Scolopendra moojeni, Bucherl, 1943:22

Shelley, Rowland M., 2006, A chronological catalog of the New World species of Scolopendra L., 1758 (Chilopoda: Scolopendromorpha: Scolopendridae), Zootaxa 1253 (1), pp. 1-50 : 30

publication ID

https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.1253.1.1

DOI

https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15634151

persistent identifier

https://treatment.plazi.org/id/EF367556-FFCE-F601-FEAC-373FFCC0F8BF

treatment provided by

Felipe

scientific name

Scolopendra moojeni
status

 

moojeni Bücherl, 1943:22 View in CoL .

Holotype ( IBSP [ Chagas 2000]); type locality: Barra do Tapirapé, Mato Grosso, Brazil .

Original rank: subspecies of S. angulata Newport, 1844 . Current rank and status: subspecies of S. angulata Newport, 1844 ( Bücherl 1974, Chagas 2000).

Anatomical illustrations: none.

Distribution : Amazonas , Ceara, Goias, Mato Grosso, Roraima, São Paulo, & Tocantins Edos., Brazil ( Bücherl 1974). Maps : none.

Remarks : This taxon has a tortured history. Bücherl (1942 b) provided a detailed anatomical description of a supposedly new, nominate subspecies of S. angulata , which he erected for 9 specimens from Tapirapé; later that year, he ( Bücherl 1942 a) provided a second and brief account of the same “ Scolopendra angulata angulata , n. subsp. ” Apparently, he then realized that the nominate subspecies of any species automatically is that of the original author, in this case Newport (1844); consequently, he ( Bücherl 1943) proposed “ S. a. moojeni Bücherl, 1941,” in a short narrative for these same individuals as a replacement name for “ S. a. angulata n. subsp. ” However, as S. a. angulata can only be authored by Newport (1844), S. a. moojeni Bücherl must be dated 1943 instead of 1941, as there is no provision for “retroactive dating” in the Code. Subsequently, Bücherl (1974) and Chagas (2000) also incorrectly attributed S. a. moojeni to Bücherl (1941) rather than (1943). Exacerbating this confusion is the fact that both of the “1941" works are misdated and were actually published in 1942, as is clearly shown by the concluding statements “Entregue para publicação em 14 de janeiro de 1941 edado à publicidade em janeiro de 1942" ( Bücherl 1942 b) and “Entregue para publicação em junho de 1941 e dado à publicidade em janeiro de 1942" ( Bücherl 1942 a)! To the best of my knowledge, this tangle has not previously been unraveled.

GBIF Dataset (for parent article) Darwin Core Archive (for parent article) View in SIBiLS Plain XML RDF