Cancer rhumphii Guérin, 1829

Low, Martyn E. Y., Ng, Peter K. L. & Evenhuis, Neal L., 2013, Names and publication dates of the Brachyura in F. É. Guérin (Guérin-Méneville) (Crustacea: Decapoda), Zootaxa 3736 (2), pp. 101-127 : 105-107

Cancer rhumphii Guérin, 1829 (in Guérin-Méneville 1829–1837) and Xantho octodentatus H. Milne Edwards, 1834 : lectotype designations and synonymy with Lophozozymus pictor (Fabricius, 1798) (Xanthidae)

The species-group name Cancer rhumphii was used by Guérin in the caption accompanying the illustration of a xanthid crab (1829, in Guérin-Méneville 1829–1837: pl. 2, fig. 2, caption to figure; see Fig. 1 B). No other information was given but the name Cancer rhumphii Guérin, 1829 , fulfils the stipulations of Article 12.2.7 of the Code (ICZN, 1999) and is an available name.

Henri Milne Edwards (1834: 398), in a footnote to his description of Xantho octodentatus , mentioned that “ C [ancer] marinus laevis . Rumph. Pl. 5, fig. N.— C[ancer] floridus ? Latr. Encyc. Pl. 283, fig. 2. (Mal copiée d’après Rumph.) Cancer rumphie [sic], Guérin. Icon. Cr., Pl. 2, fig. 1 ” [ Xantho octodentatus is the ‘ Cancer marinus laevis’ of Rumphius (1705: pl. 5, fig. N), and also the ‘ Cancer floridus ?’ of Latreille (1818: pl. 283, fig. 2) which was badly-copied from Rumphius (1705); this is also the ‘ Cancer rumphie [sic]’ of Guérin (1829, in Guérin- Méneville 1829–1837: pl. 2, fig. 1)]. It should be noted that Latreille (1818: 2) listed the plate illustrating “ Cancer floridus ? Linnaeus” as “282” and not 283, which is clearly an error.

Guérin-Méneville (1844: 6) noted:

“ Xanthe . Leach. Latr. […] X. de Rhumph. Xantho rhumphii . Guér. […] Cette espèce n’est pas nouvelle, et Rhumph l’a décrite et figurée pl. 5, f. N, sous le nom de ‘ Cancer marinus laevis , nom qui ne peut être adopté et auquel nous avons substitué celui du naturaliste qui l’a découvert le premier. C’est par erreur que l’on a gravé Latr. après le nom de cette espèce sur quelques-unes des planches de notre première édition, et c’est probablement ce qui a décidé M. Edwards à donner un autre nom ( X. octodentatus ) à ce Xanthe , croyant probablement que nous l’avions confundu avec une espèce de Pseudocarcin. ” [This is not a new species, and Rumphius (1705: pl. 5, fig. N) described and figured it as ‘ Cancer marinus laevis’, a name that may be adopted but that we have substituted with that of the naturalist who first discovered it [i.e. Cancer (or Xantho ) rhumphii ]. The wrong name for this species was engraved in error on a plate of our first edition [i.e. ‘ Cancer floridus ?’ in Latreille (1818: 6, pl. 283, fig. 2)], which is probably what made Mr. Edwards [i.e. H. Milne Edwards 1834: 398] give this species of Xantho another name (i.e. Xantho octodentatus ), probably believing that we had confused it with a species of Pseudocarcinus ].

It should also be noted that Guérin-Méneville (1844: 6) transferred Cancer rhumphii Guérin, 1829 , to Xantho Leach, 1814 .

Both Guérin-Méneville (1844: 6) and H. Milne Edwards (1834: 398) stated that their species name is the Latin (and available) name given to “ Cancer marinus laevis ” and cite “pl. 5, fig. N” of Rumphius (1705). This citation is incorrect as “ Cancer marinus laevis ” is the name given by Rumphius (1705: 8, 9) to the crab figured as “N” on plate 6 and not 5 as cited. Furthermore, the plate of Latreille (1818: pl. 282, fig. 2) cited by both Guérin-Méneville (1844) and H. Milne Edwards (1834) which was stated as being referred to as being “[m] al copiée d’après Rumph [ius]” by H. Milne Edwards (1834: 398, footnote) is not a reproduction of figure “N” (which is actually on pl. 6) of Rumphius (1705) but rather figure M on plate 5! These references to Latreille (1818: pl. 282, fig. 2) provide evidence that Guérin-Méneville (1844: 6) and H. Milne Edwards (1834: 398, footnote) cited “ Cancer marinus laevis ” of “pl. 5, fig. N” as a lapsus, and were in fact referring to “ Cancer saxatilis ” (Rumphius 1705: pl. 5, fig. M).

It is clear that both names, Cancer rhumphii Guérin, 1829 , and Xantho octodentatus H. Milne Edwards, 1834 , have their origins in the figure of “ Cancer saxatilis ” of Rumphius (1705: pl. 5, fig. M), which has been previously identified as Lophozozymus pictor (Fabricius, 1798) (see Ng & Chia 1997: 422, 428). Furthermore, the figure by Guérin (1829, in Guérin-Méneville 1829–1837: pl. 2, fig. 2) agrees with the lectotype of Lophozozymus pictor (Fabricius, 1798) (Ng & Chia 1997: fig. 1B).

A similar action was also taken by Herbst (1785: 187, 188), who instead validated the name “ Cancer saxatilis ” from Rumphius’ (1705). Cancer saxatilis Herbst, 1785 , is an objective synonym of Lophozozymus pictor (Fabricius, 1798) (see Low 2012a: 59, 60). Low (2012a: 59, 60) conserved the usage of Lophozozymus pictor (Fabricius, 1798) by reversing precedence of this name with Cancer saxatilis Herbst, 1785 , making the former a nomen protectum and the latter a nomen oblitum (Article 23.9.2 of the Code, ICZN 1999).

Although it appears that Cancer rhumphii Guérin, 1829 (now in Xantho ), and Xantho octodentatus H. Milne Edwards, 1834 , are objective synonyms, as both cite the same figure in Rumphius (1705: pl. 5, fig. M), this is not the case. The species-group name Cancer rhumphii Guérin, 1829 (in Guérin-Méneville 1829–1837) is based only on the crab illustrated from an unspecified locality (Guérin 1829, in Guérin-Méneville 1829–1837: pl. 2, fig. 2; see Fig. 1 B). The text description of Xantho octodentatus of H. Milne Edwards (1834: 398), on the other hand, was based on the specimens figured by Latreille (1818: pl. 283, fig. 2), Rumphius (1705: pl. 5, fig. M), Guérin (1829, in Guérin-Méneville 1829–1837: pl. 2, fig. 1), as well as possibly an unspecified number of specimens in the collection of the Paris Museum (“C.M.”), all of which are syntypes.

In order to stabilise the nomenclature of the species now known as Lophozozymus pictor (Fabricius, 1798) , we hereby designate the specimen figured and named Cancer rhumphii by Guérin (1829, in Guérin-Méneville 1829– 1837: pl. 2, fig. 1; see Fig. 1 B), which also partly formed the basis of the name Xantho octodentatus of H. Milne Edwards (1834: 398), as the lectotype of Cancer rhumphii Guérin, 1829 (in Guérin-Méneville 1829–1837) and the lectotype of Xantho octodentatus H. Milne Edwards, 1834 , thereby making them objective synonyms. Both names are junior subjective synonyms Lophozozymus pictor (Fabricius, 1798) .

Other valid species of Brachyura described by Guérin in the Iconographie (Guérin-Méneville 1829–1837)

Four other species-group names (all dated to Guérin 1832, in Guérin-Méneville 1829–1837) were made available by their use in the captions of the plates that illustrate the species in question (Article 12.2.7 of the Code, ICZN 1999: 17), and are considered to be valid: Pinnotheres villosulus (Guérin 1832, in Guérin-Méneville 1829–1837: pl. 4: fig. 6) (now Nepinnotheres villosulus ; see Ahyong & Ng 2007: 218); Macrophtalmus [sic] parvimanus (Guérin-Méneville 1829–1837: pl. 4, fig. 1) (now Macrophthalmus (Macrophthalmus) parvimanus ; see Barnes 1970: 211–214); Pisa serpulifera (Guérin-Méneville 1829–1837: pl. 8, fig. 2) (now Paranaxia serpulifera ; see Davie 2002: 317, 318; Rahayu & Ng 2000: 889); and Dromia nodipes (Guérin-Méneville 1829–1837: pl. 14, fig. 1) (now Fultodromia nodipes ; see Davie 2002: 164, Guinot & Tavares 2003: 66).

The date of publication of the name Pisa serpulifera Guérin, 1832 (in Guérin-Méneville 1829–1837), is almost universally cited as “1829” (e.g. Griffin & Tranter 1986: 280; Morgan 1990: 66; Rahayu & Ng 2000: 889; Davie 2002: 317, 318; Ng et al. 2008: 120). The only exception is Montgomery (1931: 417) who used the date “1834?” to indicate his uncertainty of the exact date. Rathbun (1924: 6, 7) did not give any date for Pisa serpulifera when establishing the genus-group name Paranaxia , although she did attribute authorship to Guérin. As discussed above and summarised in Table 1 , there is no evidence that the plate on which the name Pisa serpulifera is made available (i.e. Guérin-Méneville 1829–1837: pl. 8, fig. 2 and caption to figure) was in existence before 6 February 1832 (as stated in Cuvier 1832: 333). The date of publication of Pisa serpulifera should thus be cited as 1832 and not 1829.

Figures

FIGURE 1. Examples of two plates from the Iconographie du Règne animal (Guérin-Méneville 1829 – 1837: pls. 1 and 2): A, plate 1 of the Iconographie du Règne animal (Guérin-Méneville 1829 – 1837) in which Matuta peronii Leach, 1817, Orythia mamillaris [sic] (Fabricius, 1793), Podophtalmus [sic] vigil (Fabricius, 1798), and Thalamites admete (Herbst, 1803), are figured (top to bottom); B, plate 2 of the same in which Cancer rhumphii Guérin, 1829, Atelecyclus cruentatus Desmarest, 1825, and Thia polita Leach, 1816, are figured (top to bottom). The names Thalamites and Cancer rhumphii are considered to have been made available in these two plates (see text for discussion). Images from a work no longer in copyright available at the Biodiversity Heritage Library [http: // dx. doi. org / 10.5962 / bhl. title. 6255].