306 Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 51(4) December 1994 Case 2893 Temnorhynchus Hope, 1837 (Insecta, Coleoptera): proposed conservation Frank-Thorsten Krell Eberhard-Karls-Universitdt. Zoologisches Inst it ut, Lehrstiihl fiir Spezielle Zoologie. Aufder Morgenstelle 28. D-72076 Tiihingen, Germany Abstract. The purpose of this application is to conserve the name Temnorhynchus Hope. 1837, a genus of lameilicom beetles, which is threatened by the unused senior objective synonym Coptorhinus Dejean, 1833. Until recently it was believed that Coptorhinus Dejean was preoccupied by Coptorhinus Guerin Meneville, [1838] but a clarification of the publication dates has shown that Dejean's name is the older. 1. Dejean (1833, p. 152) made the genus-group name Coptorhinus available by including the species Scarabaeus retusus Fabricius, 1781 (p. 14), which is the type species by monotypy. This genus is placed in the scarabaeidae or melolonthidae. 2. Hope (1837, p. 47) proposed the replacement name Temnorhynchus because he considered Dejean's name preoccupied: 'Sp. 65. Retusus — The Baron De Jean has given the generic name of Coptorhinus to this species, a name which was published by me some years since in the Zoological Transactions, it must therefore be changed; as it is significant of the genus, I substitute for it the term Temnorhynchus'' (see Krell, 1992, p. 325). On p. 95 Hope wrote 'Mr Kirby in his MSS. gave it the generic name of Pachypus, and the Baron de Jean in his Catalogue adopts the term Coptorhinus; both names however must be changed, as they are previously used by other writers, for other genera of Lameilicom beetles'. Pachypus Kirby is a nomen nudum. In fact Coptorhinus Hope had not been introduced earlier; Hope (1833, p. 62) had published Coptorhina, which according to modem nomenclatural rules is not homonymous with Coptorhinus. 3. Guerin Meneville ([1838], p. 72) described a 'division' of Lycus Fabricius (lycidae) named Coptorhinus. The title page of the volume bears the date 1830. However, Guerin's part was published in 1838 as indicated by Sherborn & Woodward (1906, p. 336) and Sherborn (1925, p. 1510); I have confirmed this (Krell, 1992, p. 325 and following). The correct publication date had not been noted in the taxonomic literature until my nomenclatural revision in 1992. Prell (1936, p. 147), Endrodi (1976, p. 232) and Dechambre (1986, p. 32) assumed Coptorhinus Dejean to be preoccupied by Coptorhinus Guerin Meneville, but Dejean's name is the senior homonym. 4. Guerin Meneville ([1838]) did not include any species in his 'division' Coptorhi-nus, either in the original description or later (L. Bocak in litt., 1993). The name was rarely used and was considered by Kleine (1933, p. 28) as a probable synonym of Idiopteron Bourgeois, 1905. With no explanation Kleine (1933) chose to use the latter name over the senior synonym.
BioStor
