>Andrew, Harry, or...
>If a valid name is reduced to a SUBJECTIVE junior synonym in a
>proper publication, is it no longer a valid name?  Does it need to
>have a formal re-review, placing it back as a valid species before
>it can be considered valid?
>
>Allen Aigen
>[log in to unmask]

My boss, a vertebrate paleontologist, almost froths at the mouth when
"valid" is used specifically for in-use names as opposed to available
names. Any name which is correctly introduced is a valid name; this
includes available names. Available synonyms are valid and remain in
the background in case there proves to be something wrong with the
accepted name, which may turn out to be a nomen nudumor a homonym...
a recent case is NZ's Otukaia blacki (Dell 1956). As Otukaia is a
synonym of Fautor, and Fautor is a subgenus (ie a synonym) of
Calliostoma, then Dell's name is a homonym of Calliostoma (Maurea)
blacki (Powell 1950) and was replaced by Calliostoma (Fautor) alertae
Marshall 1995.

  The only other group is invalid names (nomina dubia, nomina nuda,
nonbinomial names), which are not usable.

I am unsure about nomina dubia, but if it cannot be shown that these
are valid, they should be listed as invalid. Two such are Antalis and
Tiostrea, neither of which are described as having any specific
characters.

Speaking of names, some may have NZ specimens described by Finlay as
supposedly 1927; in fact all of the species in this paper should be
dated 1926, as the reprints were available in that year.
--
Andrew Grebneff
Dunedin, New Zealand
64 (3) 473-8863
<[log in to unmask]>
Fossil preparator
Seashell, Macintosh & VW/Toyota van nut
_________________________
I want your sinistral gastropods!
_________________________
Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation.
A: Why is top posting frowned upon?