taxonID	type	description	language	source
03A38D7FFFCFFFDF9851EF05FC4D91B5.taxon	description	Unavailable Names. The lack of synthesis and attention to detail in Soula’ s guides resulted in some names that were not validly described. These names appeared in diagnoses, comparisons, keys, discussions, or indices. The name “ Mecopelidnota willersi ” (Soula 2008) was discussed in the context of comparisons with other species of Mecopelidnota F. Bates. The name “ Pelidnota vladislavmalyi ” (Soula 2010 a) appeared only within an index. The name “ Epichalcoplethis vazdemelli ” (Soula 2006) appeared only in a figure legend that compares male genitalia of other Epichalcoplethis species. The name “ Sorocha damasoi satipoensis ” (Soula 2006) appeared only in an index. The name “ Pelidnota demergesi ” (Soula 2010 a) appeared in a figure legend that compares lateral habitus photos of holotype specimens of other Pelidnota species in the “ granulata - group ”. The names “ Mecopelidnota willersi ”, “ Epichalcoplethis vazdemelli ”, “ Pelidnota demergesi ”, “ Sorocha damasoi satipoensis ”, and “ Pelidnota vladislavmalyi ” have never been associated with species descriptions, thus they are unavailable names (ICZN Article 13.1.1). One unavailable name is currently in use in the genus Chrysina. The name Chrysina henrybatesi Hawks, 2001 is listed as a synonym of Chrysina macropus (Francillon, 1795) in the popular internet synopsis for the genus Chrysina (including catalog and species pages) (Hawks 2001 b; Thomas et al. 2006). The name Chrysina henrybatesi Hawks was not included in the published version of Hawks’ synopsis of the genus, wherein he synonymized the genus Plusiotis with Chrysina, provided a list of species in the genus, and clarified the classification and nomenclature in the genus (Hawks 2001 a). Because of the synonymy of Plusiotis with Chrysina, two names were in danger of homonymy: Chrysina macropus var. mniszechi H. W. Bates, 1888 and Plusiotis mnizechii Boucard, 1875. Both species were named in honor of George Vandalin Mniszech, a well-known coleopterist from Paris who lived from 1824 to 1888. The original spellings of Bates’ and Boucard’ s names differ by inclusion (Bates 1888) or omission (Boucard 1875) of the “ s ”. Because the original, valid spelling of Boucard’ s name omitted the “ s ”, these names are not homonyms, and the replacement name Chrysina henrybatesi is not needed. The name Chrysina henrybatesi has never been published with a formal explanation. Because the name does not conform to the ICZN (Article 13.1.3), we regard this name as a nomen nudum and an unavailable name. Umlauts. According to ICZN Article 32.5.2.1, names published before 1985 based on a German word with an umlaut should have the umlaut deleted from the vowel and the letter “ e ” placed after the vowel. Plusiotis türckheimi Ohaus, 1913 was subsequently spelled as P. tuerckheimi by Machatschke (1972). Plusiotis was placed in synonymy with Chrysina by Hawks (2001 a), who subsequently misspelled the name as Chrysina turckheimi. Ohaus (1913) stated that the specific epithet türckheimi was used to honor the collector of the species, Herrn von Türckheim-Baden. Hans Freiherr von Türckheim was a German lawyer and naturalist active in Guatemala in the late 19 th century and who is most known for his botanical collections (Kneucker 1922). The specific epithet türckheimi is unambiguously based on a German word or name. The different spellings of türckheimi were not explicitly stated to be emendations and should be considered incorrect subsequent spellings (ICZN Article 33.5). The spelling of the species name is corrected herein to Chrysina tuerckheimi (ICZN Article 32.5.2.1). Incorrect Subsequent Spellings. Wi t h i n t h e pelidnotine scarabs, a few specific epithets are commonly misspelled. These names are presented in catalog format below with the valid, correctly spelled name first. These historical spelling changes should be considered incorrect subsequent spellings. None of the cited authors made a statement of intention or purpose when changing the original spellings (ICZN Article 33.2.1). We propose a justified emendation for the name Chalcoplethis kirbyi misionesensis Soula, 2010. The correct original spelling of the specific epithet kirbyi is kirbii (see catalog entry below). This name should be emended to Chalcoplethis kirbii misionesensis Soula.	en	Moore, Matthew Robert, Jameson, Mary Liz (2013): Taxonomic and Nomenclatural Changes in the Pelidnotine Scarabs (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Rutelinae: Rutelini). The Coleopterists Bulletin 67 (3): 377-387, DOI: 10.1649/0010-065x-67.3.377, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1649/0010-065x-67.3.377
03A38D7FFFCFFFDF9851EF05FC4D91B5.taxon	description	Similarly, the name Parhoplognathus parvulus var. rubripennis (Ohaus, 1930) was unambiguously infrasubspecific based on the content of Ohaus (1930), wherein he described both subspecies and varieties. Subsequent usage of this name (Ohaus 1934) referred to it in an infrasubspecific manner (var. rubripennis) and the name remains unavailable. Machatschke (1972) referred to this name as a “ forma ”, thus establishing another unavailable name (Article 45.6.3). However, Soula (2006) elevated Parhoplognathus rubripennis to species status and attributed the name to Ohaus (1930). Because Parhoplognathus parvulus var. rubripennis Ohaus was an unavailable name, Soula (2006) should be considered the author of this name: P. rubripennis Soula, 2006 (Article 45.5.1). Krajcik (2007), not acknowledging Soula’ s work, synonymized P. parvulus var. rubripennis with Parhoplognathus parvulus (Ohaus). The varieties of Pelidnota cuprea (Germar, 1824) named by Ohaus (1913) are also unavailable names. Based on the content of Ohaus (1913), wherein he described both subspecies and varieties, the names Pelidnota (Odontognathus) cuprea var. coerulea Ohaus, Pelidnota (Odontognathus) cuprea var. rufoviolacea Ohaus, and Pelidnota (Odontognathus) cuprea var. nigrocoerulea Ohaus are unambiguously infrasubspecific. Ohaus (1918) transferred P. cuprea into the subgenus Pelidnota (Ganonota) and maintained the varieties of P. cuprea that he named in 1913. Under ICZN Article 45.5.1, this change created a new set of unavailable variety names by Ohaus (1918): Pelidnota (Ganonota) cuprea var. coerulea Ohaus, Pelidonota (Ganonota) cuprea var. rufoviolacea, and Pelidnota (Ganonota) cuprea var. nigrocoerulea Ohaus. Ohaus (1918) also established a new combination and new status of an available name, Rutela fulvipennis Germar, as a variety of P. cuprea: Pelidnota (Ganonota) cuprea var. fulvipennis (Germar). Machatschke (1972) synonymized the subgenus Pelidnota (Ganonota) with Pelidnota (Strigidia). Machatschke (1972) created another set of unavailable names by synonymizing these subgenera and applying a new status to the varieties of Ohaus: Pelidnota (Strigidia) cuprea forma coerulea Machatschke, Pelidnota (Strigidia) cuprea forma rufoviolacea Machatschke, and Pelidnota (Strigidia) cuprea forma nigrocoerulea Machatschke (ICZN Article 45.5.1). Soula (2006) treated the species Strigidia cuprea (Germar) but did not address the varieties of cuprea. Krajcik (2007) did not address the cuprea varieties of Ohaus (1913) but synonymized Rutela fulvipennis Germar with Pelidnota cuprea (Germar). An infrasubspecific name that was published prior to 1961 is deemed to be subspecific from its original publication if it was adopted as a valid name of a species or subspecies before 1985 (ICZN Article 45.6.4; 45.6.4.1). One pelidnotine name proposed by Ohaus should be treated in this manner. Ohaus (1913) described new species, subspecies, and varieties of Homonyx Guérin. In this publication (Ohaus 1913), he described Homonyx chalceus ssp. uruguayanus, Homonyx chalceus ssp. santiagensis, and Homonyx chalceus var. fuscocupreus. In the context of this publication, it is unambiguous that Homonyx chalceus var. fuscocupreus is infrasubspecific and should be interpreted in this manner. Later publications appropriately treated the taxon as a subspecies (Homonyx chalceus fuscocupreus), thus within the purview of the code (ICZN Article 45.6.4.1). Homonyx fuscocupreus was later elevated to species status (Soula 2011). Pelidnotine Scarab Genera sensu Soula. Many of Soula’ s descriptions of new genera within the Rutelini lack information regarding higher-level classification (e. g., Patatra, Pachacama Soula, Homeochlorota Soula). Each of his volumes included a mix of many genera from formerly accepted subtribes (pelidnotine, anticheirine) or accepted subtribes (Areodina, Lasiocalina), and they were not arranged in a systematic fashion. Thus, Soula’ s tribal classification within the Rutelinae was not clear. Soula’ s most recent publication (2011) provided a tribal and subtribal classification within Rutelinae. Although he recognized that the classification was not based on monophyly (“ La plupart des taxon supreagénériques, n’ étant pas monophylétiques … ” [Soula 2011: 3]), he maintained the classification pending further research. His list of Rutelinae omitted the tribes Alvarengiini and Adoretini, and it included subtribes that are not currently recognized (e. g., Anticheirina, Pelidnotina) (Bouchard et al. 2011; Smith 2006 a). Nonetheless, this publication (Soula 2011) aids in placement of some genera within the pelidnotine scarabs sensu Soula. This list contradicted some information in his previous publications, for example, the classification of Minilasiocala in the lasiocaline scarabs versus the pelidnotine scarabs (Soula 2006). In addition, the list is internally contradictory. For example, the genera Pseudochlorota Ohaus and Lasiocala are classified as both pelidnotines and lasiocalines (Soula 2011). We include two genera that are omitted from Soula’ s list and that formerly were included in the subtribe Pelidnotina, Oogenius Solier and Eremophygus Ohaus. Because Soula provided no characters or justification for his higher classification, we follow the classification of Bouchard et al. (2011). Thus, the pelidnotine scarabs sensu Soula (a non-monophyletic group) includes 25 genera:	en	Moore, Matthew Robert, Jameson, Mary Liz (2013): Taxonomic and Nomenclatural Changes in the Pelidnotine Scarabs (Coleoptera: Scarabaeidae: Rutelinae: Rutelini). The Coleopterists Bulletin 67 (3): 377-387, DOI: 10.1649/0010-065x-67.3.377, URL: http://dx.doi.org/10.1649/0010-065x-67.3.377
