NOMINA CIRCUMSCRIBENTIA INSECTORUM

CONTENTS

REFERENCES

                                                   

Typified names:

Remopidia & Remipedes

CONTENTS: 

1) Remipedes Dumeril 1805

2) Remipedia Yager 1981

3) Opinion

 1) Remipedes Dumeril 1805

NOMEN: Remipedes (seu Remipedia) Dumeril 1805 [C.A.-M. Dumeril. Zoologie analitique. Paris, Allais, Libraire, Quaides Augustins, 1805 & 1806, No 39: 1-344]

ORIGINAL SPELLING (Dumeril 1805 & 1806): Remipedes (in French)

SUBSEQUENT SPELLING: -

ORIGINAL LISTED MEMBERSHIP (Dumeril 1805 & 1806): Dytiscus + Hyphydrus + Haliplus + Gyrinus 

OBJECTIVE SYNONYM: 

= Nectopodes (seu Nectopoda) Dumeril 1805

SENIOR CIRCUMSCRIPTIONAL SYNONYM:

= Hydrocanthari Latreille 1802

JUNIOR CIRCUMSCRIPTIONAL SYNONYMS:

=?Hydrocanthares Dejean 1821 

=?Hydradephaga McLeay 1825 

=?Hydrocantharides Burmeister 1829  

= Hydroacanthari Weber 1933 

=?Hydrocanthara Sturm 1834 

=?Hydrocantharida Heer 1838 

=?Notatoria Thoms 1860 

=?Euhydradephaga Kolbe 1880

TYPIFIED NAME IN BASIC FORMAT: Dytiscus/fg (incl. Haliplus, Gyrinus)

TYPIFIED NAMES IN USE: 

MODERN STATUS: a junior synonym of Hydrocanthari Latreille 1802; belongs to a widely accepted, possibly holophyletic taxon.


2) Remipidia Yager 1981

NOMEN: Remipedia Yager 1981 [J. Yager. Remipedia, a new class of Crustacea from a marine cave in the Bahams. - Journal of Crustacean Biology, 1981, 1: 328-333]

ORIGINAL LISTED MEMBERSHIP (Yager 1981):  

NON-MONOSEMANTIC CIRCUMSCRIPTIONAL SYNONYM (distinctly without †Enantiopoda):  

= Nectiopoda Schram 1986

TYPIFIED NAME IN BASIC FORMAT: Speleonectes/fg

TYPIFIED NAMES IN USE: Speleonectiformii, Speleonectiformes

MODERN STATUS:  the valid, the oldest name of a generally accepted, holophyletic taxon.


3) OPINION

The name Remipedes Dumeril 1805, being a French spelling only, can be interpreted as a Latin name Remipedia, with authorship "Dumeril 1805"; in this case the name Remipedia Yager 1981 can be interpreted as a preoccupied name. In spite of this fact, the name Remipedia Yager 1981 should be valid, because its senior homonym, being a junior synonym of Hydrocanthari Latreille 1802, is out of use during two centuries.