CONCH-L Archives

Conchologists List

CONCH-L@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Marcus Coltro <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Conchologists List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 17 Mar 2011 08:37:01 -0300
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (57 lines)
Thanks Harry - and David!

Regards

Marcus

Marcus Coltro
WWW.FEMORALE.COM


From: Conchologists List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David Kirsh
Sent: Wednesday, March 16, 2011 10:49 PM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [CONCH-L] Miltha childreni

Posted on behalf of Harry Lee:


The "corrected" spelling, "Miltha childreni" as it appears in the errata and index of the The Zoological Journal is considered part
of the original description and is thus a "correct original spelling" under the provisions of The Code.

Your example is one of an "emendation" as defined in The Code. Emendations are either "justified" (legitimate; permitted) or
"unjustified" (illegitimate; not allowed). The distinction between the two is based on the idea position that the original spelling
of a species epithet such as "weyemberghii" [note the double i] must stand unless there is evidence in the published work itself
that the author's intention was inconsistent with that orthography.

Pilsbry (1901: 101), who incidentally committed an unjustified emendation by using only one "i" in the species epithet at the
beginning of his treatment, went on to write "The spelling "weyemberghii" was obviously a misprint for weyenburghii, the species
being named in honor of Dr. D.H. Weyenburgh ...."

As reasonable as that may seem, the argument, in and of itself, falls short of criteria for a "justified emendation" under the
provisions of The Code.

So we must study the original description (Doering, 1877: 239) to see if there is an indication in the original description
(including errata and index if either exists) to support Pilsbry's action.* Anybody have access to a copy?

* Not so simple: according to Pilsbry, "Kobelt (1878: 133)" was the first to employ this emendation, but Pilsbry apparently misread
the subtle (often mid-page) article titles in this journal; the paper was actually written by Doering (see below)! Regrettably he
provided no explanation for the emendation.

Döring, A., 1877 [“1875”]. Apuntes sobre la fauna de moluscos de la República Argentina (continuación). Periódico Zoológico 2:
219–259. [not seen]
Döring, A., 1878. Verzeichniss der im Laplatagebiete lebenden Binnenconchylien. Jahrbücher der Deutschen Malakozoologischen
Gesellschaft 5 (Funster Jahrgang): 130-142.
Available on-line at < http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/81336#page/147/mode/1up >
Pilsbry, H.A., 1901-2. Manual of Conchology (second series). 14. Oriental bulimoid Helicidae; Odontostominae; Cerioninae. Academy of
Natural Sciences, Philadelphia. [iv] + 1-302 + xcix + 62 pls. Jun. 7 to April. Available on-line at <
http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/76175#page/141/mode/1up >

----------------------------------------------------------------------
[log in to unmask] - a forum for informal discussions on molluscs
To leave this list, click on the following web link:
http://listserv.uga.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=conch-l&A=1
Type your email address and name in the appropriate box and
click leave the list.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

ATOM RSS1 RSS2