12 Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 63(1) March 2006 Case 3300 Halipegus ocddualis KruU, 1935 and Halipegm eccentricus Thomas, 1939 (Digenea, hemiuridae): proposed conservation of the specific names Donald F. McAlpine New Brunswick Museum, 277 Douglas Avenue, Saint John, New Brunswick, Canada E2K 1E5 (e-mail:
[email protected]) Abstract. The purpose of this application, under Article 23.9.3 and Recommendation 23A of the Code, is to conserve the specific names oi Halipegus occiducdis KruU, 1935 and Halipegus eccentricus Thomas, 1939 for two species of hemiurid digeneans known to parasitize ranid frogs and various freshwater pulmonale snails. The names are threatened by two senior names, the homonym Halipegus occidualis Stafford, 1905 and the synonym Cercaria projecta Willey, 1930. Keywords. Nomenclature; taxonomy; Digenea; hemiuridae; Halipegus occidualis; Cercaria projecta; Halipegus eccentricus; Halipegus projecta; Gastropoda; Helisoma anceps; Amphibia; ranidae; Rana catesbeiana; Raiia clamitans; parasitic worms; North America. 1. Stafford (1905, p. 687) de.scribed the hemiurid parasite Halipegus occiducdis on the basis of 37 specimens collected from the 'mouth' of the bullfrog Rana catesbeiana Shaw, 1802 from eastern Canada. Previously Stafford (1900, p. 409) had misidentified the species as Halipegus ovocaudatum (Vulpian, 1859), but in that paper he was more specific about the site of collection within the host, stating that his collections came 'more frequently from the eustachian tubes, in a fold along the inner edge of the jaw bone, at the entrance of the posterior nares and round the entrance to the oesophagus. In one frog I lately found 1 1 specimens of this worm chiefly at the entrance and even deep in the eustachian tube and at the entrance of the oesophagus'. Stafford (1900) also states "I have not yet seen [D. ovocadatum] . . . under the tongue." Clearly, Stafford was looking for Halipegus under the tongue and did not find it there. However inadequate Stafford's (1905, p. 688) description was, he also noted that the egg filament lengths on which he based his description were 'about' 56 |.im, a detail later to prove of signifi-cance. Stafford (1905) did not designate type material or figure the species, although a recently discovered specimen of Halipegus from the Stafford Collection now in the Canadian Museum of Nature, Ottawa (CMNP 1900-1629) was probably used in the course of preparing the description and should therefore be considered a syntype. 2. The specimen (CMNP 1900-1629) bears the remains of an original University of Toronto label identifying it as Distomum ovocaudatum and a replacement label states it was collected from Rana castebeiana. Stafford (1900) hsted his address as the Biological Department, University of Toronto, whereas by 1905 Stafford was writing from McGill University, Montreal, supporting the supposition that this specimen is one of the 37 worms on which Stafford (1905) based his description of Halipegus
BioStor
