Type specimens and identity of the described species of Conus.

During the third decade of the 19th century, 21 authors described 35 Recent and 11 fossil species of Conus , in 26 separate publications. This brought to 532 the number of species-group names in the genus introduced up to 1830. Only five fossil and seven Recent species are now considered valid. Two additional valid Recent species were described but were given preoccupied names. The remaining nominal species are concluded to be junior or contemporaneous synonyms (19), nomina dubia (11), of infrasubspecific rank (1), or not now considered Conus (1). At present 160 valid species of Conus are recognized from the species-group names described between 1758 and 1830. Of these, 138 are extant and 22 are known only as Tertiary fossils. Nine otherwise valid species, six Recent and three fossil, were described but were given preoccupied names.     

Type specimens and identity of the described species of Conus VII. The species described 1810–1820

During the second decade of the 19th century, eight authors described 24 recent and 26 fossil species of Conus , bringing to 486 the number of proposed species-group names in the genus through 1820. This study analyses these nominal species, as well as three described by Perry in 1810, and evaluates the status of each. Most of the European Tertiary species described by Brocchi in 1814 and some of those described by Borson and Schlotheim in 1820 are valid. Megerle von Mühlfeld in 1816 and Dillwyn in 1817 each described a valid recent species. All other Conus species names introduced during the period are synonyms of previously or contemporaneously described species or nomina dubia. Type specimens of 23 species, including one neotype, are known to exist today. At the present time 148 valid species of Conus are recognized from the species-group names introduced between 1758 and 1820. Of these, 131 are extant and 17 are known only as Tertiary fossils. In addition, six otherwise valid species, three recent and three fossil, were described but were given preoccupied names.     

Type Specimens and identity of the described species of Conus II. The species described by Solander, Chemnitz, Born, and Lightfoot between 1766 and 1786

Twenty-three species of Conus were described by authors other than Linnaeus between 1766 and 1786. Of these, 3 are Eocene species from England described by Solander in Brander (1766), and the remainder are Recent. Chemnitz (1777) described one valid species. Of the 10 species described by Born (1778), 7 are valid, 2 are junior synonyms of Linnaean species, and 1 is a nomen dubium. Solander in [Lightfoot] (1786) described 5 species, of which 3 are valid and 2 are junior synonyms of Linnaean species. Lightfoot (1786) described 4 species, of which 1 is valid and 3 are junior synonyms of Linnaean species.
Holotypes of 7 species and lectotypes of 3 species exist, and representatives of lecto-types of 10 species have been selected. All of these types are illustrated photographically.
Between 1758 and 1786, 60 species of Conus were described, of which 45 are now considered valid. Of these, 42 are Recent.     

A taxonomic revision of the genera Phrygionis Hübner and Pityeja Walker (Geometridae: Ennominae, Palyadini)

Phrygionis and Pityeja belong to the Palyadini, a tribe of neotropical Ennominae. The moths of both genera bear striking wing markings and mere variants were frequently described as species with the consequence that species diversity was overestimated. Numerous taxonomic changes are made in this work based on the study of primary types and much other material. Variation and distribution is recorded for each species and subspecies. Phylogenetic relationships within Phrygionis are examined, and comments are made on the evolution of wing pattern within this genus.
Fifteen full species are recognized in this study (13 in Phrygionis and two in Pityeja ), of which four (all in Phrygionis ) are described as new; 19 species-group (specific and subspecific) names refer to valid taxa. Twenty-four species-group names are synonymized (19 in Phrygionis and five in Pityeja ) and five are recombined with different genera (four with Phrygionis and one with Pityeja ). Three generic names are synonymized (one in Phrygionis and two in Pityeja ).     

Type specimens of Mitridae (Mollusca:Gastropoda) described by Linnaeus in the genera Voluta, Buccinum and Bulla between 1758 and 1771

From the 16 species of Mitridae described by Linnaeus between the years 1758-71 11 species are considered valid and available for taxonomic use; four specific names have been suppressed by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature for taxonomic usage (1968). One specific name, i.e. Voluta mitra episcopalis Linnaeus, has appeared in various combinations in malacological literature over the years. From the style of listing in the 10th edition of the Systerna Naturae , it is evident that 'episcopalis' has to be treated as of infraspecific rank; there is no evidence that 'episcopalis' is even a valid subspecies of Voluta mitra.
Three holotypes and five lectotypes designated in this paper are extant in the Linnaean collection; illustrations representing three Linnaean species have been selected as lectotypes.     

The species of Hymenoptera described by Linnaeus in the genera Sphex, Chrysis, Vespa, Apis and Mutilla

Data are presented on the type-material representing the species described by Linnaeus in his genera Sphex, Chrysis, Vespa, Apis and Mutilla , The names here considered total 158; six are currently applied in the Hymenoptera Parasitica. Of the balance of 147, three are emendations and five are unavailable homonyms or names proposed in the synonymy of other species. Fifteen Linnaean names are here placed as synonyms. One name is attributed to an author other than Linnaeus, and live names remain species incertae sedis. The remainder, 118, are applied as valid names in die Hymenoptera Aculeata. Holotype specimens in London, Uppsala or Stockholm represent 60 names; 55 names are based on lectotype specimens of which 49 are here designated, two by other authors. One name is represented by a neotype specimen in Lund, and one by a lectotype figure. One non-aculeate species is based on syntypes. Specimens appear to be lost with respect to 25 names; three specimens in Uppsala may be the holotypes of a further three species.
Eight new combinations are made, and twelve new synonyms established; three further new combinations and three further new synonymies are suggested. A systematically arranged summary of species treated and of nomenclatural changes made is given. Nomenclatural changes affecting non-Linnaean names are included where relevant; lectotypes are designated for two non-Linnaean species.     

Catalog of the adelgids of the world (Hemiptera,Adelgidae)

A taxonomic and nomenclatural Catalogue of the adelgids (Hemiptera: Adelgidae) is presented. Six family-group names are listed, five being synonyms of Adelgidae. Twenty-two genus-group names, of which nine are subjectively valid and in use, are presented with their type species, etymology, and grammatical gender. One hundred and six species-group names are listed, of which 70 are considered subjectively valid.     

Common names for Australian ants (Hymenoptera: Formicidae)

Abstract Most insects do not have common names, and this is a significant barrier to public interest in them, and to their study by non-specialists. This holds for even highly familiar insect groups such as ants. Here, I propose common names for all major native Australian ant genera and species-groups, as well as for many of the most abundant and distinctive species. Sixty-two genera, 142 species-groups and 50 species are given names. The naming system closely follows taxonomic structure; typically a genus is given a general common name, under which species-group and species names are nested.     

The Noctuoidea (Lepidoptera) described by Linnaeus

Linnaeus described 166 nominal species of Noctuoidea, of which 144 (86.7%) are currently used as valid names, 18 are synonyms, one is a homonym and three taxa remain unknown. Seven taxa were described solely from illustrations in contemporary literature. Lectotypes are designated for 139 (87.4%) of the 159 remaining taxa, 122 of them from the Linnaean collection in London, 13 from the Queen Ludovica Ulrica's collection in Uppsala, Sweden, and four from other contemporary collections. Two Linnaean senior synonyms are introduced: Hada plebeja comb. nov. (Linnaeus, 1761) for the current H. nana (Hufnagel, 1766) and Oeonistis altica (Linnaeus, 1768) comb. nov. for Oe. entella (Cramer, 1779). Erebus occiduus (Linnaeus, 1758) syn. nov. is a junior subjective synonym of E. crepuscularis (Linnaeus, 1758); L. marmorides (Cramer, 1775) Stat. rev. should be reinstated for Letis occidua auct. In two species pairs the Linnaean names have been interpreted incorrectly. The lectotype designation of Phalaena prasinana Linnaeus, 1758, by Lempke (1947) is invalid because the specimen is not syntypic. According to the new lectotype, Pseudoips prasinanus (Linnaeus, 1758) comb. nov. replaces P. faganus (Fabricius, 1781), and Bena bicolorana (Fuessly, 1775) comb. nov. is available for the other species. Abrostola triplasia (Linnaeus, 1758) Stat. rev. replaces A. trigemina (Werneburg, 1864), and for the other species A. triparlila (Hufnagel, 1766) should be reinstated. One neotype designation [Eilema complanum (Linnaeus, 1758)], one lectotype designation [Xylena exsolela (Linnaeus, 1758)], and precedence of a junior synonym [Ophideres fullonia (Clerck, 1764)] over its unused senior synonym are to be referred to the ICZN; until their decision the current usage must be followed. The identity of Mesapamea secalis (Linnaeus, 1758) stat. rev. corresponds to current usage, but, under presence of syntypic material, the recent neotype designation by Lempke (1988) will be referred to the ICZN. The revision is mainly based on the discovery that the insect pins and the way specimens are prepared give evidence of the authenticity of the material. Contrary to the views of earlier authors, Linnaeus had his labels with the specific name pinned against the bottom of the drawers by the specimen pin. Because the labels have been moved twice during subsequent curations, their present position is less indicative of the authenticity than has been previously suggested. The origin of the so-called n-labels is discussed.     

The Cissia confusa species-group in Costa Rica and Trinidad (Lepidoptera: Satyrinae)

The generic names Euptychia, Cissia and Argyreuplychia are reviewed in relation to the Cissia confusa species-group in Costa Rica and Trinidad, for which the generic name Cissia Doubleday is formally resurrected. Three new species of Cissia are described, C. confusa itself is resurrected from synonymy, three neotypes and three lectotypes are designated, and six new combinations established. On the basis of early instar morphology three subgroups are recognized and the general biology of the confusa species-group is summarized. A key to species in Costa Rica is provided and the ecology of the adults is reviewed.     

Taxonomic and morphological survey of the Lygephila lusoria (Linnaeus, 1758) species-group with description of a new species (Lepidoptera,Erebidae, Toxocampinae)

The taxa of the Lygephila lusoria (Linnaeus, 1758) species-group are revised. The genital features of all known taxa are described and illustrated with special reference to the structure of vesica. The male genitalia of L. pallida pallida (Bang-Haas, 1907) are described and illustrated for the first time. L. pallida subpicata (Wiltshire, 1971) is treated here as a species, L. pallida subpicata (Wiltshire, 1971), stat. n., distinct from L. pallida. A new species, L. minima, sp. n.,from South Russia is described. Illustrations of the holotype and its genitalia are provided; a diagnostic comparison with L. pallida is given. L. alaica Remm, 1983 is included in the L. lusoria species-group for the first time.     

Typification of the Linnean species of Saxifraga

WEBB, D. A., 1987. Typification of the Linnean species of Saxifraga. Types (mainly lectotypes) arc assigned to all the species of Saxifraga described by Linnaeus. There are 38 names in all, of which one is now assigned to Bergenia, one is known to be a hybrid, three have been rejected in the past as nomina ambigua, one was later reduced to synonymy by Linnaeus himself, while 32 are accepted as valid species today. Three have been previously typified by Pugsley, one by Steam and one by the author; for the others the types are newly proposed here. Nineteen names are typified from the Linnean herbarium in London (LINN), three from the Linnean herbarium in Stockholm (S), seven from the Burser herbarium at Uppsala (UPS), one from the Tournefort herbarium in Paris (P), and eight from illustrations cited by Linnaeus in synonymy. Lists are appended of all specimens of the genus in the Linnean herbaria in London and Stockholm and the Burser herbarium at Uppsala, and a determination is given for each specimen, though in some cases these can only be tentative. The specimens include 15 species which Linnaeus did not describe, though in the case of five he probably regarded them as varieties.     

种级异物同名处理及属名变动影响分析

讨论《国际动物命名法规》(简称《法规》)关于种级单元异物同名的处理及相关规定。以斧须隐翅虫亚科Oxyporinae的同名问题为例,笔者分析了属级单元名称变动对种级单元同名关系的影响。一些古老的属级单元有很长且比较复杂的分类历史,深入分析可将各类变化归纳为六类,其中三类与原同名有关,二类与后同名有关,余一类不再影响种级同名关系。文中讨论了第4版《法规》中与种级同名关系有关的若干重要变动,通过分析比较,说明《法规》的这类变动如何影响动物分类名称的稳定性与正确性。这些分析,可望有助于避免产生新的次同名,也有助于正确恰当地解决已有的同名问题。     

An assessment of the DNA barcodes of Indian freshwater fishes

Freshwater fishes in India are poorly known and plagued by many unresolved cryptic species complexes that masks some latent and endemic species. Limitations in traditional taxonomy have resulted in this crypticism. Hence, molecular approaches like DNA barcoding, are needed to diagnose these latent species. We have analyzed 1383 barcode sequences of 175 Indian freshwater fish species available in the databases, of which 172 sequences of 70 species were generated. The congeneric and conspecific genetic divergences were calculated using Kimura's 2 parameter distance model followed by the construction of a Neighbor Joining tree using the MEGA 5.1. DNA barcoding principle at its first hand approach, led to the straightforward identification of 82% of the studied species with 2.9% (S.E = 0.2) divergence between the nearest congeners. However, after validating some cases of synonymy and mislabeled sequences, 5% more species were found to be valid. Sequences submitted to the database under different names were found to represent single species. On the other hand, some sequences of the species like Barilius barna, Barilius bendelisis and Labeo bata were submitted to the database under a single name but were found to represent either some unexplored species or latent species. Overall, 87% of the available Indian freshwater fish barcodes were diagnosed as true species in parity with the existing checklist and can act as reference barcode for the particular taxa. For the remaining 13% (21 species) the correct species name was difficult to assign as they depicted some erroneous identification and cryptic species complex. Thus, these barcodes will need further assay and inclusion of barcodes of more specimens from same and sister species.     

Generation of a large gene/protein lexicon by morphological pattern analysis

The identification of gene/protein names in natural language text is an important problem in named entity recognition. In previous work we have processed MEDLINE documents to obtain a collection of over two million names of which we estimate that perhaps two thirds are valid gene/protein names. Our problem has been how to purify this set to obtain a high quality subset of gene/protein names. Here we describe an approach which is based on the generation of certain classes of names that are characterized by common morphological features. Within each class inductive logic programming (ILP) is applied to learn the characteristics of those names that are gene/protein names. The criteria learned in this manner are then applied to our large set of names. We generated 193 classes of names and ILP led to criteria defining a select subset of 1,240,462 names. A simple false positive filter was applied to remove 8% of this set leaving 1,145,913 names. Examination of a random sample from this gene/protein name lexicon suggests it is composed of 82% (+/-3%) complete and accurate gene/protein names, 12% names related to genes/proteins (too generic, a valid name plus additional text, part of a valid name, etc.), and 6% names unrelated to genes/proteins. The lexicon is freely available at ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/tanabe/Gene.Lexicon.