SCOPE 



When a synonym exists for a phylum, class, order, etc. and is worth mentioning, it is put 

 in brackets after the preferred name, e.g. 



DISCOCEPHALI ( = Echeneiformes) 



If the group represented by the synonym is approximately equal to the group represented 

 by the preferred name, the sign for 'approximately equal' is used : 



PLECTOGNATHI (= Tetraodontiformes) 



If there are two synonyms, they are recorded as follows : 



OLIGONEOPTERA ( = Endopterygota, Holometabola) 



When the relationship between a preferred name and certain synonyms or near-synonyms 

 is simple, the relationship is recorded as follows, sometimes as a footnote: 



MESOGASTROPODA ( = Monotocardia, Pectinibranchia, - Stenoglossa) 



This means that the order Mesogastropoda is the same as the order Monotocardia or 

 Pectinibranchia, minus Stenoglossa. A plus sign between two synonyms would have the 

 analogous meaning. 



Synonyms of genera have only been given where there was good reason to do so. 

 To attempt more would make several entries under orders and sub-orders cumbersome. 

 For example, the palmate newt Triturus helveticus (Caudata) is, or has been, known as 

 Diemictyhis palmatiis, Molge palmata and Triton palmatus, so that the inclusion of these 

 synonyms would be entered as follows : 



Triturus ( = Diemictyhis, Molge, Triton) (newt) 



Even if such an entry were desirable in principle, it would be unacceptable in practice, because 

 the synonyms apply to the palmate newt and not necessarily to all newts. This question, of a 

 synonym often applying to one species and not to the whole genus, is another reason for 

 avoiding synonyms except when they serve a special purpose. 



Some synonyms, such as Troglodytes for Pan (the chimpanzee), Auchenia for Lama (the 

 llama) and a few others, may be thought surprising or unnecessary. They have been included 

 because some physiologists or biochemists used these synonyms instead of the preferred 

 names. 



To avoid possible confusion, I have occasionally put a warning footnote when the name 

 of a group, such as Decapoda, is used in more than one part of the animal kingdom. Attention 

 has not been drawn to cases of two different animals having, or having had, the same names. 

 A casual glance at Neave's Nomenclator Zoologicus (1939-1950) shows that homonyms are 

 far more common than many biologists realize. Aricia, for example, is cited in Neave as a 

 mollusc, a polychaete, a fly and a moth. There seemed no point in trying to record all 

 homonyms, irrespective of their importance for readers of this book. 



Apart from 'phylum', 'class', 'order', etc., the Index contains all the words in Chapters II 

 and III. If the reader wishes to look up Mammalia, or Prototheria, or Simiae in the 

 Index, no difficulties arise and the appropriate page numbers will be found after these words, 

 for example, Prototheria, 43. But if the reader wishes to know the systematic position of 

 Phascolarctos, a. page number would provide insufficient information because there are about 

 seventy-five Latin or English generic names per page. In the Index, therefore, the generic name 

 of an animal, or the English name of a genus, is followed by the order or sub-order (when these 

 exist) to which the animal belongs, and then the page number, as in the following examples: 



Phascolarctos, Marsupialia, 44 

 three-toed sloth (Bradypus), Edentata, 44 



