1. Introduction
The recent paper by Borovec et al. published in
Diversity 10 (2) [
1] was not in full compliance with the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature [
2] regarding publication of online taxonomic papers. Article 8.5. states that, to be considered published [within the meaning of the code], “a work issued and distributed electronically must be registered in the Official Register of Zoological Nomenclature (ZooBank) (see Article 78.2.4) and contain evidence in the work itself that such registration has occurred” (Article 8.5.3.). Because the paper by Borovec et al. (2018) was not registered in ZooBank prior to publication and therefore evidence of registration was not included in it, the new taxonomic names proposed in the paper are not available under the code [
3]. The purpose of this paper is to make those names available.
To fulfill the requirements of Article 8.5. of the code, this paper has been registered in ZooBank, with the LSID above, and the names of the species described below have also been registered, following recommendation 10B of the Code. Their LSIDs are given under each name. Nomenclatural acts other than new taxon names cannot presently be registered in ZooBank, but we also here validate the lectotype designation of
Philetaerobius nidicola that was proposed by Borovec et al. [
1].
To meet the requirements of Article 13.1.2. of the Code, the names listed below are accompanied by a bibliographic reference to their full descriptions and are thereby made available from the publication of this paper. The wording of Article 13.1.2. is somewhat ambiguous as to the status of descriptions based on bibliographic reference, so to avoid any further problems we have added below a brief description differentiating each taxon and a holotype designation with the repository identified; these are repeated from the original paper [
1].
All label data are recorded verbatim, with a slash (/) indicating separate lines on a label and a double slash (//) indicating different labels on a pin.
2. New Nomenclatural Acts
Philetaerobius nidicola Marshall, 1923
Lectotype designation. Lectotype (here designated), ♂: “Type [printed on circular label with red border] // Philetaerobius nidicola, Mshl. / TYPE [handwritten] // S. Africa [printed] // from nest of / Social Weaver / bird / (Philetaerus socius) [handwritten] // Pres. by / Imp. Bur. Ent. / Brit. Mus. / 1923–253. [printed] // L E C T O T Y P U S /
Philetaerobius nidicola Marshall / Borovec, Oberprieler & Meregalli / desig. 2018 [printed, red]” (Repository: The Natural History Museum, London, United Kingdom). See Borovec, Oberprieler & Meregalli, 2018: 7 [
1] for further details of the specimen.
Philetaerobius louwi Borovec, Oberprieler & Meregalli, sp. n.
Philetaerobius louwi Borovec, Oberprieler & Meregalli, 2018: 12 [
1] (not available)
Description. This species is distinguishable from
P. nidicola by its slender rostrum and elytra, from
P. endroedyi sp. n. by its kidney-shaped, vaulted eyes and longitudinally depressed epifrons and from
P. garibebi sp. n. by its flat shape, horizontal eyes and variegated brown, black and white scales. Its internal penis sclerite is also distinctive, being deeply cleft and with the dorsal arm shorter and narrower than the ventral one, and its spermatheca is characteristic in having a long, curved to twisted collum. See Borovec, Oberprieler & Meregalli, 2018: 12, Figures 4, 5 and 10 [
1] for full description.
Holotype, ♂: “[Namibia, Erongo], S.W.Afr., Namib / Us Pass, Park Gate / 23 040 S 15 350 E // 15.11.1974, E-Y: 468 / groundtraps 70 days / leg. Endrödy-Younga // ground traps with / ferm.banana bait// H O L O T Y P E /
Philetaerobius louwi / sp. nov. Borovec, / Oberprieler, Meregalli / 2018 [on red card]” (Repository: Ditsong National Museum of Natural History (formerly Transvaal Museum), Pretoria, South Africa). Paratypes listed in [
1].
Distribution. Namibia.
Philetaerobius endroedyi Borovec, Oberprieler & Meregalli, sp. n.
Philetaerobius endroedyi Borovec, Oberprieler & Meregalli, 2018: 15 [
1] (not available)
Description. This species is distinguishable from
P. nidicola,
P. louwi and
P. garibebi by its subtriangular, dorsally flat eyes, flat epifrons, longer pronotum and spermatheca with an apically enlarged, blunt cornu. From
P. garibebi it also differs in its flat shape and variegated colour pattern. The sclerite in the penis is characteristic, similar to that of
P. louwi but posteriorly only cleft in the apical quarter and the dorsal arm as long and about as thick as the ventral one. See Borovec, Oberprieler & Meregalli, 2018: 15–16, Figures 6, 7 and 10 [
1] for full description.
Holotype, ♂: “RSA Northern Cape / Richtersveld 19.ix.2013 / rd to Akkedis pass 450 m / 28°09.880′ S 17°01.497′ E // Sifting of detritus, died / leaves and branches / below shrubby
Euphorbia sp. / R. Borovec, M. Meregalli lgt. // H O L O T Y P E /
Philetaerobius endroedyi / sp. nov. Borovec, / Oberprieler, Meregalli / 2018 [on red card]” (Repository: Ditsong National Museum of Natural History (formerly Transvaal Museum), Pretoria, South Africa). Paratypes listed in [
1].
Distribution. South Africa, Namibia.
Philetaerobius garibebi Borovec, Oberprieler & Meregalli, sp. n.
Philetaerobius garibebi Borovec, Oberprieler & Meregalli, 2018: 19 [
1] (not available)
Description. This species differs from all other
Philetaerobius species most obviously in its convex body, vertically aligned eyes, predominantly greyish scales, single claws and genitalia, especially in the long tubular internal sclerite of the penis and the S-shaped spermatheca. See Borovec, Oberprieler & Meregalli, 2018: 19–20, Figures 8, 9 and 10 [
1] for full description.
Holotype, ♂: “S.W.Africa/Namibia / 10 km E Karibib / 21°57′ S 15°57′ E / 10.iii.1987 / R. Oberprieler // collected / on grass // H O L O T Y P E /
Philetaerobius garibebi / sp. nov. Borovec, / Oberprieler, Meregalli / 2018 [on red card]” (Repository: South African National Insect Collection, Pretoria, South Africa). Paratype listed in [
1].
Distribution. Namibia.