| Abstract: | "Nässig & Holloway (2010) published a nomenclatural note on the correct name for Antheraea roylei MOORE, 1859 (Lepidoptera: Saturniidae). In the opinion of Nässig & Holloway the spelling roylii is an incorrect original spelling and the correct spelling of the specific name of Antheraea (Antheraea) roylei MOORE, 1859 is the spelling with “-ei” as used consistently over about 140 years. In my opinion, the authors' statements had not been discussed intensely enough. At this point I would like to review the article and add some important considerations and examples. To avoid any misunderstandings, I would like to point out clearly that the name roylei MOORE, 1859 can be given priority for reasons of stability (cf. ICZN 1999, Art. 33.3.1), even if this is not the original spelling used by Moore (1859) in his accidentally published description, which of course, is considered being a valid original decription.
Paukstadt, U., Paukstadt, L. H. & Brosch (1998) discussed the following facts on the name roylii: The taxon roylii was originally described by Moore 1858-9 [1860] in Cat. Lep. Ins. Mus. E. I. House, II: 395 under the name of A. Roylei [sic, regarding the capital first letter] n. sp. In his publication a further publication was cited “Antheraea Roylei, Moore, P. Z. S. (1859), p. [without page number] pl. LXI. fig. 1” and to a planned illustration was pointed. In Proc. Zool. Soc. London, XXVII: 256, plate LXIV, fig. 1 [♂ adult] Moore cited this taxon without exception under the name of A. Roylii [sic, regarding the capital first letter] without any designation as a new species. Moore cited the original description to be “Antheraea Roylii, Moore, Catal. Lep. Mus. Ind. House, ii. p. 397 (1858)”. Unfortunately the second publication was issued in the Proceedings prior the supposed original description in the Catalogue and therefore represents a valid and available original description of Antheraea roylii. The taxon was named in honor of Dr. Forbes Royle. Both spellings roylei and roylii (after the Latin Roylius) would have been correct. Due to the fact that the spelling roylii was published first the name roylii represents the original spelling and the name roylei has to be lowered to an incorrect subsequent spelling of roylii, cf. ICZN (1999) Art. 33.3. The ICZN (1985) Appendix D, Rec. III 16 b recommended that a name of a person should be not latinized by ending “-ius” and than transformed into gender “-ii”. This is clearly a recommendation, cf. ICZN (1985) Art. 87(b) and ICZN (1999) Art. 89.2. Therefore the authors decided to use the original spelling roylii instead of roylei and follow Bouvier (1928) and van Eecke (1930). This decision has been not accepted by some other entomologists."
|