the ICZN (1985) Table D the correct formation for family group names in zoology based on "gaster" must always be -gastridae, gastrinae, etc. An old Code but as far as I know the advice/rule still stands. For an in-depth discussion see Burks, 2012, Zootaxa 3389:61-64.
Department of Life Sciences
Natural History Museum
London SW7 5BD
jsn at nhm.ac.uk
Tel.: +44 (0) 207 942 5594
Fax.: +44 (0) 207 942 5229
Universal Chalcidoidea Database (everything you wanted to know about chalcidoids and more):
From: Taxacom [mailto:taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu] On Behalf Of Michael Heads
Sent: 02 November 2015 08:17
To: Tony Rees; taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
Subject: Re: [Taxacom] Formation of family names e.g. Diplogasteridae vs. Diplogastridae in Nematoda (and similar)
Latin itself never decided how to decline this word, borrowed from Greek.
The word was treated as both second declension and third declension, with the genitive forms being gastri and gasteri respectively. So they are old variations.
On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 8:08 PM, Tony Rees <tonyrees49 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 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:
> 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.
> 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
> Taxacom Mailing List
> Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
> Celebrating 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.
Dunedin, New Zealand.
Craw, R., J. Grehan, M. Heads. 1999. *Panbiogeography: Tracking the history of life*. Oxford University Press, New York.
Heads, M. 2012.* Molecular panbiogeography of the tropics. *University of California Press, Berkeley. www.ucpress.edu/book.php?isbn=9780520271968
Heads, M. 2014.* Biogeography of Australasia: A molecular analysis*.
Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. www.cambridge.org/9781107041028 _______________________________________________
Taxacom Mailing List
Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
Celebrating 28 years of Taxacom in 2015.
More information about the Taxacom