Listers--
Would the emendation of demani to demanorum be formalized with the first published review of the taxon?  If that reviewer decides not to amend it, can it still be emended later?

Allen Aigen
[log in to unmask]

-- Riccardo  Giannuzzi-Savelli <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
I fully agree with Marco statement. In my opinion the name should be emended.
Ciao from Italy

Riccardo Giannuzzi-Savelli




>Sorry Marien, probably my bad English failed to make my thinking clear.
>But your example of Reeve is perfect, except for the conclusion.
>There is not a single way to latinize a name. One can latinize Reeve
>in "Reevius" (root = reevi-") and then properly have Conus reevii.
>Other can latinize Reeve in "Reeveus" (root reeve-") and then we
>have, Larus reevei. Fianlly the latinization in "Reeveius" is also
>possible and one can have a Murex reeveii.
>All are correct, because latinization is not ruled by strict rules.
>The use of the latinized roots is instead ruled by Latin Grammar.
>The error or demani vs demanorum (it is a grammatical error,
>inadvertent or voluntary, it remains an error) is the same as if
>one described a Conus alba, stating that is was for its white
>colour. Any person coming across such name would correct it into the
>correct Conus albus. Error in gender or in number would be treated
>in the same way: emendation.
>
>Cheers
>
>=========================================================
>Marco Oliverio - Evolutionary Biology PhD
>Research Scientist
>
>Dipartimento di Biologia Animale e dell'Uomo
>Viale dell'Universita' 32
>I-00185 Roma   ITALY
>
>phone  +39.06.49914307
>FAX    +39.06.4958259
>e-mail: [log in to unmask]