Doweld • (2463) Conserve Pseudonitzschia
TAXON 65 (5) • October 2016: 1166
PR O P O S A L S TO CO N S E R V E O R R E J E C T N A M E S
Edited by John McNeill, Scott A. Redhead & John H. Wiersema
(2463) Proposal to conserve the name Pseudonitzschia (Algae:
Bacillariophycota), hyphenated when published, with that spelling
Alexander B. Doweld
National Institute of Carpology (Gaertnerian Institution), 21 Konenkowa Street, 127560 Moscow, Russian Federation;
[email protected]
DOI http://dx.doi.org/10.12705/655.17
(2463)Pseudonitzschia H. Perag. in Peragallo & Peragallo, Diatom.
Mar. France: 263. 1900 (‘Pseudo-Nitzschia’), orth. cons. prop.
Typus: P. seriata (Cleve) H. Perag.
When originally published, the name of the new genus of diatom algae, Pseudo-Nitzschia, included a hyphen (Peragallo & Peragallo, l.c. – for discussion of the date of publication, see below). The
generic name was typified on P. seriata by Fryxell & al. (in Diatom
Res. 6: 243. 1991). Being derived from Nitzschia Hassall (Hist. Brit.
Freshwater Alg. 1: 435. 1845), the generic name was initially spelled
correctly on page 263 and in the legend to plate 72, but on page 298,
in a later fascicle, was misspelled “Pseudo-Nitzchia”; the first and
correct version has prevalence in use. However, the hyphenated
spelling soon disappeared from use; perhaps, it was a logical step
towards simplification of lengthy names that a hyphen is not used
in classical botanical plant names when the standard Greek prefix
pseudo- [ψευδής] is used in combination with the stem of a generic
name (Stearn, Bot. Latin, ed. 4: 293. 1992): Pseudobryum (Kindb.)
T.J. Kop., Pseudocalyx Radlk., Pseudocapsa Erceg., etc. As such, the
dehyphenated form has entered widely into modern diatom literature
(Round & al., Diatoms: 699. 1990; Hasle in Beih. Nova Hedwigia
106: 316. 1993; Hallegraeff in Bot. Mar. 37: 397. 1994). This was in
accord with the established tradition of dehyphenated spelling in other
diatom genera: Pseudoamphiprora (Cleve) Cleve, Pseudoaulacosira
Lupikina & Khursevich, Pseudocerataulus Pant., Pseudodictyoneis
Cleve ex Pant., Pseudodimerogramma H.-J. Schrad., Pseudogomphonema Medlin – which were all proposed and used with no hyphen
1166
between the Greek prefix and the stem. However, there are also users
who strictly follow Peragallo’s initial spelling (Fourtanier & Kociolek
in Diatom Res. 14: 114. 1999; Skov & al. in ICES Ident. Leafl. Plankton
185: 5. 1999; in Seckbach & Kociolek, Diatom World: 593. 2011; etc.),
which is in accord with the current rules of ICN that do not allow the
omission of hyphens from generic names originally published with
a hyphen without a conservation procedure (see Art. 60 Note 3). In
order to maintain the established custom in modern systematic botany
of using generic names without their original hyphens, a formal proposal to conserve the name with the commonly used dehyphenated
spelling is presented here.
The famous work of Peragallo brothers, Diatomées marines de
France, was originally published in numerous, irregularly issued
fascicles from 1897–1908, the precise dates of publication of which
remained unknown (see TL-2) due to the strange almost complete
lack of their registration and review in contemporary botanical and
bibliographical serials (e.g., Bibliographie de la France, Naturae
Novitates, etc.). In addition to the indefinite range of dates 1899–Apr
1901, listed in TL-2 (Stafleu & Cowan in Regnum Veg. 110. 1983) for
the second part of the book, entitled Pseudo-Raphidées, I could find
only indirect reference that Fascicle 20 of Diatomées marines de
France (pp. 256?–268), in which Pseudo-Nitzschia was originally
published, must have been published in 1900, since the next Fascicle
21, containing the following pages 269–281, was originally published in January–February 1901 (vide Naturae Novitates 23: 147. Feb
1901).
Version of Record