122 Bulletin ofZoological Nomenclature 63(2) June 2006 Case 3344 Pseudorthodadius Goetghebuer, 1943 and Mesosmittia Brundin, 1956 (Insecta, Diptera, chironomidae): proposed conservation of the generic names Martin Spies do Zoologische Staatssammlung Miinchen, Milnchhausenstr. 21, D-81247 Miinchen, Germany (e-mail: [email protected]) Abstract. The purpose of this application, under Articles 23.4 and 23.9.3 of the Code, is to conserve the generic names Pseudorthodadius Goetghebuer, 1943 and Mesosmittia Brundin, 1956 for two widespread genera of non-biting midges by the suppression ofPseudorthodadius Edwards, 1932. Pseudorthodadius Edwards, 1932 is a senior homonym of Pseudorthodadius Goetghebuer, 1943, but has not been used for the last 50 years, being replaced with Mesosmittia Brundin, 1956. It is proposed that the replacement ofPseudorthodadius Edwards, 1932 with Mesosmittia Brundin, 1956 is accepted. Keywords. Nomenclature; taxonomy; chironomidae; Pseudorthodadius; Meso- smittia; Pseudorthodadius curtistylus; Mesosmittiaflexuella; non-biting midges. 1. Goetghebuer (1932, p. 93) proposed Pseudorthodadius as the name of a new subgenus in the genus Orthodadius van der Wulp, 1874, to include three nominal species of non-biting midges (family chironomidae): Spaniotoma (Orthodadius) flexuella Edwards, 1929 (p. 349); Psectrodadius curtistylus Goetghebuer, 1921 (p. 101); and Psectrodadiusfiliformis Kieifer, 1908. No type species was fixed for Pseudorthodadius Goetghebuer, 1932, which is therefore a nomen nudum (Article 13.3). 2. Edwards (1932a, p. 141), in a hterature review of Goetghebuer's (1932) work, published the statement: 'Four new subgeneric names are introduced by Dr. Goetghebuer, but for three ofthese type-species are not indicated; 1 hereby designate the following: . . . Pseudorthodadius,'S. flexuella Edw. . . .' (names of other taxa omitted forclarity). Edwards (1932a)[ included no other species in Pseudorthodadius; the two additional species placed there by Goetghebuer (1932) he assigned to a different taxon. In this classification, largely carried over from Edwards (1929), Pseudorthodadius was not given subgeneric rank as in Goetghebuer (1932), but corresponded to Spaniotoma (Orthodadius) 'Group E' sensu Edwards (1929, p. 349). Likewise, Psectrodadius curtistylus Goetghebuer (see para. 3) - misrepresented as 'Dactylodadius curtistylus Goet.' - was placed in 'Group F' of Spaniotoma (Ortho- dadius), 'which might bear the name Spaniotoma' (Edwards, 1932a, p. 141). This system ignored the Principle of Coordination (Edwards, 1929, p. 308, footnote): the previously unused name Spcmiotoma Philippi, 1865 was reintroduced for a genus including Orthodadius as a subgenus, but there was no nominotypical subgenus Spaniotoma (Spcmiotoma), and the subfamily was called 'Orthocladiinae'. Bulletin ofZoological Nomenclature 63(2) June 2006 123 Moreover, several previously available genus-group names were not necessarily used as valid in the sense of the Code, but were presented in more or less tentative association (see the above quote from Edwards, 1932a, concerning 'Group F') with Edwards' own lettered group terms; for example, \Dactylocladius, Kieff.)' was set in a separate line underneath the text section title 'Group D' in Spaniotoma (Ortho- cladius) (Edwards, 1929, p. 346). Edwards (1932b), published about one month after Edwards (1932a), repeated this classification: the 'type of the new subgenus Pseudorthocladius Goetghebuer' was treated under the name 'Spaniotoma (Ortho- cladhis) flexneUa Edw.', and placed in 'a special section of Orthocladiiis for this species alone'. 3. Goetghebuer (1943 in 1940-1950, p. 73; for publication dates ofthe successive instalments ofthis work see Evenhuis, 1997, p. 461) treated the name and systematic placement of Pseudorthocladius after Goetghebuer (1932), but this time gave PsectrocladiuscurtistylusGoetghebueras the 'genotype', and transferred Spaniotoma flexuella Edwards to the genus Linmophyes Eaton, 1875 (op. cit., 1944, p. 134). In doing so, Goetghebuer apparently was unaware of Edwards' (1932a, 1932b) publi- cations; there is no reference to them in Goetghebuer (1940-1950), and a note given under L.flexuellus (op. cit., 1944, p. 134) clearly refers to the treatment ofthe species in Edwards (1929) rather than in Edwards (1932a, 1932b). Under these circum- stances, Goetghebuer's (1943 in 1940-1950) treatment of Pseudorthocladius may be seen as the effective (though unintentional) establishment of a separate available name. 4. Until 1951, most authors publishing on the taxa in question made no reference whatsoever to Edwards' (1932a, 1932b) works, and derived their nomenclature and taxonomic concepts from those of Goetghebuer (1932 or 1940-1950, respectively) (see, e.g. Thienemann & Kriiger, 1939; Thienemann, 1944; Brundin, 1949; Hennig, 1950; Strenzke, 1950). On the other hand, Coe (1945, 1950) followed Edwards, and Laurence (1951) argued that Pseudorthocladius Edwards took precedence over Pseudorthocladius Goetghebuer byvirtueofthetypedesignation in Edwards (1932a). He proposed 'Pseudokiefferiella sub-genus nov.' for Pseudorthocladius Goetghebuer, but that substitute name was preoccupied by Pseudokieff'eriella Zavfel, 1941 (see Spies & Saether, 2004, pp. 19-20). Freeman (1953) and Thienemann (1954), although aware ofLaurence's (1951) arguments, chose to maintain and use Pseudorthocladius Goetghebuer. 5. Brundin (1956, pp. 138-139) reviewed the conflicting uses oiPseudorthocladius and related names, but the solution he proposed was guided more by taxonomic considerations than by rules of nomenclature. In following most of Goetghebuer's (1940-1950) ratherthan Edwards' (1929, 1932a) classification -especiallyconcerning Edwards' peculiar treatment of Spcmiotoma - Brundin (1956, pp. 137-139) used Pseudorthocladius Goetghebuer, 1943 instead of Pseudorthocladius Edwards, 1932 and replaced the latter by a new name, Mesosmittia Brundin, 1956 (p. 163), with the same type species as in Edwards (1932a, 1932b). 6. Since Brundin (1956), his basic definitions ofthe two genera in question and the names he applied to the latter have been used unanimously: in all applicable catalogues ofChironomidae taxa (e.g. Freeman & Cranston, 1980; Ashe, 1983; Ashe & Cranston, 1990; Oliver, Dillon & Cranston, 1990; Spies & Reiss, 1996), standard keys (e.g. Wiederholm, 1983, 1986, 1989; Langton, 1991; Sather et al., 2000), 124 Bulletin ofZoological Nomenclature 63(2) June 2006 pertinent revisions (Saether & Sublette, 1983; Ssether, 1986; Andersen & Mendes, 2002), etc. The genus treated under the name 'Pseudorthocladius Goetghebuer' presently includes about 35 nominal species, and has been reported from all zoogeographic world regions except Australia and the Antarctic (e.g. Scether & Andersen, 1996; Chaudhuri et al., 2001; Roque et al., 2003). Members of 'Mesosmittia Brundin' are known from the Holarctic, Afrotropical and Neotropical regions; currently there are 14 named species (Andersen & Mendes, 2002). Some authors have credited Pseudorthocladius to Goetghebuer (1932) rather than to Goetghebuer(1943) and some details ofthe synonymies and explanations given have varied, but the present applicant is unaware ofany post-1956 publication that would constitute an exception to the universal use of Pseudorthocladius Goetghebuer and Mesosmittia Brundin, anddisuseofPseudorthocladiusEdwards. Several authorshave commented that this usage is not in accordance with the Code and that a ruling by the Commission is necessary (e.g. Cranston, 1975; Ashe, 1983; Seether & Sublette, 1983; Andersen & Mendes, 2002). However, no corresponding application has previously been submitted. 7. To use Pseudorthocladius Edwards in place of Mesosmittia, and to establish a substitute name for Pseudorthocladius Goetghebuer, would represent the most destabilizing and confusing kind of nomenclatural change: the switching of a scientificnameinwidespreaduseforonetaxonomicconcepttoadifferentconcept for which another name has also been in common use. However, only one of the two conditions for Reversal of Precedence (Article 23.9) is met. Pseudorthocladius Goetghebuer, 1943 and Mesosmittia Brundin, 1956areinprevailingusageforthe last 50 years as presumed valid names (Article 23.9.1.2). However, the senior homonym Pseudorthocladius Edwards, 1932 was established after 1899 and hence does not qualify as a nomen oblitum (Article 23.9.1.1). 8. The International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature is accordingly asked: (1) to use its plenary power to suppress the generic name Pseudorthocladius Edwards, 1932 for the purposes of both the Principle of Priority and the Principle ofHomonymy; (2) to place onthe Official List ofGenericNames in Zoology thefollowing names: (a) Pseudorthocladius Goetghebuer, 1943 (gender: masculine), type species by original designation Psectrocladius curtistylus Goetghebuer, 1921; (b) Mesosmittia Brundin, 1956.(gender: feminine), type species by original designation and monotypy Spaniotoma (Orthocladius)flexuella Edwards, 1929; (3) to place on the Official List ofSpecificNames inZoology the followingnames: (a) curtistylus Goetghebuer, 1921, as published in the binomen Psectro- cladius curtistylus (specific name of the type species of Pseudorthocladius Goetghebuer, 1943); (h)flexuella Edwards, 1929, as pubhshed in the binomen Spaniotoma (Ortho- cladius)flexuella (specificname ofthetypespeciesofMesosmittiaBrundin, 1956); (4) to place on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology the name Pseudorthocladius Edwards, 1932, as suppressed in (1) above. Bulletin ofZoological Nomenclature 63(2) June 2006 125 References Andersen, T. & Mendes, H.F. 2002. Neotropical and Mexican Mesosmittia Brundin, with the description offour new species (Insecta, Diptera, Chironomidae). Spixiana, 25: 141-155. Ashe, P. 1983. A catalogue of chironomid genera and subgenera of the world including synonyms (Diptera: Chironomidae). Entomologica scandinavica Supplement^ 17: 1-68. Ashe, P. & Cranston, P.S. 1990. Family Chironomidae. Pp. 113-355 in Sobs, A. & Papp, L. (Eds.), Catalogue ofPalaearctic Diptera. vol. 2. 499 pp. Akademiai Kiado, Budapest. Brundin, L. 1949. Chironomiden und andere Bodentiere der siidschwedischen Urgebirgsseen. Ein Beitrag zur Kenntnis der bodenfaunistischen Charakterziige schwedischer ohgotro- pher Seen. Reportsfrom the Institute ofFreshwater Research, Drottningholm. 30: 1-914. Brundin, L. 1956. Zur Systematik derOrthocladiinae(Dipt., Chironomidae). Reportsfrom the Institute ofFreshwater Research, Drottninghohih 37: 5-185. Chaudhuri, P.K., Hazra, N. & Alfred,J.R.B. 2001. Achecklist ofchironomidmidges(Diptera: Chironomidae) ofthe Indian subcontinent. OrientalInsects, 35: 335-372. Coe,R.L. 1945. Chironomidae. Pp. 334-340in Kloet, G.S. & Hincks,W.D. (Eds.), A checklist ofBritish insects. 59, 483 pp. Kloet & Hincks, Stockport, U.K. Coe, R.L. 1950. Family Chironomidae. Pp. 121-206 in Coe, R.L., Freeman, P. & Mattingly, P.P. (Eds.), Handbooksfortheidentification ofBritish insects, vol. 9, part2. 216pp. Royal Entomological Society of London, London. Cranston, P.S. 1975. Corrections and additions to the list ofBritish Chironomidae (Diptera). Entomologist's Monthly Magazine, 110: 87-95. Edwards, F.W. 1929. British non-biting midges (Diptera, Chironomidae). Transactions ofthe Royal Entomological Society ofLondon, 11: 279-430. Edwards,F.W. 1932a. Recentliterature. FaunedeFrance: 23. Dipteres: Chironomidae, IV. Par M. Goetghebuer. Paris (Lechevalier), 1932. The Entomologist, 65: 140-141. Edwards,F.W. 1932b. Thefemale ofSpaniotoma (Orihocladius)ftexuella Edw. TheEntomolo- gist, 65: 167. Evenhuis, N.L. 1997. Litteratura taxonomica dipterorum (1758-1930), 2 vols. 10, 871 pp. Backhuys, Leiden. Freeman,P. 1953. Chironomidae(Diptera)fromWesternCapeprovince-I. Proceedingsofthe Royal Entomological Society ofLondon, 22: 127-135. Freeman, P. & Cranston, P.S. 1980. Family Chironomidae. Pp. 175-202 in Crosskey, R.W. (Ed.), Catalogue of the Diptera of the Afrotropical Region. 1437 pp. British Museum (Natural History), London. Goetghebuer, M. 1921. Chironomides de Belgique et specialement de la zone des Flandres. Memoires du Musee royald'histoire naturelle de Belgique, 8(4): 1-211. Goetghebuer, M. 1932. Dipteres (Nematoceres), Chironomidae IV. Orthocladiinae, Corynon- eurinae, Clunioninae, Diamesinae. Faune de France, 23: 1-204. Goetghebuer, M. 1940-1950. Tendipedidae (Chironomidae). SubfamiHe Orthocladiinae. A. Die Imagines. In Lindner, E. (Ed.), Die Fliegen derpalaearktischen Region, vol. 3, family 13g. 208 pp., 24 pis. E. Schweizerbart, Stuttgart. Hennig,W. 1950. DieLarvenformenderDipteren,vol. 2. vii,458 pp., 10pis. Akademie-Verlag, Berlin. Langton, P.H. 1991. A key topupal exuviae of West Palaearctic Chironomidae. 386 pp. P.H. Langton, Huntingdon, U.K. Laurence,B.R. 1951. OntwoneglectedtypedesignationsinthegenusHydrobaenusFries, 1830. Entomologist's Monthly Magazine, 86: 164—165. Oliver, D.R., Dillon, M.E. & Cranston, P.S. 1990. A catalog ofNearctic Chironomidae. 89 pp. Agriculture Canada Research Branch, Publication 1857/B. Roque,F.O.,Trivinho-Strixino,S.,Yamada,M.V.& Penteado-Dias, A.M. 2003. Apreliminary survey ofChironomidae(Insecta: Diptera) in a heterogeneous landscape ofJaragua State Park, Sao Paulo, Brazil. Biotemas, 16: 67-78. Saether, O.A. 1986 ('1985"). The imagines ofMesosmittia Brundin, 1956, with the description ofseven new species (Diptera, Chironomidae). Spixiana Supplement, 11: 37-54. Saether, O.A. & Andersen,T. 1996. First Afrotropical records ofthe genera DoithrixSaetheret Sublette and Georthocladius Strenzke {Toyamayusurika Sasa et Kawai, syn. nov.) 126 Bulletin ofZoological Nomenclature 63(2) June 2006 (Diptera: Chironomidae), with new combinations in the Pseudorthocladius group. Tijdschrift voor Entomologie, 139: 243-256. Sather, O.A., Ashe, P. & Murray, D.A. 2000. Family Chironomidae. Pp. 113-334 in Papp, L. & Darvas, B. (Eds.), Contributions to a manual of Palaearctic Diptera (with special reference to theflies ofeconomic importance). Appendix vol. 604 pp. Science Herald, Budapest. Saether, O.A. & Sublette, J.E. 1983. A review of the genera Doithrix n. gen., Georthocladius Strenzke, Parachaetocladius Walker, and Pseudorthocladius Goetghebuer (Diptera: Chironomidae, Orthocladiinae). Entomologica scandinavica Supplement, 20: 1-100. Spies, M. & Reiss, F. 1996. Catalog and bibliography ofNeotropical and Mexican Chirono- midae (Insecta, Diptera). Spixiana Supplement, 11: 61-119. Spies, M. & Ssther, O.A. 2004. Notes and recommendations on taxonomy and nomenclature ofChironomidae (Diptera). Zootaxa, 751: 1-90. Strenzke, K. 1950. Systematik, Morphologic und Okologie der terrestrischen Chironomiden. Archivfur Hydrobiologie, Supplement-Band, 18: 207^14. Thienemann,A. 1944. Bestimmungstabellenfiirdiebisjetzt bekannten Larven und Puppender Orthocladiinen (Diptera, Chironomidae). Archivfiir Hydrobiologie, 39: 551-664. Thienemann, A. 1954. Chironomus. Leben, Verbreitung und wirtschaftliche Bedeutung der Chironomiden. Die Binnengewdsser, 20: 1-834. Thienemann, A. & Kriiger, F. 1939. Terrestrische Chironomiden. II. Zoologischer Anzeiger, 111: 246-258. Wiederholm, T. (Ed.). 1983. Chironomidae ofthe Holarctic region. Keys and diagnoses. Part 1. Larvae. Entomologica scandinavica Supplement, 19: 1^57. Wiederholm, T. (Ed.). 1986. Chironomidae ofthe Holarctic region. Keys and diagnoses. Part 2. Pupae. Entomologica scandinavica Supplement, 28: 1^82. Wiederholm, T. (Ed.). 1989. Chironomidae ofthe Holarctic region. Keys and diagnoses. Part 3. Adult males. Entomologica scandinavica Supplement, 34: 1-532. Acknowledgement ofreceipt ofthis application was published in BZN 62: 58. Comments on this case are invited for publication (subject to editing) in the Bulletin; they should be sent to the Executive Secretary, I.C.Z.N., c/o Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, U.K. (e-mail: iczn(gnhm.ac.uk).