| Memo: |
Hemming (1967) stated:-
The name Neomaniola was introduced as a replacement for Pseudomaniola Weymer, 1890, in the belief that it was invalid, as a junior homonym of Pseudomaniola Röber, which he erroneously believed was published in 1889. Actually, that name was not published by Röber until 1892. Thus, it is Pseudomaniola Röber and not Pseudomaniola Weymer which is the junior of these two homonyms. Thus, the replacement name Neomaniola Hayward is invalid as a junior objective synonym of Pseudomaniola Weymer, 1890.
Cowan (1968: 13) stated:-
NEOMANIOLA & type-species print Bold (valid).
Cowan (1968: 16,17) stated:-
Two widely different genera of Neotropical Satyridae compete for the four interlocking names Pseudomaniola Röber, 1889 (nec 1892), Pseudomaniola Weymer, 1890, Catargynnis Röber, 1892, and Neomaniola Hayward, 1949. Hemming's List [Hemming, 1967] gives the references and type-species of each correctly, but dates the first name "1892" although Trophonina, described by Röber on the same page in 1889, is given its correct date.
Consequently, and also through misreading Röber's explanatory note when proposing Catargynnis, Hemming's historical remarks are at fault.
What actually happened was that Röber and Weymer independently proposed the same name Pseudomaniola for two quite different genera, Weymer being the later. Then, in 1892, when ending the concluding part of his book, Röber explained exactly what had happened and added that, to preserve Weymer's genus, he would rename his own as Catargynnis. This well-intentioned act, even to him as First Reviser, was ultra vires.
Unfortunately Röber's wishes were respected by succeeding writers, notably Weymer himself in Seitz (Grschm. Erde 5 : 268), and so Pseudomaniola Weymer (the junior homonym) and Catargynnis Röber (a junior objective synonym) became widely used.
This mispractice was ended by Hayward in 1949, when he reinstated Pseudomaniola Röber and replaced Weymer's homonym by Neomaniola.
So in the List [Hemming, 1967], Pseudomaniola Röber, 1889 (nec 1892), and Neomaniola Hayward, 1949 should be shown, with their type-species, as both available and valid; and Pseudomaniola Weymer, 1890 and Catargynnis Röber should be shown as invalid.
The higher classification used here follows Lamas (2008).
|
|