Bull, zool Norn., vol. 40, pt 4, December 1 983 195 FURTHER COMMENTS ON THE PROPOSED DESIGNATION OF A TYPE SPECIES FOR -l.VOL/SDAUDIN. 1802 Z N(S)1603 (see vol. 20, pp. 438-439; vol. 40, pp. 15-19) ( 1 ) By Jay M. Savage (Deparimenl of Biology. Unlvemtv of.VIiami Coral Gables Florida 33124) M, I n^.'' T^l^ comments regarding the 1963 proposal by Smith, Williams & Lazeli to hx the type spec.es of Afwlis presented by Sabrosky and by Stimson & Underwood are essentially correct. However, the underemphasis on the result nLeH httr'"'''' ^"//^''■;^L'""a^"^' 1758, as the type species of Ariolts. as desig-nated by Stejneger m 1904 creates problems that are best resolved by accepting he proposal of Smith WUliams & Lazeli to designate Anolis carolmens.s Voigt 1832 as type species, by fiat of the Commission. ' T . „ ^^^^"^8^-'967, p. 171, in the interim between the Smith. Williams & Lazeli proposal and those of Sabrosky and Stimson & Underwood split Anolis into two species groups, the alpha and beta sections, based on differences in caudal vertebrae. While he did not formally recognise the groups as dTsdnc" genera all subsequent workers on the genus recognise that the name Anolis referred to alpha anoles and Norops Wagler, 1830 (type species, by monotypy Anohs «»/■«/».. Daudm, 1802) to beta anoles. This practice, deeply embedded m he minds of students in this field, would be reversed by Sabroskv and Stimson & Underwood s proposal. Alpha anoles would then become Deiroptvx Fitzinger R^ ^T/,'P^^'^f'> °"8'"^' designation, Anolis vermiculatus Dumtv^ & Bibron. 1837), and the betas would become Anolis While the proposals of Sabrosky and Stimson & Underwood, had they been published and acted on earlier, are correct under strict interpretation of for .? hT. p"'T'"'"^ '° ^'"■' of custom and usage counter their arguments tor stability For these reasons I now support completely the request of Smith a^d Sson rf ''J'"' T^'^'t ^•°PP°^^'^ '' °" ^he samegroundsas Sabrtky and Stimson & Underwood at the time it was made. ADDITIONAL REFERENCES SI?''n?D^'?-hL ^^ ^-'^'^^--^''"'^'"^ Reptilnun. Vienna, 106 VI pp. WAULhR, J. 1830. Nalurliches System der Amphibien . . . Munich, VI 354 pp. (2) Reply by A. F. Stimson & G. L. Underwood ci^ 1 ^'"''? i^^^ T'"''^''' generally have referred to Etheridge's two groups simply as alpha anoles and beta anoles. placing both groups in the genus ^/,X without formal use of subgeneric names. The onlv exception of which we are aware is Savage (1980, pp. 69-73; 1982, pp. 468, 475, 509, 519) who used Anolis tor alpha anoles and Norops for beta anoles. We do not consider this to represent 20 years of custom and usage'. REFERENCES SAVAGE, J. M. 1980. A handlist with preliminary keys to the herpetofaima of Costa Rica. 1 1 1 pp.
BioStor
