OPINION 2006 (Case 3171)
Cryphops Richter & Richter, 1926 (Trilobita): conserved
Keywords. Nomenclature; taxonomy; Trilobita; phacopoid
trilobites; PHACOPIDAE; Cryphops; Devonian.
(1) Under the plenary
power the generic name Gortania Cossmann, 1909 is hereby suppressed
for the purposes of the Principle of Priority but not for those of the Principle
(2) The name Cryphops
Richter & Richter, 1926 (gender: masculine), type species by original
designation Phacops cryptophthalmus Emmrich, 1844 is hereby placed
on the Official List of Generic Names in Zoology.
(3) The name cryptophthalmus
Emmrich, 1844, as published in the binomen Phacops cryptophthalmus
(specific name of the type species of Cryphops Richter & Richter,
1926) is hereby placed on the Official List of Specific Names in Zoology.
(4) The following
names are hereby placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic
Names in Zoology:
Cossmann, 1909, as suppressed in (1) above;
Gortani, 1907 (a junior homonym of Microphthalmus Mecznikow, 1865).
History of Case 3171
An application for
the conservation of the name Cryphops was received from Dr D.J. Holloway
(Museum Victoria, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia) and Dr K.S.W. Campbell
(Australian National University, Canberra, Australia) on 29 August 2000.
After correspondence the case was published in BZN 58: 97-99 (June
2001). The title, abstract and keywords of the case were published on the
Commission’s website. Additionally, as an experiment in the use of specialist
websites for handling applications to the Commission, the application was
placed on a specialist trilobite website (http://www.aloha.net/~smgon/ICZN3171.htm)
by courtesy of the webmaster, Dr Sam Gon III of the Nature Conservancy of
Hawaii, Honolulu, Hawaii. Comments were invited to be placed on the website
instead of the usual practice of publication in the Bulletin. Five comments
were received, three via the Secretariat and two direct to the website. A
note that comments on the case had been placed on the website was published
in BZN 58: 304 (December 2001), and further comments were invited.
Comments on Case 3171 placed on the trilobite
A summary of the comments is presented here because of the ephemeral nature
of the website on which these were originally published.
Four comments placed
on the website were in favour of the application and confirmed that the senior
name Gortania Cossmann, 1909 had not been used as a valid name since
its publication. H.B. Whittington (University of Cambridge, Cambridge,
U.K.) added that ‘to treat Cryphops Richter & Richter, 1926
as junior to the unused name Gortania Cossmann, 1909 would cause considerable
confusion and serve no useful purpose’. The other supportive comments were
from R. Thomas Becker (Museum für Naturkunde, 10115 Berlin, Germany),
Adrian Rushton (The Natural History Museum, London, U.K.) and S.M.
Gon III (Honolulu, Hawaii, U.S.A.). An opposing comment was received
from P. Bouchet (Muséum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris, France)
who, although accepting that the list of references ‘is not exhaustive’,
pointed out that the application gave only 11 references to works published
in the last 50 years that have used the name Cryphops, which was far
less than the 25 references requested by Article 23.9. He also pointed out
that Gortania Cossmann, 1909 is a senior homonym of Gortania
Rabbi, 1960 (Giornale di Geologia [Bologna], ser. 2, 28: 190).
Decision of the Commission
On 1 March 2002 the members of the Commission were invited to vote on the
proposals published in BZN 58: 98. At the close of the voting period on 1
June 2002 the votes were as follows:
Affirmative votes - 20: Bock, Böhme, Brothers, Calder, Cogger, Eschmeyer,
Evenhuis, Fortey, Halliday, Kraus, Macpherson, Mahnert, Martins de Souza,
Mawatari, Ng, Nielsen, Papp, Patterson, Rosenberg, Song
Negative votes - 7: Alonso-Zarazaga, Bouchet, Kerzhner, Lamas, Minelli, Štys,
No vote was received from Dupuis.
Brothers commented: ‘Although the strict application of numbers of references,
as pointed out by Bouchet in his comments, would seem not to justify the suppression
of Gortania Cossmann, 1909, such numbers must surely be tempered by
considerations of intensity of publication activity in the field concerned.
Although no information has been provided about Gortania Rabbi, 1960,
suppression of Gortania Cossmann, 1909 should apparently also clarify
the status of that name’. The status of Gortania Rabbi is not affected
by this ruling, since Gortania Cossmann is not suppressed for the
purposes of the Principle of Homonymy.
Patterson commented: ‘This case raises issues about the use of the web. I
applaud the use of the web, and urge that we promote it. I am concerned that
we may not receive with fidelity all views posted and believe that the opinions
should be taken into account only if the webmaster accepts an obligation
to return to the Secretariat all views expressed, leaving it to the Secretariat
to edit those. I am concerned that some of those commenting on the web may
have no access to the Code or to its interpretation’.
Voting against, Alonso-Zarazaga, Lamas, Štys and van Tol submitted comments
in agreement with those of Bouchet. However, Bouchet’s comment on the number
of references required refers to Article 23.9.1 of the Code, whereas this
application was referred to the Commission for a ruling under the plenary
power (Article 23.9.3), and there was no requirement for 25 references to
be presented to the Commission in support of this application.
are the original references to the names placed on Official Lists and an Official
Index by the ruling given in the present Opinion:
Richter & Richter, 1926, Abhandlungen der Preussischen geologischen
Landesanstalt, 99: 157.
Phacops, Emmrich, 1844, Zur Naturgeschichte der Trilobiten,
Cossmann, 1909, Revue critique de paléozoologie, 13:
Gortani, 1907, Memorie della Reale Accademia delle Scienze dell'Istituto
di Bologna, (6)4: 229.
NOTE: per agreement with ICZN staff,
this web publication of Opinion 2006 will be maintained for a period of one