TACHINIDAE OF ORIENTAL REGION 159 



paper was 'in no way intended to establish specific names'. The question arises, 

 therefore, as to whether the single description for each of the puparia is sufficient 

 to provide availability under the Code for both the generic name and the specific 

 name in each binomen. 



Before publishing my 1967a paper I was advised by an authority on nomenclature 

 that the specific names in the combinations cited above are available, satisfying 

 Article 11(g) (ii) of the Code, but that the generic names are unavailable because 

 there is not a separate description purporting to differentiate the generic (as opposed 

 to the specific) taxon in each case. The single puparial description, since both 

 generic and specific taxa were not previously described, constitutes a 'gen. n., 

 sp. n.' situation but one in which there is no distinction made between 'generic' 

 and 'specific' characters. Single combined descriptions for a new monotypic 

 genus based upon a new species are not clearly covered by the existing ICZN Code 

 if published after 1930, and there is currently some dispute being published in the 

 Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature as to whether the generic name published in 

 a post-1930 single combined description of this kind is available or not. It seems 

 likely that the new edition of the ICZN Code to appear shortly will rule that such 

 generic names are available, and certainly it is my opinion that they should be so 

 (see Bull. zool. Nom. 32 : 94). 



In anticipation of the probable outcome of the reconsideration now being given 

 by the ICZN to the post-1930 'gen. n., sp. n.' situation, I am here accepting Euha- 

 palivora and Masicerella as available names. They are, of course, attributable 

 to Gardner and not to Baranov under the rules of nomenclature, and their type- 

 species (indica Gardner and indistincta Gardner respectively) are fixed by original 

 designation and monotypy (on the assumption that the provisions of Article 68(a) (i) 

 will in future apply to post-1930 as well as pre-1931 names). 



At present no practical problem arises from the availability or non-availability 

 of the names Euhapalivora and Masicerella because I consider both of them to 

 be synonyms of Pseudoperichaeta Brauer & Bergenstamm. 



SYNOPSIS OF THE CATALOGUE ARRANGEMENT OF SUBFAMILIES, 



TRIBES AND GENERA 



The following synopsis is given to show at a glance the arrangement of subfamilies, 

 tribes and genera adopted in the body of the catalogue. The genera listed are 

 those considered to be valid at present. The affinities of some Oriental tribes 

 and genera are still obscure because they are known from very little material and 

 have been inadequately studied, and somewhat arbitrary assignments of these 

 tribes and genera to higher taxa have had to be made. The genera and tribes for 

 which the placements are doubtful are indicated by an asterisk (*) against each 

 name, and this mark should be read as implying that the taxon concerned is in 

 special need of study to determine its relationships more clearly. 



