NO. 2 OPINIONS jS TO 8 1 3 



1897 Neumann, after studj-ing this material, considered it the same as tlie 

 European D. reticulalus, the manuscript name D. zrontsfiis being cited in 

 identifying the specimens from the United States. 



In 1905 Stiles used the name andcrsoni for material from Montana, con- 

 cluding that the species did not transmit the disease known as Rocky Moun- 

 tain spotted fever. This was a nomcn nudum as it was unaccompanied by a 

 description or by a specific indication. In June, 1908, Banks, after studying 

 all of the Marx material, described the species, using the Marx name 

 D. veniistus. He used one of the males from Soldier, Idaho, as the type for 

 his species. By doing this Banks repudiated Neumann's placing the species 

 as a synonym of reticulatus. The name venustus cannot date from 1897 

 because Neumann did not specifically differentiate this species from his reticu- 

 latus, but confused it with his material. Banks, by describing this species in 

 1908, gave it a standing in nomenclature as a distinct species. In July, 1908, 

 Stiles, after studying part of the Marx material exclusive of Banks' type of 

 D. venustus, briefly described specimens from Montana under the name 

 D. andersoni. Subsequently, Aug. 1910 — (Taxonomic Value of the Micro- 

 scopic Structure of the Stigmal Plates in the Tick Genus, Dermacentor, Bull. 

 No. 62, Hygienic Laboratory), Stiles applied the name D. venustus to the 

 Texas material which was contained in the Marx collection, and designated 

 this as the type of the species. He stated that the New Mexico material could 

 not be positively identified and that the Idaho specimen was not sufficient to 

 base a determination upon. In this publication he fully described certain 

 Montana material under the name D. andersoni. 



On Oct. 29, 1910, in the JAMA, Stiles reiterates Banks' statement that Neu- 

 mann was incorrect in placing D. venustus, Marx's manuscript, as a synonym 

 of D. reticulatus but claimed that venustus should date from Neumann, 1897. 

 In the last paragraph of this statement he says "Were the premise correct 

 that Marx's specimens from Texas and New Mexico are identical with the 

 specimens from Montana, D. venustus would of necessity be the correct name 

 for the Rocky Mountain spotted fever tick, but this premise is erroneous and 

 the name venustus must be applied to the species containing the original speci- 

 mens designated under this name." We must take exception to the last por- 

 tion of this sentence, as a part of the material labeled D. venustus by Marx 

 (specimens from Soldier, Idaho), is identical with the form found in Mon- 

 tana and called D. andersoni by Stiles. One of these males from Soldier, 

 Idaho, was designated as type of D. venustus by Banks. A careful comparison 

 of this type specimen with Stiles' type of D. andcrsoni shows the two species 

 to be identical and there is no question that this is the form which conveys 

 Kocky Mountain spotted fever. Hence D. andersoni is a synonym of D. venus- 

 tus, and if Stiles is correct in his belief that the specimens from " Texas on 

 sheep " are specifically different from D. venustus of Montana, this species 

 requires another name. 



Stiles submits the following statement to the Commission : 



I. In Summary, I submit to the Commission the following points: 



a. Under the International Rules, the name D. venustus dates from 

 Marx in Neumann, 18973, 365. (Art. 25; Opinion of HaUcampus grayi 

 1856, ruled upon in Opinion No. 53.) 



