Hypselodoris Stimpson, 1855

Johnson Aângel Valdeâs, Rebecca F., 2001, complex (Mollusca, Nudibranchia, Chromodorididae), with remarks the genus Brachychlanis Ehrenberg, 1831, Journal of Natural History 35 (9), pp. 1371-1398 : 1372-1373

Genus Hypselodoris Stimpson, 1855

Pterodoris Ehrenberg, 1831 . Type species: Pterodoris picturata Ehrenberg, 1831 , by subsequent designation by Gray (1847). Suppressed by Opinion 1375 (ICZN, 1986).

Brachychlanis Ehrenberg, 1831 . Type species: Brachychlanis pantherina Ehrenberg, 1831 , by monotypy, syn. nov. Nomen oblitum ( ICZN, 1999: Article 23.9.2).

Hypselodoris Stimpson, 1855: 389 . Type species: Goniodoris ? obscura Stimpson, 1855 , by monotypy. Nomen protectum ( ICZN, 1999: Article 23.9.2).

Felimare Ev. Marcus and Er. Marcus, 1967: 62 . Type species: Felimare bayeri Ev. Marcus and Er. Marcus, 1967 , by original designation.

Remarks

Ehrenberg (1831) described the monotypic genus Brachychlanis based on B. pantherina Ehrenberg, 1831 . The single specimen, which was damaged due to putrefaction, was collected from the Red Sea at Suez. Ehrenberg was unable to obtain further information from the preserved animal, besides the information he recorded in his original ®eld notes. Later, Herrmannsen (1852) regarded Brachychlanis as a synonym of Goniodoris Forbes and Goodsir, 1839 .

Stimpson (1855) introduced the genus Hypselodoris for Goniodoris ? obscura Stimpson, 1855 , with a short description. Since then the name Hypselodoris has gained universal acceptance and has been used for many members of the family Chromodorididae ( Bertsch, 1978; Rudman, 1984).

Bergh (1877b) revised the taxonomic status of Ehrenberg’s dorids, based on a re-examination of the type material and translations of Ehrenberg’s (1831) paper and original ®eld notes. Bergh interpreted that the holotype of B. pantherina was lost. However, he found one specimen labelled B. pantherina in the collection of the MHUB, which matched the original description as well as Ehrenberg’s manuscript notes, and considered this specimen to be the holotype of B. pantherina . Bergh (1877b) proposed an updated classi®cation for most of Ehrenberg’s taxa, but regarded several of them, including B. pantherina , as indeterminable forms.

Rudman (1983), in preparation for a review of the family Chromodorididae , again re-examined the type specimens of three of Ehrenberg’s species, Actinodoris sponsa Ehrenberg, 1831 , Pterodoris picturata Ehrenberg, 1831 and Glossodoris xantholeuca Ehrenberg, 1831 . They were supposed to be the type species of all the chromodorid genera described by Ehrenberg. Rudman (1983) asked the Commission of Zoological Nomenclature to suppress under plenary powers the genera Actinodoris Ehrenberg, 1831 and Pterodoris Ehrenberg, 1831 , senior synonyms of Chromodoris Alder and Hancock, 1855 and Hypselodoris Stimpson, 1855 , respectively, and to conserve the name Glossodoris Ehrenberg, 1831 . This conclusion was endorsed in Opinion 1375 (ICZN, 1986). Descriptions of the three holotypes were included in a later paper ( Rudman, 1984), but Rudman did not examine the type material of B. pantherina .

Our re-examination of the type material of B. pantherina showed that it is a synonym of Hypselodoris infucata (see below), and therefore the generic name Brachychlanis Ehrenberg, 1831 becomes a senior synonym of Hypselodoris Stimpson, 1855 . The replacement of Hypselodoris with Brachychlanis would certainly cause a great deal of nomenclatural confusion. Brachychlanis has not been used in the last 50 years, whereas Hypselodoris is in constant use and has been placed on the O cial List of Generic Names in Zoology. According to the new edition of the Internationa l Code of Zoological Nomenclature ( ICZN, 1999: Article 23.9.1), authors are required to not displace a name which has been used as valid by at least 10 authors in 25 publications during the past 50 years, by an earlier synonym which has not been used as valid since 1899. The name Brachychlanis (nomen oblitum) has not been used as valid for longer than 100 years, and its re-establishment would cause nomenclatural instability. This paper provides a list of more than 25 papers, by more than 10 authors, using the name Hypselodoris as valid. Therefore, the name Hypselodoris (nomen protectum) should be maintained as the valid name for this genus.