[Taxacom] Availability of Nephilingis Kuntner, 2013

Evangelos Vlachos evlacho at gmail.com
Thu Aug 22 08:14:59 CDT 2019

Hi, I know I am late to the party and perhaps I am missing some of the
emails because I get only the digest of taxacom.

After some superficial reading of the paper of Kuntner et al. 2013 and
reading the emails in this thread, I have some comments:

1) The name was *not* proposed in the Appendix A of the paper. The name is
proposed in the abstract of the paper (the journal is both print+online) as:

> Nephilengys species fall into two clades, one with Australasian species
> (true Nephilengys) as sister to Herennia, and another with Afrotropical
> species (*Nephilingis Kuntner new genus*) as sister to a clade containing
> Clitaetra plus most currently described Nephila.

and later as well:

> The clade containing Nephilengys cruentata, N. livida, N. borbonica, and
> N. dodo, is here transferred to a *new genus, Nephilingis
> Kuntner (Appendix A). *

 2) I think that one point that needs to be discussed is whether or not the
type species is fixed indeed in the original publication or not, because it
is actually fixed in the Appendix.

3) Along the same line of thought, it needs to be clarified if the
description or definition of the taxon that appears in the Appendix (but
not in the paper) could be considered as "accompanying" the name sensu Art.
13.1.1, or the citation of the appendix in the original publication could
be considered IMO "a bibliographic reference to such a published statement"
sensu 13.1.2.

So, I would say that most likely the name should be considered available.

and most importantly:

4) how the (*excellent*) World Spider Catalog is not named as World Spider
*Web* or something like that??? This is a huge missed opportunity IMO.

All the best and greetings from Patagonia,

Evan Vlachos


More information about the Taxacom mailing list