On the family- and genus-series nomina in Gyrinidae Latreille, 1810 (Coleoptera, Adephaga) Gustafson, Grey T. Miller, Kelly B. Zootaxa 2013 3731 1 77 105 Dejean, 1833 Dejean 1833 [151,427,151,176] Insecta Gyrinidae Epinectus GBIF Animalia Coleoptera 20 97 Arthropoda genus  The name  Epinectuswas first published by Dejean (1833), attributed to an unpublished work by Eschcholtz, to which it was also attributed by later authors (Aubé 1838; Regimbart 1877; Balfour-Browne 1945). Dejean’s (1833) catalogue did not include any descriptions, only a list of nomina, and for this reason Balfour-Browne (1945) believed that  EpinectusEschcholtzshould be considered a nomen nudumfollowing Opinion 1 of the ICZN (1944). Balfour-Browne (1945) then suggested that Aubé (1836) made the nomen available by listing it as a synonym associated with a description. However, Dejean’s (1833) lack of description is not what made  Epinectusa nomen nudumat that time according to the current Code. Dejean’s (1833) work often indicated valid species nomina according to Article 12.2.5. In the case of  Epinectus,the indication Dejean (1833) makes, is subject to some interpretation. The species associated with the generic concept of  Epinectusis “ sulcatusDej.” It is reasonable to assume Dejean is referring to  Gyrinus sulcatus, as Aubé (1836), Balfour-Browne (1945) and Brinck (1961) assumed, the authorship of that species is consistently attributed to Wiedeman (1821), not Dejean. If Dejean (1833) was accrediting himself with the specific nomen  sulcatusit would render  EpinectusDejean, 1833a nomen nudumunder the current Codeas it would be lacking reference to a valid species nomen or reference. However, if one refers to Aubé (1836) it appears that Dejean’s action many not have been to suggest his authorship of the specific nomen  sulcatus, but to suggest a new combination of which he as well as Aubé (1836, 1838) credit him authorship. Therefore, Dejean’s (1833) indication could be treated as to a valid species or reference. This would result in Dejean (1833) taking authorship of  Epinectusand the nomen being available and valid, rendering  EnhydrusLaporte, 1834a junior objective synonym. Dejean (1833) however, was inconsistent with accrediting himself for all new combinations as can be clearly seen with the nomen  Orectochilus, or his new nomen  Trigonocheilus, which includes previously described nomina, where Dejean does not give authorship to himself with each new combination. Given this uncertainty, the most direct route is to assume Dejean (1833) was ascribing himself with authorship to the specific nomen  sulcatusrendering  EpinectusDejean, 1833a nomen nudum. This prevents further nomenclatural calamity with the nomen  Enhydrus, and is in line with the Commission’s ruling of Opinion 714 (Anonymous, 1964), which already deemed  EpinectusDejean, 1833a nomen nudum. The nomen  Epinectusagain appeared in use by Régimbart (1877) as a subgenus of  Enhydrus. In this same work Régimbart (1877) created an unjustified emendation of the spelling, simply stating “the name of  Epinectusor better  Epinectes” (translated). Régimbart (1877) divided the genus  Enhydrusinto two subgenera with  Epinectusincluding  Gyrinus sulcatusand  Enhydrus s. str.including the Australian species then placed in  Enhydrus(Balfour- Browne & Brinck 1961). Later, Régimbart (1882) erected the genus  Macrogyrusto include the Australian  Enhydrus s. str.species and relegated his name  EpinectesRegimbart, 1877to synonymy (Balfour-Browne & Brinck 1961). For this reason Balfour-Browne & Brinck (1961) requested that  EpinectesRégimbart, 1877be placed on the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoologydespite his earlier (Balfour-Browne 1945) promotion of the use of  EpinectusAubé, 1838, and EPINECTINAE(Balfour-Browne 1945) instead of  Enhydrusand  ENHYDRINAE. Balfour-Browne & Brinck (1961) also suggested that  Epinectusbe considered a nomen nudum, since they believed Dejean’s (1833) indication to be invalid. Balfour-Browne & Brinck’s (1961) proposal resulted in Opinion 710 (Anonymous 1964) placing  Epinectusand  Epinecteson the Official Index of Rejected and Invalid Generic Names in Zoology, with  EpinectusDejean, 1833as a nomen nudumand  EpinectesRégimbart, 1877as a junior objective synonym of  Enhydrus.