Ectinogonia isamarae Moore, 1994
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.7887598 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:651D001D-1C91-4A1A-B8BE-335BC7E7DD0FA |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/A92E87EF-5E43-7D01-FF50-CD17FC0BFD6A |
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
scientific name |
Ectinogonia isamarae Moore |
status |
|
Ectinogonia isamarae Moore View in CoL , resurrected name
A recent paper ( Anguita-Salinas et al. 2019) provided molecular evidence refining the species concepts of a few species of Ectinogonia Spinola, 1837 . In that paper they provided evidence that the two recognized subspecies of E. speciosa (Germain, 1856) were not monophyletic and should be recognized as separate species. Ectinogonia obscuripennis Cobos, 1954 , was considered to be the valid name of one of the taxa (which Anguita-Salinas et al. consistently misspelled as E. “ oscuripennis ”). However, Cobos (1954: 65) actually proposed the name Ectinogonia buquetii speciosa var. obscuripennis , because his new varietal name was proposed under the subspecies E. b. speciosa . Thus, even though this has been recognized as a subspecies in subsequent works as E. speciosa obscuripennis (e.g., Bellamy 2008a: 834) prior to the Anguita-Salinas et al. paper, the name is clearly unavailable as a quadrinomial and infrasubspecific. Therefore, E. isamarae Moore (1994: 159) , considered a synonym of E. obscuripennis by Anguita-Salinas et al. (2019: 169), is the valid name for the species.
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |
|
Genus |
Kingdom |
|
Phylum |
|
Class |
|
Order |
|
Family |