English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Mulsant & Rey (1866a: 22) proposed the subgenus Olotelus for four species of the genus Xylophilus Latreille, 1829 (now a synonym of Aderus Stephens, 1829), namely, X. punctiger Mulsant & Rey, 1866 (now a synonym of Cobososia pallescens (Wollaston, 1854), X. pruinosus Kiesenwetter, 1861, X. flaveolus Mulsant & Rey, 1866 and X. neglectus Jacquelin du Val, 1863. They neither designated a type species nor noticed that their new taxon was a homonym of the genus Olotelus Solier, 1851 (Coleoptera, Tenebrionidae). The name is an incorrect latinization of the Greek adjective holotele-s, meaning “quite complete” (Schenkling, 1917). They repeated the description (Mulsant & Rey, 1866b: 110) in the journal version of their book. However, it is not clear which of the two versions has the precedence. Mroczkowski (1987: 139) created the replacement name Otolelus for Olotelus Mulsant & Rey, but he did not designate a type species, thus failing to fulfill the requirements of the article of the Code then in force (3 Edition) equivalent to article 13.3.1 in the present Code (ICZN, 1999). In consequence, Otolelus Mroczkowski, 1987 is an unavailable name. Even so, it has been used by some authors (Nardi & Mifsud, 2000; Gompel & Barrau, 2002). Klinger (2000: 275) made use of the unavailable name Otolelus Mroczkowski and designated a type species for it: Xylophilus pruinosus Kiesenwetter, 1861. However, this action is contrary to the Code, since an unavailable name cannot have a type species by subsequent designation, only available names described before 1931 can have it. Article 67.8 only allows the designation of a type species for a genus published before 1931 without it, through a new replacement name in the same work where the replacement name is being proposed. Klinger (l.c.) did not propose a new replacement name, he was using Otolelus Mroczkowski, which is unavailable, as shown above. Some authors (v.g. Nardi, 2001: 163) have assigned the authorship of the nominal genus Otolelus to Klinger, but this author never indicated that he was proposing a new name, failing thus to fulfill the requirements of the Art. 16.1 of the Code for new taxa proposed after 1999. The name could have been made available by Klinger one year before, under the 3 Edition of the Code, which did not request the explicitness of the intention to establish new taxon. “Otolelus Klinger, 2000”, as used by Nardi (2001) or, even more unfortunately, by Nardi (2008), and others, simply does not exist, it is an invention, but Nardi (2007: 25) failed to recognize this. The nomenclatural situation now, therefore, is exactly the same as that before Mroczkowski’s unsuccesful intent to create a replacement name. Olotelus Mulsant & Rey is still the only available generic name for this group of species and still has no validly designated type species. To remedy this, I propose here the following replacement name:

<i>Gompelia</i>, a replacement name for <i>Olotelus</i> Mulsant & Rey, 1866 (Coleoptera, Aderidae)