Rhytidodeira Laurent 1985b: 7 Liolaemus Cei 1986: 187 Etheridge 1995: 32 Etheridge & Espinoza 2000: 5 Donosolaemus Pincheira-Donoso & Núñez 2005: 59 Liolaemus archeforus Donoso-Barros & Cei 1971 archeforus kingii Liolaemus A monographic catalogue on the systematics and phylogeny of the South American iguanian lizard family Liolaemidae (Squamata, Iguania) Pincheira-Donoso, Daniel Scolaro, J. Alejandro Sura, Piotr Zootaxa 2008 2008-06-16 1800 1 85 Pincheira-Donoso & Nunez Pincheira-Donoso & Nunez 2005 [279,807,1250,1276] Reptilia Liolaemidae Liolaemus Animalia Squamata 33 34 Chordata subGenus Donosolaemus      Rhytidodeira Laurent 1985b: 7(invalid designation; see below).     Liolaemus Cei 1986: 187;  Etheridge 1995: 32;  Etheridge & Espinoza 2000: 5.     Donosolaemus Pincheira-Donoso & Núñez 2005: 59( typespecies:  Liolaemus archeforus Donoso-Barros & Cei 1971). This group of patagonian lizards, commonly recognized as archeforus-kingiigroup (see Scolaro & Cei 1997; Pincheira-Donoso & Núñez 2005), has a controversial and complex nomenclatural and systematic history. Over the last few decades, some authors have identified a series of phenotypic traits observed in a unique combination in these species ( Laurent 1985b; Cei 1986; Scolaro & Cei 1997; Pincheira-Donoso & Núñez 2005). Interestingly, recent phylogenetic hypotheses based on both molecular and morphological variables have also suggested that lizards belonging to the groups  archeforusand  kingiiwould represent a monophyletic clade within the genus  Liolaemus( e.g. Schulte et al.2000; Espinoza et al.2004).  The first explicit proposal suggesting that the groups  archeforusand  kingiishould be formally placed in a separate lineage was provided by Laurent (1985b), who resurrected the genus  Rhytidodeiraestablished long before by Girard (1858a)for a series of  Liolaemusspecies ( Etheridge 1995). Laurent (1985b)designated  Liolaemus kingii(Bell)as the typespecies for this genus, in which also included  L. archeforusand  L. ruizleali(see Donoso-Barros & Cei 1971), this last taxon conspecific to  L. rothi( Cei & Scolaro 1987; see also Etheridge & Espinoza 2000) and belonging to the unrelated clade  fitzingerii( Schulte et al.2000; PincheiraDonoso et al.2007a; Fig. 4). However, Etheridge (1995)returned  Rhytidodeirato the synonymy of the  Liolaemusgenus, arguing that “  Liolaemus kingiiand  L. archeforushave all of the synapomorphies that diagnose  Liolaemus, and, according to Laurent (1985b), differ from other  Liolaemusin being "primitive." No derived characters are known to unite  L. kingiiand  L. archeforus, the species assigned to  Rhytidodeiraby Laurent (1985)”. More recently, Pincheira-Donoso & Núñez (2005)studied a large subset of exomorphological, anatomical and biogeographical characteristics of the groups  archeforusand  kingii, and concluded that they should be placed in a separate lineage, in agreement with Laurent (1985b). Nevertheless, in contrast to Laurent’s (1985b)opinion, these authors suggested that the subgenus  Rhytidodeiramay not be valid for  L. kingiiand for the remaining species belonging to the  archeforusand  kingiigroups, because in a previous study Donoso-Barros (1970b)had already designated  Liolaemus bibroniias the typetaxon for  Rhytidodeira, a species belonging to the  Liolaemussubgenus (or  chiliensisclade; see above). According to the article 69.1 of the International Code for Zoological Nomenclature (2000), if an author establishes a genus or subgenus with no official designation of a typespecies, the first later explicit designation of a typespecies from one of the taxa originally included as members of that genus or subgenus is the only valid typespecies for that genus or subgenus, and any other typespecies designated later is not valid. Consequently, the only valid typespecies for  Rhytidodeirais  Liolaemus bibronii(included in this genus by Girard 1858a, as  Proctotretus bibronii). Since  Rhytidodeirais therefore a synonym of the subgenus  Liolaemus, Pincheira-Donoso & Núñez (2005)proposed for the species belonging to the groups  archeforusand  kingii(see Scolaro & Cei 1997) the subgenus  Donosolaemus. These authors designated  Liolaemus archeforusDonoso-Barros & Ceias the typespecies for  Donosolaemus, in which also included  L. bagualiCei & Scolaro,  L. escarchadosiScolaro & Cei,  L. gallardoiCei & Scolaro,  L. kingii(Bell),  L. sarmientoiDonoso-Barros,  L. scolaroiPincheira-Donoso & Núñez,  L. somuncuraeCei & Scolaro,  L. tariScolaro & Cei,  L. tristisScolaro & Cei, and  L. zullyiCei & Scolaro(it was also recently included in this lineage the species  L. uptoni Scolaro & Cei 2006; see below). Due to these nomenclatural aspects established in the International Code for Zoological Nomenclature, the valid subgeneric name for these Patagonian  Liolaemuslizards is  Donosolaemus.