Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7czq Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-28T04:48:51.013Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

NOMENCLATURAL STATUS AND AUTHORSHIP OF SOME FAMILY-GROUP NAMES IN THE ERIOPHYOIDEA (ACARINA: PROSTIGMATA)

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 May 2012

Evert E. Lindquist
Evert E. Lindquist
Affiliation:
Biosystematics Research Institute, Canada Department of Agriculture, Ottawa
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The following suggestions in use of family-group names for eriophyoid mites are made in accordance with the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. (1) The name Sierraphytoptidae Keifer 1944 should have priority over Nalepellidae Roivainen 1953 sensu Newkirk and Keifer (1971). (2) The name Diptilomiopidae Keifer 1944 should have priority over Rhyncaphytoptidae Roivainen 1953 sensu Keifer (1961). (3) The superfamily concept of Shevchenko (1968, 1971) should take the name Nalepelloidea Roivainen 1953 rather than Trisetacoidea (a justified emendation of "Trisetoidea") Shevchenko 1968. (4) The names Nalepellidae and Nalepellini should take Roivainen 1953 as author rather than Newkirk and Keifer (1971). (5) Similarly, the names Sierraphytoptini Keifer 1944, Mackiellini Keifer 1946, Diptilomiopinae Keifer 1944, and Trisetacini Shevchenko 1968 should retain their authors and dates as first proposed for new family-group taxa, rather than being new taxa as proposed by Newkirk and Keifer (1971).

Type
Articles
Information
The Canadian Entomologist , Volume 106 , Issue 2 , February 1974 , pp. 209 - 212
Copyright
Copyright © Entomological Society of Canada 1974

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Boczek, J. 1966. Generic key to Eriophyoidea. Zesz. Probl. Post. Nauk Roln. 65: 177–187.Google Scholar
Carmona, M. M. 1970. Asetadiptacus, a new genus; family Rhyncaphytoptidae (Acarina: Eriophyoidea). Acarologia 12: 527–530.Google Scholar
Channabasavanna, G. P. 1966. A contribution to the knowledge of Indian eriophyid mites (Eriophyoidea: Trombidiformes: Acarina). Univ. Agric. Sci., Hebbal, Bangalore. 154 pp.Google Scholar
Farkas, H. 1965. Familie Eriophyidae, Gallmilben. Die Tierwelt Mitteleuropas, Bd. 3, Liefg. 3 Neubearb. 155 pp.Google Scholar
Flechtmann, C. H. 1970. New records and notes on eriophyid mites from Brazil and Paraguay, with a list of Eriophyidae from South America. Proc. ent. Soc. Wash. 72: 94–98.Google Scholar
Hall, C. C. Jr. 1967. The Eriophyoidea of Kansas. Univ. Kans. Sci. Bull. 47: 601–676.Google Scholar
International Code of Zoological Nomenclature adopted by the XV International Congress of Zoology, 2nd ed., 1964. Int. Trust for Zool. Nomen., London. 176 pp.Google Scholar
International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. 1972. XVIIth International Congress of Zoology, Monaco. Minutes of the meeting of the section on nomenclature, 28 September 1972. Bull. zool. Nom. 29: 179–189.Google Scholar
Keifer, H. H. 1944. Eriophyid studies XIV. Bull. Calif. St. Dep. Agric. 33: 18–38.Google Scholar
Keifer, H. H. 1946. Eriophyid studies XVI. Bull. Calif. St. Dep. Agric. 35: 39–48.Google Scholar
Keifer, H. H. 1951. Eriophyid studies XVII. Bull. Calif. St. Dep. Agric. 40: 93–104.Google Scholar
Keifer, H. H. 1952. The eriophyid mites of California. Bull Calif. Insect Surv. 2, No. 1. 123 pp.Google Scholar
Keifer, H. H. 1956. Eriophyid studies XXIV. Bull. Calif. St. Dep. Agric. 44: 159–164.Google Scholar
Keifer, H. H. 1959. Eriophyid studies XXVII. Bur. Ent., Calif. Dep. Agric., Occ. Pap. 1. 18 pp.Google Scholar
Keifer, H. H. 1961. Eriophyid studies B-4. Bur. Ent., Calif. Dep. Agric. 20 pp.Google Scholar
Keifer, H. H. 1964. Eriophyid studies B-11. Bur. Ent., Calif. Dep. Agric. 20 pp.Google Scholar
Marshall, V. G. and Lindquist, E. E.. 1972. Notes on the genus Nalepella (Acarina: Eriophyoidea) and the occurrence of N. halourga on black spruce in Canada. Can. Ent. 104: 239–244.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newkirk, R. A. and Keifer, H. H.. 1971. Revision of types of Eriophyes and Phytoptus. Eriophyid studies C-5. Agric. Res. Serv., U.S. Dep. Agric. pp. 1–10.Google Scholar
Roivainen, H. 1953. Subfamilies of European eriophyid mites. Ann. ent. fenn. 19: 83–87.Google Scholar
Shevchenko, V. G. 1968. Filogeneticheskie otnosheniya i osnovnye napravleniya evolyutsii chetyrekhnogikh kleshchei (Acariformes, Tetrapodili). Abstracts of papers, XIII int. Congr. Ent., Moscow. p. 235.Google Scholar
Shevchenko, V. G. 1971. Filogeneticheskie svyazi i osnovnye napravleniya evolyutsii chetyrekhnogikh kleshchei (Acariformes, Tetrapodili). Proc. XIII int. Congr. Ent., Moscow, 2–9 Aug. 1968, Vol. 1, p. 295.Google Scholar
Shevchenko, V. G. and Sukhareva, S. I.. 1970. Osobennosti zimovki nekotorykh vidov chetyrekhnogikh kleshchei (Acarina, Tetrapodili). Biull. Moskov. Obshch. Ispyt. Prirody, Otd. Biol. 75: 133–144.Google Scholar
Styer, W. E., Nielsen, D. G., and Balderston, C. P.. 1972. A new species of Trisetacus (Acarina: Eriophyoidea: Nalepellidae) from scotch pine. Ann. ent. Soc. Am. 65: 1089–1091.CrossRefGoogle Scholar