[Taxacom] Small mystery - the name Byrrhininus Pic

Francisco Welter-Schultes fwelter at gwdg.de
Thu Sep 10 17:00:58 CDT 2020


Dear Tony,
if it is not much work I can try to help you.

Pic 1922 presented some species in the genus Byrrhinus, which should 
refer to Byrrhinus Motschoulsky, 1858.

B[yrrhinus]. gracilicornis Pic, 1922, from Brazil, was made available 
because it was equipped with a description.
As you reported, Pic stated that this species could enter in a new 
subgenus Byrrhininus (peut rentrer, can enter, I do not read a "perhaps" 
in this statement).
The genus-group name Byrrhininus was established at this occasion, as a 
subgenus of Byrrhinus, and with Byrrhinus gracilicornis Pic, 1922 as its 
type by monotypy.
Pic 1922 classified the species as Byrrhinus (Byrrhininus) 
gracilicornis. Others may later have applied a different classification.

I do not see the problem. The nomenclatural background seems clear.

Bestv wishes
Francisco



Am 10.09.2020 um 22:05 schrieb Tony Rees via Taxacom:
> Dear all,
> 
> I am wondering if anyone is interested in solving a small mystery for me.
> The beetle genus-group name Byrrhininus Pic, 1922, is presently listed
> twice in my IRMNG compilation, based on records from Joel Hallan's Biology
> Catalog (the latter no longer online unfortunately): once as a subgenus of
> Byrrhus Linnaeus, 1767 [Family: Byrrhidae] (and treated in IRMNG as a
> synonym of that name at generic level), and once a synonym of Byrrhinus
> Motschoulsky, 1858 [Family: Limnichidae].
> 
> The uBio (online) copy of Neave (Nomenclator Zoologicus) has no entry for
> "Byrrhininus" so that is not helpful in tracing the original publication[s]
> of this name. BHL has one article by Pic from 1922 (
> https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/page/36371588 plus following page) in
> which he erects one new species of  Byrrhininus, refers to several others
> apparently previously erected, and on the following page talks about "this
> last species ... could perhaps be placed in a new subgenus which I name
> Byrrhininus" [my rough understanding from the French original).
> 
> So, it looks like Pic may indeed have used the name twice, once as a genus,
> once as a new subgenus (of what??), but apart from that the trail is a bit
> clouded.  Spangler et al., 2001, in "A checklist of the Limnichidae and the
> Lutrochidae (Coleoptera) of the world", list  Byrrhininus Pic, 1922 in the
> synonymy of  Byrrhinus Motschulsky, 1858 (which corresponds to the second
> of Hallan's records as noted above) but the first one / putative subgenus
> of Byrrhus may be different - or may be a duplicate to be deleted, I am not
> sure, although Pic's statement in the BHL record I have found is
> intriguing...
> 
> If anyone can shed further light on this, I would appreciate it -
> ultimately desiring to know whether to maintain one or two entries for the
> same "name, authority" combination in IRMNG, corresponding to one or two
> different initially erected taxa (possibly in different families as well...)
> 
> Regards - Tony
> Tony Rees, New South Wales, Australia
> www.irmng.org
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> 
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit: http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> You can reach the person managing the list at: taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at: http://taxacom.markmail.org
> 
> Nurturing nuance while assaulting ambiguity for about 33 years, 1987-2020.
> 


More information about the Taxacom mailing list