| Memo: |
Hemming (1967) stated:-
As pointed out by myself in 1934 (Stylops 3 : 144) the name Lingamius was introduced by Bryk in an extremely unsatisfactory manner. The name Lingamius was used by Bryk twice in 1932, first in January (Parnassiana 2 (1) : 1) and second in March (ibidem. 2 (2) : 20), being applied on the first of these occasions to Parnassius hardwickii Gray, 1831, and on the second, to Parnassius cephalus Grum.-Grshimaïlo, 1892. On neither of these occasions did Bryk provide a generic diagnosis or designate a type-species. Both of these requirements constitute an essential condition for availability under Article 13 (b) in the case of a generic name published after 1930. Accordingly, neither of the above usages constitutes a valid publication of the name Lingamius. The next occasion on which this name was used, again by Bryk, was in December 1934 (loc. cit. 3 (3) : 43). On this occasion Bryk did designate a type-species (Parnassius hardwickii Gray) but failed to provide a generic diagnosis. On this latter account this usage of name Lingamius fails under the provision of the Code cited above to constitute a valid publication of this name.
The first occasion on which the name Lingamius appeared in print with both a generic diagnosis and a designated type-species was in 1935 when it was so used by Bryk in Leiferung 65 of the publication Das Thierreich. Bryk did not treat the name Lingamius, as here published, as a new name, obstinately referring this name to the earlier usages discussed above, although he was aware (from correspondence with myself - that under the decision by the Budapest Congress of 1927 (now embodied in the provision of the Code cited above) none of those usages constituted a valid publication of this generic name. However, in his treatment of this name in Das Thierreich in 1935 Bryk complied (though, as it were, inadvertently) with all the requirements of the Budapest Congress, and the name Lingamius so published accordingly acquired at last the status of availability under the Code.
[Cowan (1968: 13) stated:-
LINGAMIUS, last line; "myself - that" should read; "myself) that".
The higher classification used here follows Lamas (2008).
|
|