Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 199 PROPOSED USE OF THE PLENARY POWERS TO VALIDATE THE GENERIC NAME PARAPENAEUS S. I. SMITH, 1885, AND TO INTER-PRET THE NOMINAL SPECIES PENEUS MEM BRAN ACEUS RISSO, 1816 (CLASS CRUSTACEA, ORDER DECAPODA). Z.N.(S.) 645 By L. B. Holthuis {Rijksmuseum van Natuurlijke Historic, Leiden, The Netherlands) The purpose of the present application is to secure a vaUd basis for the use of the currently accepted name for the well-knowTi and economically important shrimp almost universally known by the name Parapenaeus longirostris (Lucas, 1846). To secure this end the Commission wiU need to use its Plenary Powers in two directions. First, it will need to vaUdate the generic name Parapenaeus Smith, S.I., 1885, by suppressing the older but totally unknown and never used name Parapenaeus Claus, 1876. Second, it will be necessary, in order to place in an unassailable position the specific name longirostris Lucas, 1846, as pubhshed in the binomen Peneus longirostris, for the Commission both to give directions as to the interpretation of the nominal species Peneus mem-branacetts Risso, 1816 and to suppress a specific name of older date which is a senior subjective sjmonym of longirostris Lucas. 2. In 1885, S. I. Smith proposed the new generic name Parapenaeus for a genus of shrimps of which Peneus longirostris Lucas, 1846, is the type. This generic name has almost universally been adopted and at present is firmly entrenched in scientific and non-scientific carcinological literature. Para-penaeus longirostris (Lucas) is a species which is fished for on a very large scale in the deeper water of the Mediterranean and is of considerable economic importance ; in fishery literature concerning this species the generic name Parapenaeus is practically always adopted. As far as is knoAvn to me only one other generic name has been proposed for the genus in question, namely, Neopenaeopsis Bouvier, 1905 (C R. Acad. Sci. Paris 141 : 747). This latter name, however, in 1908 {BuU. Inst, oceanogr. Monaco 119 : 8) was synonymised by Bouvier with Parapenaeus, and has not been used since. 3. The name Parapenaeus S. I. Smith, 1885, is invaUdated by the older generic name Parapenaeus Claus, 1876. In his book " Untersuchungen zur Erforschung der genealogischen Grundlage des Crustaceen-Systems ", Claus, 1876, mentions in a foot-note on p. 46 " Parapenaeus n. gen.". Of this new genus Claus gives only a few details of the maxilla and the first maxilhped, and does not even mention any species as belonging to it. It is therefore not possible to ascertain the identity of Claus's new genus. The name Parapenaeus has been pubhshed by Claus in such an obscure place, that it is not even mentioned in Neave's Nomenclator Zoologicus. Since Claus mentions some characters of his new genus, the name Parapenaeus Claus cannot be considered a nomen nudum, and being an older homonym of Parapenaeus S. I. Smith, it invaUdates the latter name. 4. The suppression of Parapenaeus Claus, 1876, seems to be perfectly BvM. tool. Nomend. Vol. 17, pte. 6-8. April 1960.
Proposed use of the Plenary Powers to validate the generic name Parapenaeus S. I. Smith, 1885 and to interpret the nominal species Peneus membranaceus Risso, 1816 (Glass Crustacea, Order Decapoda) Z.N.(S.) 645
BioStor
