THE CANADIAN ENTOMOLOGIST. .^80 



THE GENERIC AND SUBGENERIC 1 YPES OF THE LYTTID^ 

 (MELOID^ S. CAlVTHARIDy^ MjC\T.), (COL) 



BY CREIGHTON WELLMAN, B.A, MD., F.E.S., OAKLAND, CALIFORNIA. 



It is not the writer's intention in proposing generic types for tiie 

 blister beetles to engage in a general discussion of the laws of zoological 

 nomenclature, but a brief outline of the principles which have been 

 followed is not out of place. 



Types have been justly called the "anchors" of genera. In order to 

 avoid unnecessary changes in nomenclature and to obviate irritating doubt 

 as to the limits of groups, it is necessary that types for existing zoological 

 genera be fixed as rapidly as possible, and that authors of new genera 

 should clearly designate type species of the same. It is to be hoped that 

 systematic workers in special groups will speedily publish the types of aU 

 the genera familiar to them. 



In my study of the genera of the Coleopterous family Lyttidre, I have 

 been able, by applying the rules laid down in the International Code,^ to 

 name type species for many of the genera and subgenera thus far proposed. 

 For various reasons I decline at present to name types for several genera, 

 but subsequent study may render this possible. 



Regarding the spelling of generic names, I should perhaps say that I 

 do not at present admit the duty or privilege of a succeeding writer to 

 "correct" the orthography or etymology of the author of a genus. I also 

 regard misprints as having a nomenclatorial status, and believe that they 

 should be listed as synonyms. 



In designating generic types, it is necessary to include discarded 

 genera and those existing only in synonymy, as well as those adopted by 

 zoologists, because a species once used as a type cannot subsequently be 

 made to serve for a different genus. 



In the earlier literature especially, it is extremely difficult always to 

 determine whether an author intends to indicate a type species or not, but 

 it is important to endeavour to decide this before naming the type, because 

 a type once properly designated in the literature cannot be subsequently 

 changed. It, of course, follows from this that if a type be selected for a 

 genus which has previously had its type species properly named (either by 

 the proposer of the genus or by a subsequent author), the last designation, 

 unless it coincide with the orginal and valid one, is not to be regarded. I 



1. The International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, 1905. 

 T")ecomber, 1910 



