Nomenclatural Notes on Torpedo (Chondrichthyes: Torpedinidae) and Some Other Early Established ﬁsh Taxa (Actinopterygii: Molidae, Eleginopidae and Citharinidae)

Home , Branchiostegus, Torpedinidae, Torpedo (genus)

Species, Phylogeny and Evolution 1, 3 (30.9.2008): 141-145.

Nomenclatural notes on Torpedo (Chondrichthyes: Torpedinidae) and some other early established ﬁsh taxa (Actinopterygii: Molidae, Eleginopidae and Citharinidae)

Francisco W. Welter-Schultes & Verena Feuerstein

Zoologisches Institut der Universität, Berliner Str. 28, 37073 Göttingen, Germany, corresponding author: [email protected]

Abstract

During the compilation of a zootaxonomical database (www.animalbase.org) we consulted original literature predating 1800 and discovered some inconsistencies in fish nomenclature. Torpedo "Houttuyn, 1764" (Chondrichthyes: Torpedini- dae) was not established by this author, but by Forskål (1775). The names "Mola Koelreuter, 1766" and "Mola aculeata Koelreuter, 1766" (Actinopterygii: Molidae) were mentioned in a non-binominal context by Koelreuter and are not available. "Mola Koelreuter, 1766" must be replaced by Mola Linck, 1790. "Gadus nawaga Koelreuter, 1770" (Actinopterygii: Eleginopidae) is a misinterpretation of a vernacular name and unavailable, the first correctly established name for this fish was Gadus Callarias Var. Nowaga Bloch & Schneider, 1801, so its current scientific name must be Eleginus nowaga (Bloch & Schneider, 1801). "Salmo niloticus Hasselquist, 1762" (from a rejected work, not Salmo niloticus Linnæus, 1758) is not available, its correct current name is Distichodus nefasch (Bonnaterre, 1788) (Actinopterygii: Citharinidae).

Zusammenfassung

Im Zuge der Erstellung einer zootaxonomischen Datenbank (www.animalbase.org) haben wir Originalliteratur von vor 1800 überprüft, dabei sind uns einige Inkonsistenzen in der Fischnomenklatur aufgefallen. Torpedo "Houttuyn, 1764" (Chondrichthyes: Torpedinidae) wurde nicht von diesem Autor, sondern von Forskål (1775) eingeführt. "Mola Koelreuter, 1766" und "Mola aculeata Koelreuter, 1766" (Actinopterygii: Molidae) wurden in einem nicht-binominalen Zusammen- hang erwähnt und sind nicht verfügbar. "Mola Koelreuter, 1766" muss durch Mola Linck, 1790 ersetzt werden. "Gadus nawaga Koelreuter, 1770" (Actinopterygii: Eleginopidae) ist eine Missinterpretation eines Trivialnamens und nicht ver- fügbar, der erste korrekt eingeführte Name für den entsprechenden Fisch war Gadus Callarias Var. Nowaga Bloch & Schneider, 1801, der aktuelle wissenschaftliche name muss Eleginus nowaga (Bloch & Schneider, 1801) lauten. "Salmo niloticus Hasselquist, 1762" (aus einem nicht anerkannten Werk, nicht Salmo niloticus Linnæus, 1758) ist nicht verfügbar, der korrekte aktuelle Name ist Distichodus nefasch (Bonnaterre, 1788) (Actinopterygii: Citharinidae).

Introduction cations and the available information online of FishBase (www.fishbase.org, 2007) and the Eschmeyer Catalog Since 2003 we have been developing the online database databases (W. N. Eschmeyer Catalog of Fishes, California www.animalbase.org, a non-profit public service provi- Academy of Sciences, version January 2004). ded by the University of Göttingen, Germany. The Uni- versity Library of Göttingen has accumulated a great deal of the early zoological literature. We digitized many origi- "Torpedo Houttuyn, 1764" nal taxa descriptions published before 1800 and checked (Chondrichthyes: Torpedinidae) most publications from 1758-1770, entering manually all the new specific and generic taxa into the database to pro- Raja torpedo Linnæus, 1758 is the electric ray. Torpedo is vide direct links to the original descriptions. This produ- an important fish genus, type genus of the family Torpedi- ced data entries independent of other zoological databases nidae, and the name-bearing basic name of Torpedinifor- for every specific and generic taxon. By this method we mes. In the Eschmeyer Catalog, Torpedo Houttuyn, 1764 discovered some inconsistencies between original publi- (p. 453) is listed as a genus currently in use: 141 least 1973. "Type [Raja torpedo Linnæus, 1758] by tautonymy According to the Eschmeyer Catalog, the next author [original not seen]. Valid as Torpedo Houttuyn 1764 who used the generic name Torpedo for this fish was [... many references]" Duméril (1806), without included species. Rafinesque "Valid" is here used in the sense that the name is regarded (1810: 48, 60) introduced a new specific name, Torpedo as currently in use. ocellata, for Raja torpedo Linnæus, 1758 - obviously The original publication (Houttuyn 1764) is available as a replacement name to avoid tautonymy, T. ocellata online (www.animalbase.org). Type species would be would be the type species by subsequent monotypy. The Raja torpedo by monotypy, but the genus Torpedo does Eschmeyer Catalog gives Torpedo Rafinesque, 1810 as a not appear to have been established in Houttuyn's work. new generic name, apparently an unjustified procedure In his large compendium published in the Old Dutch because the name referred to the same animal, and so it language, Houttuyn listed several species of each animal was only a use of Torpedo Duméril, 1806. genus and added long descriptions and comments. On p. Forskål (1775: 16) (often incorrectly spelled Forsskål) 453 the species Raja torpedo Linnæus, 1758 appeared as introduced the generic name Torpedo Forskål, 1775 for the first species of the genus Raja Linnæus, 1758 (Chon- another fish, predating Torpedo Duméril, 1806. Therefore drichthyes). At the margin to the right "I. Torpedo" was Torpedo Duméril, 1806 is a junior homonym of Forskål's printed. The second specific name Raja batis Linnæus, name and cannot be used. 1758, appeared on p. 462 ("II. Batis" was printed at the The generic name Torpedo Forskål, 1775 is assigned to margin of that page). Similarly "III. Oxyrinchus" for Raja the type specific name Raja torpedo by monotypy. Howe- oxyrinchus Linnæus, 1758, "IV. Miraletus" for Raja mira- ver, Forskål (1775) misinterpreted the name Raja torpedo letus Linnæus, 1758, etc. Throughout his work, Houttuyn Linnæus, 1758, and obviously assigned it to a fish later rarely cited the generic names, but referred to the species described by Gmelin (1789: 1354) as Silurus electricus. simply as "Torpedo", "Batis", "Miraletus" etc., with the This is the electric catfish of the Nile, currently known specific names written with the first letter in the upper as Malapterurus electricus (Gmelin, 1789). The genus case. This is the author's style. If this context is not known Malapterurus La Cepède, 1803, type species Silurus elec- to the reader (for example, if no other parts of the work tricus Gmelin, 1789 (designated by ICZN decision, Opi- besides a copy of p. 453 are examined), a misunderstan- nion 93), is an important fish genus too, and type genus ding is possible. This probably occured and resulted in the of the family Malapteruridae. This implies that, when false interpretation of the specific name "Torpedo". (nomenclaturally correctly) introducing the genus Tor- On p. 460 Houttuyn reported that Gronovius assigned pedo, Forskål (1775) had a malapterurid actinopterygian something like a special rank to a fish named "Torpedo fish in mind. der Schryveren" [ = "Torpedo according to the writers/ Here is the original description of the genus Torpedo authors"]. Since Houttuyn clearly referred to and descri- Forskål, 1775: bed only the contents of Gronovius' work in this entire "An cum Mormyro, genere potest sociari; vel inter passage, citing such a name alone without adopting it Torpedines posteriores Rondeletii locum invenire: aut in his own classification would not constitute a correct potius novum constituere genus? Certe determinatur establishment of a new scientific name by Houttuyn. Torpedinis character genericus: Piscis branchiostegus: Moreover, "Torpedo der Schryveren" cannot have meant apertura lineari, obliqua supra pinnas pectorales: cor- a scientific name of a genus because the "Schryveren" (= pore nudo: pinnis ventralibus, seu abdominalibus: den- Linnaeus and others) used this name for a species, hence, tibus numerosissimis, densis, subulatis." only the specific or a vernacular name could have been ("Genus can probably be united with Mormyrus; or meant. No author had ever used Torpedo as a generic one can categorize it among the latter [?] Torpedo of name before. The Dutch word for genus is "geslagt", and Rondelet: or can one rather create a new genus? Und- it did not appear here. oubtedly the characters of the genus Torpedo can be The same applies to "Batis" which was mentioned in recognized: Fish with covered gills [= branchiostegan the text on p. 463. In this case too, a species was meant. fish?]: line shaped [thin/straight?] oblique openings Houttuyn's use of italics is meaningless. When Hout- above the pectoral fins: body naked [scaleless]: fins tuyn used italics, this did not necessarily imply a scienti- [located] ventrally or abdominally: teeth numerous, fic name. The vernacular names of Raja batis (in French, densely together, subulate.") German and Dutch) were also printed in italics. We did not find mention of a genus Torpedo in Above, in the presentation of the so-called Raja torpedo Houttuyn's work anywhere else. There was no index of we read the following description: scientific names. Only Dutch and a few Low German "Dentes numerosissimi, conserti, breves in utraque vernacular names were listed in the index at the end of maxilla, setacei, nec emarginati: qua nota discedit a the volume. Boeseman & De Ligny (2004) coincidentally charactere generico Mormyri." (and correctly) mentioned "Raja torpedo" listed by Hout- ("Teeth numerous, they follow one another, short in tuyn (1764). Torpedo Houttuyn, 1764 has not been esta- both jaws, setaceous [straight?] and not emarginate: blished as a generic name. thus distinguishable from the characters of the genus But Torpedo Houttuyn, 1764 had been taken as the type Mormyrus.") genus for Torpedinidae and according to the Eschmeyer Catalog has constituted an important fish genus since at It is obvious from the description that the electric catfish

142 Silurus electricus and not the electric ray Raja torpedo after "aculeata" was coincidental and did neither imply was meant, and consequently the type species of the genus that the name was binominal in the Linnaean sense, nor Torpedo Forskål, 1775 was misinterpreted. that the word "aculeata" was intended as a name. The ICZN Code (4th ed. Article 70.3) provides two The comment in the Eschmeyer Catalog adds "Origi- options to solve this problem. As type species for the nal seen" - but the original text was clearly misinterpre- genus Torpedo Forskål, 1775 may be selected: ted. It is possible that only a copy of p. 337 was seen, and the context and author's style applied in this paper 70.3.1 - the nominal species (Raja torpedo Linnæus, 1758, were ignored, which led to a misunderstanding. Neither a disregarding Forskål's misidentification), or genus Mola nor a species Mola aculeata were established 70.3.2 - the taxonomic species actually involved in the by Koelreuter (1766). Both names were thus not made misidentification (Silurus electricus Gmelin, 1789). available. If the second option is taken, the consequences would be startling. A new generic name (which one?) would have to Nomenclatural consequences. The specific name Mola be selected for the species group containing Raja torpedo aculeata seems to have been regarded as a synonym of Linnæus, 1758. The genus Torpedo Forskål, 1775 with Tetraodon mola Linnæus, 1758 and as such, has probably its type species Silurus electricus Gmelin, 1789 would not been in current usage. replace Malapterurus La Cepède, 1803, and still the con- According to the Eschmeyer Catalog, the next author sequences to the family names and expressions like Tor- who used Mola as a generic name was Linck (1790: 37). pediniformes would not have been determined. FishBase (www.fishbase.org, July 2005) recorded 36 spe- In the best interest of stability and universality, we cific names in the genus Mola, with Diodon nummularis select the first option. Walbaum, 1792 the second oldest name after Tetraodon Type species of Torpedo Forskål, 1775 shall be Raja mola Linnæus, 1758. The type species of Mola Linck, torpedo Linnæus, 1758, to be interpreted in the sense of 1790 is either Tetraodon mola Linnæus, 1758 by subse- Linnæus (1758), by monotypy, disregarding the facts that quent designation or by monotypy prior to 1798, or Mola (i) Forskål (1775) misidentified this species, (ii) the gene- rotunda Cuvier, 1798 by subsequent monotypy designa- ric description of Torpedo given by Forskål (1775) refered ted by Cuvier (1798: 324), who established Mola rotunda to a totally different fish and (iii) had he seen it, Forskål as a new replacement name for Tetraodon mola Linnæus, would probably not have introduced a new generic name 1758 to avoid tautonymy. No other names seem to con- for the electric ray. flict, so the unavailable generic name "Mola Koelreuter, 1766" can simply be replaced by Mola Linck, 1790. The Nomenclatural consequences. The unavailable name family name Molidae may therefore be retained, based on Torpedo Houttuyn, 1764 must be replaced by Torpedo Mola Linck, 1790. Forskål, 1775. Consequently, the type genus of the family Torpedinidae must be Torpedo Forskål, 1775. Torpedo Duméril, 1806 is not to be interpreted as the description of a new name, the name used by Duméril is merely a sub- "Gadus nawaga Koelreuter, 1770" sequent use of Torpedo Forskål, 1775. The same applies (Actinopterygii: Eleginopidae) to Rafinesque (1810). The Eschmeyer Catalog lists "Gadus callarias nawaga Koelreuter, 1770", with the following comment: "Mola Koelreuter, 1766", and "Mola "Valid as Eleginus navaga [sic] (Koelreuter 1770) (but aculeata Koelreuter, 1766" sometimes with authorship as Pallas) -- [... many refe- (Actinopterygii: Molidae) rences]. Should be put in the genus Microgadus -- [...]. The original spelling was nawaga (in the title only), The Eschmeyer Catalog lists Mola aculeata Koelreuter, that spelling should be used unless current usage is 1766 as a synonym of Tetraodon mola Linnæus, 1758 maintained. Sometimes dated to Pallas 1814. Appeared (see Fraser-Brunner 1951: 113, Parenti 2003: 2). Mola as Gadus callarias var. nowaga in Bloch & Schneider Koelreuter, 1766 is listed as a generic name currently in 1801:7." use (applied since at least 1951) and is the type genus of In the fishbase synonyms list additionally a species Molidae. "Gadus navaga Koelreuter, 1770" is listed, an emended The publication of Koelreuter (1766) was not bino- spelling. According to FishBase, the name is currently in minal. Although the name "Mola" was mentioned, this use as "Eleginus nawaga (Koelreuter, 1770)". The genus cannot be interpreted as a taxonomic description of a Eleginus Fischer, 1813 has as its type species the species genus. Koelreuter's name "Mola" has to be interpreted as here discussed by monotypy. a Latin vernacular name, which was combined with seve- The original publication Koelreuter (1770) is available ral Latin adjectives to form a description of a fish species. online (www.animalbase.org). The name "nawaga" is Several other fishes were described in the same paper by only mentioned in the title: the same method. The epithet "aculeata" cannot be interpreted as a specific name, since it formed part of the Latin "Descriptio piscis, e Gadorvm genere, Rvssis nawaga characterisation which consisted of a number of words, as dicti, historico-anatomica." with the other fishes described in this paper. The comma ("Historical-anatomical description of a fish of the 143 genus Gadus, in Russian called nawaga.") We agree with the interpretation of the Eschmeyer database team. Salmo nefasch Bonnaterre, 1788 was correctly The specific name "nawaga" was not made available here established. The name Salmo nefasch Bonnaterre, 1788 is because it was explicitely mentioned as a Russian ver- not known to FishBase. It is interesting to note that Has- nacular name. An emendation ("navaga") of an unavai- selquist (1757: 381) had already mentioned the Arabic lable name does not make it available. The specific name name "Nefasch". Possibly Bonnaterre (1788) adopted this Gadus callarias was nowhere mentioned by Koelreuter. It name from Hasselquist's (1757 or 1762) work maintai- is not even clear from the title whether the Russian name ning the German transcription. "nawaga" refers to the species of fish described in the arti- Fernholm & Wheeler (1983) proposed to conservation cle, or to the genus Gadus generally. of the use of "Distichodus niloticus Hasselquist, 1762" Bloch & Schneider (1801: 7) introduced Gadus Calla- and the rejection of Salmo niloticus Linnæus, 1758. In rias Var. Nowaga Bloch & Schneider, 1801, included a their list of freshwater fishes of Kenya, Seegers et al. brief Latin description and a reference to Koelreuter (2003) listed the fish under the name Distichodes niloti- (1770). This name was correctly established and is avai- cus (Linnaeus in Hasselquist, 1762). This was incorrect lable. because the author of both publications (1757 and 1762) was Hasselquist, Linnæus was only the editor. Nomenclatural consequences. The correct original name for the fish in question is Gadus callarias var. nowaga Nomenclatural consequences. The correct original Bloch & Schneider, 1801. If placed as a species in the name of the fish in question is Salmo nefasch Bonnaterre genus Eleginus Fischer, 1813, the current name in use 1788, its current allocation being Distichodes nefasch must be Eleginus nowaga (Bloch & Schneider, 1801). In (Bonnaterre, 1788). Salmo aegyptius Gmelin, 1789 is the Koelreuter's phrase no scientific name was established. only available junior synonym. In our opinion there is no Any assignment of "Gadus nawaga" to him does not need to validate the unavailable name "Salmo niloticus accord with the Code. Hasselquist, 1762", as proposed by Fernholm & Wheeler (1983). "Salmo niloticus Hasselquist, 1762" (Actinopterygii: Citharinidae) Acknowledgements

The Eschmeyer Catalog lists "Salmo niloticus Hassel- We thank W. Eschmeyer for helpful comments and corrections. quist, 1762", with the following comment: English translations of Latin texts were provided by F. Wieland "Treated as valid as Distichodus niloticus (Hassel- and R. Klug. The digitization of the zoological works and the input of the AnimalBase database were financially supported by quist, 1762) -- [... some references]. Type catalog and the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG). nomenclatural comments: Fernholm & Wheeler 1983: 213-214. Not available, published in a rejected work (ICZN, Opinion 57)." The name Salmo niloticus Hasselquist cannot be used References for two reasons: (i) it was published in a rejected work (Hasselquist 1757 was pre-Linnean, Hasselquist 1762 Bloch, M. E. & Schneider, J. G 1801. Systema ichthyologiae is officially rejected) and is therefore unavailable, (ii) it iconibus CX illustratum. - pp. I-LX [= 1-60], 1-584, Pl. i-cx is a junior homonym of Salmo niloticus Linnæus, 1758. [= 1-110]. Berolini. (Sander). Boeseman, M. & De Ligny, W. 2004. Martinus Houttuyn (1720- According to Fernholm & Wheeler (1983) who exami- 1798) and his contributions to the natural sciences, with ned the types, Salmo niloticus Linnæus, 1758 referred to emphasis on zoology. - Zoologische Verhandelingen 349. a fish of the genus Alestes, and was clearly different from 1-211. "Salmo niloticus Hasselquist, 1762". Cuvier, G. 1798. Tableau élémentaire de l‘histoire naturelle The identity of synonyms of "Salmo niloticus Hassel- des animaux. - pp. j-xvj [= 1-16], 1-710, pl. I-XIV [= 1-14]. quist, 1762" seems to be unclear. FishBase (3/2006) listed Paris. (Baudouin). the fish under the name "Distichodus niloticus (Hassel- Cuvier, G. & Valenciennes, A. 1830. Histoire naturelle des pois- quist, 1762)", with the synonyms Salmo niloticus Hassel- sons. Tome cinquième. Livre cinquième. Des sciénoïdes. - quist, 1762, Salmo aegyptius Gmelin,1789, Characinus pp. i-xxviii [= 1-28], 1-499, [1-4]. Paris. (Levrault). Duméril, A. M. C. 1806. Zoologie analytique, ou méthode nefasch (non Bonnaterre, 1788) and Citharinus nefasch naturelle de classification des animaux, rendue plus facile à (non Bonnaterre, 1788). The last two names are listed as l‘aide de tableaux synoptiques. - pp. i-xxxiii [= 1-33], 1-344. misidentifications. The name Salmo aegyptius Gmelin, Paris. 1789 is available. Fernholm, B. & Wheeler, A. 1983. Linnaean fish specimens in According to the Eschmeyer Catalog Characinus the Swedish Museum of Natural History, Stockholm. - Zoo- nefasch La Cepède, 1803 should be corrected to Salmo logical Journal of the Linnean Society 78. 199-286. nefasch Bonnaterre, 1788: Forskål, P. 1775. Descriptiones animalium avium, amphibi- orum, piscium, insectorum, vermium; quæ in itinere orien- "Appeared as 'Le Néfasch 46. S. Nefasch...'. We regard tali observavit Petrus Forskål. Post mortem auctoris edidit this as available, with the 'S.' traced back to Salmo on Carsten Niebuhr. Adjuncta est materia medica Kahirina atque p. 158 and agreeing with the style of the work.". tabula maris rubri geographica. - pp. 1-20, I-XXXIV [= 1-

144 34], 1-164, 1 map. Hauniæ. (Möller). Fischer, G. 1813. Recherches Zoologiques. - Mémoires de la Société Impériale des Naturalistes de Moscou 4: 249-257. Fraser-Brunner, A. 1951: The ocean sunfish (family Molidae). - Bulletin of the British Museum (Natural History) Zoology 1 (6). 89-121. Gmelin, J. F. [1789]. Caroli a Linné, systema naturae. Tom. I. Pars III. - pp. 1033-1516. [Lipsiae]. ([G. E. Beer]).Has- selquist, F. 1757. Iter Palæstinum eller resa til heliga landet, förrättad ifrån år 1749 til 1752, med beskrifningar, rön, anmärkningar, öfver de märkvärdigaste naturalier, på hennes Kongl. Maj:ts befallning. Uitgifven af Carl Linnæus. - pp. [1-15], 1-619, [1]. Stockholm. (Salvius). Hasselquist, F. 1762. Reise nach Palästina in den Jahren von 1749 bis 1752. Auf Befehl Ihro Majestät der Königinn von Schweden herausgegeben von Carl Linnäus. Aus dem Schwedischen. - pp. [1-15], 1-606. Rostock. (J. C. Koppe). Houttuyn, F. 1764. Natuurlyke historie of uitvoerige beschry- ving der dieren, planten en mineraalen, volgens het samens- tel van den Heer Linnæus. Met naauwkeurige afbeeldingen. Eerste deels, zesde stuk. Dieren van beiderley leven. - pp. [1-6], 1-558, [index 1-4], [1-2], Pl. L-LVI [= 50-56]. Amster- dam. (Houttuyn). Koelreuter, I. T. 1766. Piscivm rariorvm e Mvs. Petrop. excep- torvm descriptiones continvtae. - Novi Commentarii Aca- demiae Scientiarum Imperialis Petropolitanae 10: 329-351, Tab. VIII [= 8]. Koelreuter, I. T. 1770. Descriptio piscis, e Gadorvm genere, Rvssis nawaga dicti, historico-anatomica. - Novi Commen- tarii Academiae Scientiarum Imperialis Petropolitanae 14: 484-497, Tab. XII [= 12]. La Cépède, B. G. E. de 1803. Histoire naturelle des poissons. Tome cinquième. - pp. j-lxviij [= 1-68], 1-803, Pl. 1-21. Paris. (Plassan). Linck, H. F. 1790. Versuch einer Eintheilung der Fische nach den Zähnen. - Magazin für das Neueste aus der Physik und Naturgeschichte 6 (3): 28-38. Gotha. Linnæus, C. 1758. Systema naturæ per regna tria naturæ, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis. Tomus I. Editio decima, reformata. - pp. [1-4], 1-824. Holmiæ. (Salvius). Parenti, P. 2003. Family Molidae Bonaparte 1832 - molas and sunfishes. - California Academy of Sciences Annotated Checklists of Fishes 18: 9 pp. Rafinesque-Schmaltz, C. S. 1810. Indice d‘ittiologia siciliana; ossia, catalogo metodico dei nomi latini, italiani, e siciliani dei pesci, che si rinvengono in Sicilia disposti secondo un metodo naturale e seguito da un appendice che contiene la descrizione de alcuni nuovi pesci siciliani. - pp. 1-70. Messina. Walbaum, J. J. 1792. Petri Artedi Sueci genera piscium. In quibus systema totum ichthyologiæ proponitur cum clas- sibus, ordinibus, generum characteribus, specierum differentiis, observationibus plurimis. Redactis speciebus 242 ad genera 52. Ichthyologiæ pars III. Cum tabula ænea. - pp. [1- 7], 1-723, Tab. 1-3. Grypeswaldiæ. (Röse).

145