[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]
Re: Leviathan melvillei -- preoccupied?
K and T Dykes <email@example.com> wrote:
> Hang on. If the preoccupation is a junior synonym,
> then isn't that usage rendered irrelevant and, therefore,
> the name would be available for valid use?
Once a genus is named, it's named for good. A genus name is still regarded as
a preoccupied name (homonym) even when the genus is later deemed to be a junior
synonym (either objective or subjective) of another genus.
For example, the beetle genus _Syntarsus_ Fairmaire 1869 is now regarded as a
junior objective synonym of another beetle genus (_Cerchanotus_). As such, it
is high unlikely that the name _Syntarsus_ will ever be used as a valid genus
of beetle. _Syntarsus_ Fairmaire will probably be forever sunk into
However, _Syntarsus_ is still unavailable as a name for the dinosaur that was
named later: _Syntarsus_ Raath 1969. _Syntarsus_ Fairmaire is a senior homonym
of _Syntarsus_ Raath, irrespective of the former's taxonomic status. So the
latter had to be re-named (_Megapnosaurus_, as it turned out).