NO. 8 OPINIONS 124 TO 133 41 



OPINION 133 



Urothoc Dana and Phoxocephalidae Sars 



Summary. — Under the Rules, the type of Urothoc is U. roslratus. The 

 original author of a family name is free to select any contained genus as the 

 nomenclatorial type of that family. It is not necessary to select the oldest 

 included genus as type genus for the family. Under the present premises it is 

 unnecessary to substitute the newer name Urothoidae 1932 for the earlier 

 Phoxocephalidae. 



Presentation of case. — Dr. Jean M. Pirlot of the University of 

 Lieges requests an Opinion on certain points of nomenclature which 

 he has raised on pages 61-62 in an article' published in February 

 1932, involving the generic name Urothoe Dana, 1852 and 1853, vs. 

 Pontharpinia Stebbing, 1897, and the family name Phoxocephalidae 

 vs. Urothoidae. 



Discussion. — i. Type of Urothoc. Dana (1852, p. 311') in an 

 extensive key summary, down to and including genera, describes 

 Urothoe Dana, with generic diagnosis but without mention of any 

 species. This appears to be the original publication of the generic 

 name. 



The following year, Dana (1853, p. 921 ') discusses Urothoe and 

 cites two species {U . rostratiis [which is given unconditionally] and 

 U . irrostratus [which is clearly given sub judice 'J ) . This is apparently 

 the first allocation of any species to this genus. 



Under Article 2pc(i^ of the Rules, U. h-roslratits is excluded as 

 type, and U. rostratus automatically becomes type regardless of the 

 fact whether one dates the geiuis from 1852 or 1853. Compare Opin- 



' Les Amphipodes de I'Expedition du Siboga, deuxieme partie. Les Amphipodes 

 Gammarides: I. Les Amphipodes fouisseurs, Phoxocephalidae, Oedicerotidae. 

 Leide. 



"On the classification of the Crustacea Choristopoda, Anier. Journ. Sci., ser. 2, 

 vol. 14, no. 41, Sept. 



^ U. S. Expl. Exped., vol. 13, pp. 920-923. 



* " The occurrence of the individuals of this species with the preceding lead> 

 us to suspect that the two may be male and female. Yet the great difference 

 in the front is not like any sexual difference noticed ; moreover, the superior 

 antennae differ much." 



^ e. The following species are excluded from consideration in determining 

 the types of genera. 



/3. Species which were species iiiqiiirciidac from the standpoint of the autlior 

 at the time of its publicati(jn. 



