[Taxacom] Names missing from Neave/Nomenclator Zoologicus - any case studies?

Neal Evenhuis neale at bishopmuseum.org
Wed Oct 5 15:11:43 CDT 2016


You might try Eschmeyer for fish.

Caveat on Neave: the list is essentially an aggregator and it is not known
how much vetting was done. Before adding the nanmes recorded in Zoological
Record, the majority of names were taken from previous nomenclators
(Agassiz, Marschall, Poche, Scudder, Sherborn, Waterhouse) and thus errors
in them persist. As for missing names in Neave, when Neave grabbed names
from Sherborn, he did not know that Sherborn did not list names that were
made available on plates — Sherborn was under the contemporary impression
that names had to have a description to be available; nor did he list new
genera that had no description but had a taxonomically valid species
included (the ICZN Code, of course, has since allowed these names). To
confound, Neave lists some names as available when they are simply
subsequent usages of a name by another author and in cases where a name is
equivocal as to its availability as an emendation, he appends them with
(“pro” X-us). On the latter, checking each “pro” shows that some are
indeed available, while others are misspellings.

We’re working on the Diptera ~20,000 names takes a bit of time to vet
properly, but we’ve found both names missed and names mis-attributed in
Neave. Sorry — no complete list of those missing though since we’re not
through examining all of them ...

-Neal

On Stardate 10/4/16, 4:46 PM, "Taxacom on behalf of Tony Rees"
<taxacom-bounces at mailman.nhm.ku.edu on behalf of tonyrees49 at gmail.com>
wrote:

>Dear Taxaacomers,
>
>I am interested in attempting to quantify the percentage of generic and
>subgeneric names potentially missing from Neave's monumental "Nomenclator
>Zoologicus" compilation (over the period of relevant coverage) and am
>wondering whether there are case studies in specific groups which may be
>able to supply a figure for the same. For example, although I do not have
>the work to hand, apparently M. Alonso-Zarazaga & C. Lyal's "A world
>catalogue of families and genera of Curculionoidea (Insecta: Coleoptera)
>(excepting Scolytidae and Platypodidae)" includes "a list of the available
>genus-group names absent from Neave's Nomenclator Zoologicus" - so I would
>be interested to know what percentage of the total figure this may be. I
>also imagine some figures might be available for other well studied groups
>(Diptera? Hexacorals?) where a similar exercise may have been carried out.
>
>Any pointers to either published or unpublished data on this aspect would
>be appreciated,
>
>With best regards,
>
>Tony Rees, New South Wales, Australia
>https://about.me/TonyRees
>_______________________________________________
>Taxacom Mailing List
>Taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
>http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
>The Taxacom Archive back to 1992 may be searched at:
>http://taxacom.markmail.org
>
>Injecting Intellectual Liquidity for 29 years.


This message is only intended for the addressee named above.  Its contents may be privileged or otherwise protected.  Any unauthorized use, disclosure or copying of this message or its contents is prohibited.  If you have received this message by mistake, please notify us immediately by reply mail or by collect telephone call.  Any personal opinions expressed in this message do not necessarily represent the views of the Bishop Museum.


More information about the Taxacom mailing list