Tribune

NOTES ON NOMENCLATURE OF PLANT

Renaud FORTUNER

California Deoartmentof Food and Agriculture Nematology Lab, Room 340, 1220 N Street, Sacramento, California, U.S.A.

A number of violations of the rules of the Interna- Ogma modestum, Hemicycliophora chathaensis are not tional Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN) came available in the thesis of Kapoor (1982). to my attention during the update of the book Nomen- This enumeration is not limitative and more non- clatorial Compilation of Plant and Soi1 Nematodes available names may have been proposedin other theses (Tarjan & Hopper, 1974), and its two supplements that 1 failed to locate. (Hopper & Tarjan, 1977; 1978). Because the updated data on nematodenomenclature will eventually be distributed in the form of a compu- Correct spelling of names terized data fiie, the corrections of these infractions have to be published first in a printed form (Art. 8, ICZN). The original spelling of a name is to be accepted as the correct original spelling, unlessit contravenes some provision of Articles 26 to 30 and 32. Names not available The deposition of athesis in alibrary does not AGREEMENTIN GENDER constitute a publication.The mention of a newname at Taylor (1936) treated Criconemoides as aneuter name, a meeting does not make it available (Art. 9). whereas it is a masculine name(Art. 30, a, ii) as pointed Abstracts of theses printed in Dissertation Abstracts out by Loof (1964).The new names he proposed, when International, and abstracts of communications in jour- adjectives, must be corrected; nals or books are publishedaccording to Article 8. Criconemoides annulatum to C. annulatus; However, the new names they include are available only Criconemoides axeste to C. axestis; if the abstract accomplieswith the requirements of Criconemoides morgense to C. morgensis; etc. Art. 13. Ogma is €ormed on ogmos, a masculine Greek word, Table 1 presents a list of names that cannot be feminized when latinized with a change of termination acceptedbecause ofArticles 9 and 13 (some names (Art. 30, a, i, 3). were made availableby a subsequent correct pu- Ogma coronatum is corrected to O. coronata blication). In addition to Table 1 : Tylen- O. simlaense to O. sirnlaensis, etc. chus vividus, T. varicaudatus, T. serenus, Coslenchus Because a genus name takes the gender appropriate temperatus, Tenunenia tenuum,Malenchus microlo- to its termination (Art. 30, a, i, 4), Thecavemziculatus is batus, M. praecisus, M. kasolensis, Neottolenchus clams, a masculine genus name.T. crassicrustata is correctedto N. unicus, Basiria abrupta,'B. simulata, Nothotylenchus T. crassicrustatus. The name of the type species of the strictus, Boleodorus vincde, Basiliophora constricta, B. genus, T. gracilancea is correct(from lancea, light, spear, filicaudata, B. delicata, Sakia attenuata, S. bella, Ty- a noun). lenchorhynchus caricae, T. sulcaticeps, T. valerianae, T. Other specific names corrected because of errors in stabilis, T. imitans, Quinisulcius similis, Merlinius auste- gender include : rus, Nagelus magnus, Telotylenchus sparsus, Helicotylen- Allantonenla bathycapsulata to A. bathycapsulatum chus certus, Rotylenchus julaharensis, R. yarikahensis, Criconema elegantula to C. elegantulum Orientylus cognatus, O. populus, O. prominens, Pratylen- Criconema kornabaeensis to C. komabaeense chus himalayaensis, P. angelicae, P. ntenthae, Hirsch- Criconema proclivis to C. proclive manniella augusta, H. phantastica, Macroposthonia vi- Nothocriconema montanus to N. montanum gens, M. lanatae, M. efJiciens, Nothocriconema indolens, Iotonchium obtusicaudatus to I. obtusicaudatum

Revue Nématol. 8 (1) : 77-83 (1985) 77 R. Fortuner

Table 1 List of names non-available becauseof Articles 9 and 13, eventually with correct authorityfor the names that later become available

NAMESNON-AVAILABLE AVAIWLENAMES Tylenchus oyzae Soltwedel,1889 T. oyzaeBreda van de Haan,1902 Pratylenchus rhizasinus Sher, 1948 - P. thomei Sher, 1948 P. thomei Sher & Allen, 1953 Radopholus paludosus Whitlock, 1957 - Helicotylenchus digonicus Perry, 1959 H. digonicus, Perry in Perry, Darling & Thorne, 1959 H. microlobus Perry, 1959 H. microlobus, Perry in Perry, Darling & Thorne, 1959 H. pumilus Perry, 1959 H. pumilus, Perry in Perry, Darling & Thorne, 1959 H. platyurus Perry, 1959 H. platyurus, Perry in Perry, Darling & Thorne, 1959 Xiphinema paulum Bravo-Lima, 1965 - X. griphum Bravo-Lima, 1965 - X. mediterraneum Bravo-Lima, 1965 X. mediterraneum Martelli & Lamberti, 1967 X. latinum Bravo-Lima, 1965 - Macroposthonia amorphus De Grisse & Loof, 1965 Criconernoides amorphus De Grisse, 1967 Chitinotylenchoides mediterranensis Arias & Jiménez- C. mediterranensis Arias & Jiménez-Millan, 1973 Millan 1965; 1968 Aphelenchoides longiuteralis Eroshenko, 1967 - Atalodera ucri Wouts, 1970 A. ucri Wouts & Sher, 1971 Sarisodera hydrophila Wouts, 1970 S. hydrophila Wouts & Sher, 1971 dilatatus Rodriguez 1976; 1977 T. dilatatus Rodriguez & Bell, 1978 T. intermedius Rodriguez, 1976; 1977 T. intermedius Rodriguez & Bell, 1978 Atlantadorus grandis Rodriguez, 1976; 1977 (Atlantadorus)grandis Rodriguez & Bell, 1978 Nanidorus westindicus Rodriguez, 1976; 1977 Paratrichodorus (Nanidorus)westindicus Rodriguez, Sher & Siddiqi, 1978 Allotrichodorus vangundyi Rodriguez, 1976; 1977 Monotrichodorus vangundyi Rodriguez, Sher & Siddiqi, 1978 Vadorus bullatus Rodriguez, 1976; 1977 V; varians Rodriguez, 1976; 1977 - Macroposthonia similicrenata Cid del Prado, 1976 M. similicrenata Cid del Prado, 1978 M. caballeroi Cid del Prado, 1976 M. caballeroi Cid del Prado, 1978 M. sosamossi Cid del Prado, 1976 M. sosamossi Cid del Prado, 1978 Meloidogyne californiensis Abdel-Rahman, 1981 Hirschmanniella pomponiensis Abdel-Rahman, 1981 Radopholus citrophilus Huettel, 1982 R. citrophilus Huettel, Dickson & Kaplan, 1984

Scutellonema magna to S. magnum specific (not the generic) name of its host; this name orientalis to S. orientale should be treated as a substantive in the genitive case Sphaeronema cornubiensis' to S. cornubiense (Article 11, g, 4). For example, Hemicaloosia americana

Helicotylenchus unicum to~ H. unicus Ray & Das, 1978 is a species from India named after its Paratylenchus longistylosa to P. longistylosus host : Agave americana. H. americana is to be spelled H. americanae. SPECIFTCNAMES DERIVED FROM HOST NAMES Many authors use the generic name of the host. It would not serve the stability of nomenclature to change A parasite named after its hosts should be given the these names and they will be accepted as proposed.

38 Revue Nématol. 8 (1): 77-83 (1985) Nomenclature of plant nematodes

SPECIFICNAMES'DERIVED FROM GEOGRAPHICAL NAMES MISCELLANEOUS Nothocriconema sanctus-fiancisci van den Berg & cola. This word is either an adjective (colus, cola, Heyns, 1977, must be correctedby deletion of a hyphen colum, living among) or nouna (cola, inhabitant of). (Art.26), and should be written in the genitive case as The decision of the original author, or the evidence N. sanctifiancisci. of usage, must be accepted in deciding whether a Scutellonema imphalus Sultan & Jairajpuri,1979, speciesname ending with cola isa noun or an from the tom of Imphal, India, treatedis as an adjective. adjective (see also art. 30, i). It should be spelled S. imphalum. philus, phila, philum is an adjective and must agree with the gender of the generic nme. SPECIFICNAMES FORMED FROM MODERN PERSONAL cauda, tail is a noun (example : Tylenchorhynchus NAMES magnicauda). Helicotylenchus hoplocaudus is correc- ted to H. hoplocauda; Laimaphelenchuspannocaudus Aphelenchoides fianklini Singh, 1969, from the name to L. pannocauda. Caudatus is an adjective formed of Dr MaryFranklin, is corrected to A. franklinae. from cauda and must agree with the gender of the Cosaglenchus rafiqus Siddiqui & Khan, 1983 is corrected generic name. to C. rafi'qi (Recommendation 31 A; see also D III). urus from a Greek feminine word K ura )>,tail, has beensometimes latinized into urus, amasculine ERRORSIN TARJAN AND HOPPER'S BOOK noun. When Rotylenchus brachyurus was transferred to Scutellonema, the specificnames becomes S. The specificnames listed in Tarjan and Hopper brachyurus, not K Scutellonema brachyurum )>.Other (1974) are sometimes spelled with an ending different specific names have keptthe feminine gender for the from that in the original publication. These discrepan- noun (( ura >) :Anguillulina macrura Goodey, 1932, cies occurred when a taon is better known in a genus that later became Merlinius macrura. different from the original genus, and with a different profindus, -a, -um, is an adjective but profindorum gender. is anoun in the genitive case.Dolichodorus profindo- For example the species named Tylenchus balsamophi- mm is correct. lus Throne, 1926, in the original descriptionwas spelled i? balsamophila in Tarjan and Hopper's book, probably because it is now Anguina balsamophila. In the com- New combinations made by synonymization puterized datafiie, the spelling hasbeen reverted to that Tarjan and Hopper (1974) accepted as new ctmbi- of the original author. nations only species names actually publishedin combi- Other typographicalerrors in Tarjan and Hopper nation with a genus name. When an author listed a (1974) include : species under its old name as a synonymof a species in Anguillonema erenati for A. crenati. a different genus, Tarjan and Hopper did not credit him Aphelenchoides eradicatus for A. eradicitus as the author of a new combination.These authors based These incorrect subsequent spellings have no status this policy on the interpretation of Article 11, g, ii : a in nomenclature (Art. 33, b). species name must be published in combination with a Anotherincorrect subsequent spelling was made genus name. whenBajaj and Bhatti (1979)transferred Basiroides In fact, Article11, g, ii is irreleventin this case because longimatricalis Kazachenko, 1975 to Basiria under the it refers to the availability of the specific name when specific name Basik leptolongimatricalis. The correct originally proposed (Penrose, in litt.). newcombination is Basiria longimatricalis (Kaza- In the computerized data file, new combinations will chdo)Ba,iaj & 'Bhatti. be credited to the authors of the synonymization.

INCORRECTORIGINAL SPELLING Infrasubspecifk names The word (( philus >> was mispelled in Criconemoides cocophillus. Four species names were formed with the NAMES PROPQSED BEFORE 1961 word a areolated D (with areolaes in the lateral field) mispelled G aerolated D. These inadvertent errors must Articles 46 states that a name originally proposed as be corrected without change of amhorship (Art. 33, a, either a species or a subspeciesis available withthe same i) : Criconemoides cocophilus Loos, 1p49; Telotylenchm author and date in the other ategory (subspecies or areolatus Baqri & Jairajpuri,1969; Tylenchorhynchns species accordingly). areolatus Tobar-Jiménez, 1970; Tylenchorhynchus mw- For example, Heterodera schachtii var. avenae Wol- latus Khan & Nanjappa, 1972 (= i? nordiensis Khan & lenweber, 1924, proposed avarietyas before 1961should Nanjappa 1974);Helicotylenchus areolatus van den Berg be interpreted asa subspecies : Heterodera schachtii & Heyns, 1975. avenae Wollenweber, 1924 (art. 45, .e, i).

Revue Nématol. 8 (1) : 77-83 (1985) R. Fortuner

Because of Art. 46, the name avenue is also available Fuchs (1930) proposed the new species Parusitaphe- at the specific rank as Heterodera avenue Wollenweber, lenchus hylustophilus as two forms : cunicularii and ateri. 1924. Even if it is Filip’ev, 1934Who first used this latter P. hylustophilus cunicularii is here renamed P. hylasto- combination, it is wrong to cite : (( Heterodera avenue philus hylastophilus Fuchs, 1930. The same author also Filip’ev, 1934 )) or even t( Heterodera avenue (Wollenwe- proposed P. pissodispiceae and P. pissodis notati. P. ber 1924) Filip’ev, 1934 B. pissodis piceae is here renamed P. pissodis pissodis Fuchs, Conversely, Tylenchus afizcanus Micoletzky, 1916was 1930. reduced to subspecific rank by Micoletzky, 1922 but the Micoletzky, 1922 proposed Aphelenchus (Paraphelen- correct authority is Tylenchus robustus aficanus Mico- chus) pseudoparietinus as two varieties : microtubifer and letzky,1916 andnot (( Tylenchus robustus afn’canus tubifer. A. (Paraphelenchus)pseudoparietinus microtubi- (Micoletzky 1916) Micoletzky, 1922 P. fer is here renamed Aphelenchus (Paraphelenchus)pseu- Some authors proposed quadrinomina by splitting a doparietinus pseudoparietinus Micoletzky, 1922. subspecies into varieties or forms. Even if proposed before 1961 such names are clearly of infrasubspecific rank and are not available. Homonymy The variety and form names magnus, paruus, gracilis and infomzis proposed by Micoletsky (1922) for Aphe- Tylenchus robustus var. exiguus Kreis, 1924(also lenchus parietinus micrqtubifer and A. parietinus tubifer available as T. robustus exiguus Kreis, 1924 and as T. are not available. exiguus Kreis, 1924) a junior primary homonym of Ty- In Tylenchorhynchus robustus var. pseudorobustus f . lenchus exiguus deMan, 1876, is here rejected and brasiliensis proposed by Rahm (1928) the name brasi- replaced by Tylenchus kreisi nomen novum. liensis is not available. Tylenchus davainei var. gracilis Rahm, 1928, a junior primary homonym of Tylenchus gracilis de Man, 1880, NAMESPROPOSED AFTER 1960 is here replaced by Tylenchus rahmi nomen novum. Tylenchus (Chitinotylenchus) coffeae var. brevicauda Paratylenchus nanus var. bicaudatus Gubina, 1973 Rahm, 1928 (now in Pratylenchus), a junior primary and Aphelenchus avenae f. bicaudata Adilova, 1973 are homonym of Tylenchus brevicauda Micoletzky,1925 not available (Art. 45, e, ii and c). (now in Ditylenchus) (see Art. 57, a),is here rejected and replaced by l’rarylenchus kolourus nomen novum (kolos, Nominate subspecies Gr., shortened; uros, Gr., tail, masculine noun). Anguillulina (Tylenchus) aberrans Altherr,1952, a The subspecies that contains the type-specimen of a junior primary homonym of Anguillulina aberrans subdivided species bears the same name as the species Thorne, 1935, now in thegenus Tylenchus, is here (Art. 57, a). rejected and replaced by Tylenchus althem‘ nomen Criconema cobbi (Micoletzky 1925) Taylor, 1936 was novum. Split by De Coninck (1945) into three forms (tobe When another species, Psilenchus aberrans Thorne, interpreted as three subspecies, see Art. 45, e, i): C. cobbi 1949was transferred to Tylenchus as T. (Filenchus) typica. C. cobbi duplex. C. cobbi multiplex. According to aberrans (Thorne, 1949) Goodey, 1963,a secondary Art. 47,a, the subspecies Criconema cobbi typica is homonymy appeared between this species and T. (Lelen- renamed Criconema cobbi cobbi (Micoletzky 1925) chus) aberrans (Altherr, 1952) Andrassy, 1954. A new Taylor, 1936 (seeArt. 46 for thecorrect authority for this name, neoaberrans, was proposed by Cioodey (1963) for subspecies). De Coninck (1945) remains the authority of T. (Filenchus) aberrans (Thorne 1949). In fact, Thorne’s the other two subspecific names. species was senior to Altherr’s, because what counts is Fuchs (1915) proposed a new species Tylenchus con- the date when the specific name is originally proposed. tortus with three subspecies : T. contortus amitini. T. Altherr’s specific name should have been replaced, not contortus cembraei. T. contortus typographi. Acting as Thorne’s. first reviser inthe sense of Article 24, 1 choose T. With the replacement of T. (L.)aberrans (Altherr) by contortus typographi as the name of the nominotypical T. althem‘ nomen novum, the secondary homonymy of subspecies. Its name is changed to T. contortus contortus this species with T. (P.) aberrans (Thorne)no longer Fuchs, 1915. The name and authority of the other two exists. In addition, Thorne’s species was later transferred subspecies and of additional subspecies within T. contor- to Busiria, which also breaks the homonymy (see Art. tus proposed by Fuchs (1929) remain unchanged. 59, b, ii). In conclusion, the correct names of the three Fuchs (1929) proposed the new species Tylenchus mecies are : sulphureus as four subspecies (piceae, piniphili, notati, * aberrans (Thorne, 1935) Thorne & Allen, pini). Acting as first reviser, 1 choose T. sulphureuspiceae 1944 to be here renamed T. sulphureus sulphureus Fuchs, = Anguillulina aberrans Thorne, 1935 1929. * Busiria aberrans (Thorne, 1949) Siddiqi, 1963

80 Revue Nématol. 8 (1) : 77-83 (1985) Nomenclature of plant nematodes

= Tylenchus (Filenchus) neoaberrans Goodey, 1963 (Steiner) Siddiqi is again rejected and replaced by Merli- = Psilenchus aberrans Thorne, 1949 nius macrura (Goodey) Siddiqi. * Tylenchus altheni nom. nov. Tarjan (1973) regarded the population studied by = Anguillulina (Tylenchus) aberrans Altherr, 1952. Goodey (1932) when he proposea the nomen novum Anguil?ulina macrura to be different from. the species Tylenchus (Aglenchus)parvus Siddiqi, 1963 is a junior originany described by Steiner as Aphelenchus dubius. ,< primary homonym of Tylenchus filiformis f. parvus Mi- Tarjan considered Aphelenchus dubius Steiner a species coletzky, 1922. Golden (1971) considered T. (A.) parvus inquirenda and treated Goodey’s population as a valid, Siddiqi and T. (Ottolenchus) equisetus Husain & Khan, distinct species which henamed Merlinius macrura 1967 tobe synonyms. Tylenchus (Aglenchus) parvus (Goodev) Siddiqi. Siddiqi, 1963 is here rejected and replaced by Tylenchus (Ottolenchus) equisetus Hussain & Khan, 1967, an availa- This is unacceptable because the name macrura was ble name. clearly attached by Goodey (1932) to the species des- cribed by Steiner. Tarjan (1973) considers that Steiner’s Paraphelenchus micoletzkyi Ali, Farooqui & Surya- species cannot be identifïed at generic level. It should be wanshi, 1970, a primary homonym of P. micoletzkyi listed as Anguillulina macrura Goodey species incertae Steiner, 1941 (now in Metaphelenchus), is here rejected sedis. The population described by Goodey (1932) under and replaced by Paraphelenchus alii nomen novum. this name and discussed by Dr. Tarjan (1973) is here renamed Merlinius caroli nomen novum (from Charlie Hemicycliophora tesselata Boonduang & Ratanaprapa, TaIjan). 1974 is ajunior primary homonym of H. tesselata Sauer, 1958. The form described by Boonduang and Ratana- Basiria elegans Patil& Khan, 1983 is a junior secon- prapa (1974) as a new species belongs in fact to the dary homonym of B. elegans (Khan & Khan 1975) Bajaj species Caloosia paradoxa (Boonduang, inlitt.). H. & Bhatti, 1979 (syn. : Basiroides elegans Khan & Khan tesselata Boonduang & Ratanaprapa, 1974 is here re- 1975). It is here renamed Basiria patili nomen novum. jected and replaced by Caloosia paradoxa (LUC, 1958) Brzeski, 1974, an available name (Art.60). AKNOWLEDGEMENTS 1 Pratylenchus capitatus Das & Sultana, 1979, a junior 1 thank Drs. R. V. Melville, P. A. A. Loof, and M. Luc for primary homonym of P. capitatusIvanova, 1968, is here their comments on this note, andA. Penrose of the Internatio- rejected and replaced by Pratylenchus dasi nomen no- nal Commission of Zoological Nomenclature forhis explana- vum. tions on some articles of the Code of Nomenclature. Art. 59, a Statesthat a junior primary homonym must be permanently rejected. Tylenchus cobbi was proposed by de Man, 1906 to replace T. gracilis Cobb, 1888, junior homonym of T. gracilis de Man, 1880. The species of REFERENCES” de Man(1880) was later transferred to Tylenchorhynchus by Micoletzky (1925). It is now in Hirschmanniella after ABDEL-RAHMAN, F. H. (1981). ,morphology and the action of Luc and Goodey (1964). The species of biology of two new species of nematodes parasitic on sedge, Cobb (1888) was transferred to Aphelenchus by Cobb Scirpus robustus Pursh. Ph. D. Thesis, Univ. Cal$, Davis, (1891), even before de Man rejected its original name. 89 PP. Probably because of these transfers Steiner (1932) and ADILOVA, N. B. (1973). Fauna nematod Kukuruzy i prikor- Goodey (1960) used the rejected name gracilis for the nevoipochvy, ee dinamika b usloviyakhTashkentskoi species described by Cobb instead of the replacement oblasti. In : [The question of phytonematodes in Uzbekistan]. name cobbi. This is not justifïed. The taon originally Tashkent, Izdatelistvo “PAN” Vol. 3 :15-68. described by Cobb must be named Aphelenchus cobbi ARIAS, M. & JIMBNEZ-MILLAN,F. (1968). Chitinotylenchoides (de Man, 1906) Steiner, 1932. mediterranensis n. gen. n. sp. (Abstr.). WII Symp. Europ. Goodey (1932) transferred Tylenchus dubius Biitschli, Soc. Nematol., Antibes, September 8-14, 1965: 34. 1873 and Aphelenchus dubius Steiner, 1914 to Anguil- lulina. He proposed Anguillulina macrura replacement ARIAS, M. & JI~NEZ-MILLAN,F. (1973). Tylophaynx foetidus name for A. dubius Steiner.A. dubia (Biitschli) and A. (Biitschli, 1874) Sachs, 1950 en el levante Espaliol. Cuad. Cienc. Biol., 2 : macrura (Goodey) were later both transferred to Tylen- 53-55. chorhynchus. In 1970, Siddiqi transferred T. macrura (Goodey) to Merlinius, while T. dubius (Bütschli) remai- ned in Tylenchorhynchus. Siddiqi revalidated the name dubius in Merlinius dubius (Steiner) Siddiqi. Because the secondary homonym A. dubius Steiner wasrejected * Articles included in the-literaturelist in Tarjan and Hopper before 1961 it cannot be restored. Therefore, M. dubius (1974) are not referenced here.

1: 1: Revue Nématol. 8 (1) : 77-83 (1985) 81 !’., . ..; R. Fortuner

BAJAJ,H. K. & BHA~,D. S. (1979). Two new species of 1972 to Nomenclatorial Compilation of Plant and Soil Basiria Siddiqi, 1959 () from Haryana, India. Nematodes. Agric. Canada Res. Branch (Ed.) : 17 p. Indian J. Nematol., 8 :(1978) 95-101. HOPPER,B. E. & TARJAN,A. C. (1978). Supplement for the year BOONDUANG, A.& RATANAPRAPA, D. (1974). Identification of 1973 to Nomenclatorial Compilation of Plant and Soil plant parasitic nematodes of Thailand. Systematic study of Nematodes. Agric. Canada Res. Branch (Ed.) : 21 p. Criconematidae in Thailand with description of three new HUETTEL, R. N. (1982). Genetic basis for the identification species. Pl. Protect. Sem. tech. Bull., Dept. Agric., Bangkok, and separation of the two Floridaraces of Radopholus Thailand, No. 22, 16 p. similis. Ph. D. diss. univ. Florida, 117 pp. BRAVO-LIMA,M. (1965). Studies on species of the genus Xi- HUETEL, R. N., DICKSON,D. W. & KAPLAN, D. T. (1984). Ra- phinema and other*nematodes.PhD Thesis, Fac. Sci. Univ. dopholus citroph$us sp. n. (Nematoda), a sibling species of London, Rothamsted, 165 p. Radopholus similis. Proc. helminth. Soc. Wash., 51 : 32-35. CIDDEL PRADO-VERA,1. (1976). Estudio taxonomico de algunas KAPOOR, M. (1982). Taxonomic studies on nematodes of some especies de la familia Criconematidae (Taylor 1936) Thorne, medicinal and aromatic plants of North India. Thesis, Panjab 1949, presentes encultivos de importancia agricola de Mexico. Univ., Chandigarh, India, 418 p. Thesis. Esc.Nac. Agric., Coleg. Postgrad., Chapingo, KAZACHENKO, 1. P. (1975).[New species of the Mexico, 98 p. family from the litter of coniferous forests] CIDDEL PRADO-VERA,1. (1978). Three new species of Macre- Trudy BioL-Pochven. Inst., 26 : 178-186. ’ posthonia (Nematoda : Criconematidae) from Mexico. Ne- KHAN, E. & NANJAPPA, C.K. (1972). Pseudhalenchus acutus, matologica, 24 : 29-36. sp. nov., and Tylenchorhynchus aerolatus, sp. nov. (Nema- DM, V. M. & SULTANA, S. (1979). Five new species of the genus toda : Tylenchida) from India. Bull. Entomol., 12 (1971) : Pratylenchus from vegetable crops of Hyderabad, (Andhra 55-58. Pradesh). Indian J. Nematol., 9 : 5-14. LOOF,P. A. A. (1964). Free-living and plant-parasitic nemato- Da CONINCK,L. A. P. (1945). Sur la variabilité de Criconema des from Venezuela. Nematologica, 10 : 201-300. cobbi (Micoletzky 1925) et la systématique du genre Crico- Luc, M. & RASKI, D. J. (1981). Status of genera Macropost- nema Hofmaner & Menzel, 1914 (Criconematinae, Nema- honia, Criconemoides,Criconemella and Xenocriconemella toda), avec des données nouvelles sur quelques espèces du (Criconematidae : Nematoda). Revue Nématol., 4 : 3-21. genre. Bull. Musée r. Hist. Nat. Belg., 21 : 1-31. PATIL,K. J. & KHAN, E. (1983). Taxonomic studies on DE GRISSE,A. & P. A. A. (1965). Revision of the genus LOOF, nematodes of Vidarbha region of Maharashtra, Indian. VI.. Criconemoides (Nematodal Meded. LandbHoogesch. Op- Four new species of Tylenchid nematodes. Indian J. Ne- zoekStns Gent, 30 * 577-603. matol., 12(1982) : 330-338. EROSHENKO,A. S. (1984). [New species of ectoparasitic nema- PERRY,V. G. (1959).Anatomy, taxonomy, and control of todes from the rhizophere of conifers inthe Primorsk certain spiral nematodes attacking blue grass in Wisconsin., territory]. Paruzitologiya, 18 : 75-77. Diss. Abstr., 19 : 1509. EROSHENKO,A.S. (1967). [The nematode fauna of oats in the RAY, S. & DAS,S. N. (1978). Hemicaloosia americana n. gen., Primorsk territory ] Mater. nauch. KonJ vses. Obshch. Gel’ n. sp. (Nematoda :Hemicycliophoridae) from Orissa, India. mint. Year 1966, Part 5 : 159-160. O.U.A.T. J. Res., 8 : 131-138. FILIP’EV,1. N. (1934). [Harmful and useful nematodes in rural RODRIGUEZ-MONTESSORO,R. (1977). eontributions to the economy] Moscow, Leningrad, 440 p. taxonomy of (Thorne 1935)Clark, 1961 GOLDEN,A.M. (1971). Classification ofthe genera and higher (Nematoda : Diphtherophorina). Diss.Abstr., internat., categories of the order Tylenchida (Nematoda). In : Zuc- 37B : 5902. kerman, B. M., Mai, W. F. & Rohde, R. A. (Eds.), Plant RODRIGUEZ-MONTESSORO;R. & BELL, A. H. (1978). Three parasitic nematodes. Volume 1. Morphology, anatomy, taxo- new species of Trichodoridae (Nematoda : Diphtheropho- nomy, und ecology. New York, Academic Press : 191-232. rina) with observations on the vulva in Paratrichodorus. J. GOODEY,J.B. (1960). The classification of the Aphelenchoidea Nematol., 10 : 132-141. Fuchs, 1937. Nematologicu, 5 : 111-126. RODRIGUEZ-MONTESSORO,R., SHER, S. A. & SIDDIQI,M. R. GOODEY,T. (1932). The genus Anguillulina Gerv. & V. Ben., (1978). Systematics ofthe monodelphic species ofTrichodo- 1859, vel TylenchusBastian, 1865. J. Helminth., 10 :75-180. ridae (Nematoda : Diphtherophorina) with descriptions of GOODEY,T. (1963). Soil andfreswater nematodes. 2nd Ed., rev. a newgenus and four new species. J. Nematol., 10 : 141-152. J. B. Goodey. Methuen, London, 544 p. SHER,S. A. (1948). Revision of the genus Pratylenchus (Ne- GUBINA,V. G. (1973). [Scutellonema picea n. sp. (Nematoda : matoda :Tylenchidae). PhD Thesis, Univ. Calif., Riverside, ) and a new variety of Paratylenchus nanus 64 p. Cobb, 1923 (Nematoda : Tylenchidae) from roots and SIDDIQI,M. R. (1970). On the plant-parasitic nematode genera rhizosphere of conifer seedlings]. Trudy gel’mint. Lab., 23 : Merlinius gen. n. and Tylenchorhynchus Cobb and the 52-55. classification of the families Dolichodoridaeand Belonolai- HOPPER,B. E. & TARJAN,A. C. (1977). Supplement for the year midae n. rank. Proc. helminth. Soc. Wash., 37 : 68-77.

82 Revue Nématol. 8 (1) : 77-83 (1985) Nomenclature of plant nematodes

SIDDIQUI,A. U. & KHAN, E. (1983). Taxonomic studies on TAYLOR,A. L. (1936). The genera and species of the Cricone- Tylenchidae (Nematoda) on India. II. Descriptions of two matinae, a sub-family of the Anguillulinidae (Nematoda). new sp. of Cosaglenchus gen. n. along with proposition of a Tram Am. microsc. Soc., 55 : 391-421. new sub-family Aglenchinae.IndianJ. Nematol., 12 (1982) : 303-3 1 1. VANDEN BERG,E. & HEYNS,J. (1975). South African Hoplo- laiminae. 4. The genus Helicotylenchus Steiner, 1945. Phyto- SOLTWEDEL,F. W. O.(1889). Verslag van de Directeur. Vijfde phylactica, 7 : 35-52. Jversl, Proefstation voor Midden Java over 1888-1889. STEINER,G. (1932). Annotations on the nomenclature of some VANDEN BERG,E. & HEYNS,J. (1977). Descriptions of new and plant parasitic nematodes.J. Wash. Acad. Sci., 22 :517-518. little known Criconematidae from South Africa (Nema- toda). Phytophylactica, 9 : 95-101. SULTAN,M. S. & JAIRAJPURI, M. S. (1979). A new species of the genus Scutellonenzahdrassy, 1958 (Nematoda :Hoplo- WHITLOCK,L. S. (1957). Notes on Radopholus oyzae (Ne- laimidae) from Manipur, India. Curr. Sci., 48 : 277-278. matoda, Phasmidia) with akey to the genus and description TARJAN,A. C. (1973). A synopsis ofthe genera and species in of a new species, R. paludosus. M. S. Thesis, Louisiana St. the Tylenchorhynchinae (, Nematoda). Proc. Univ., 74 p. helminth. Soc. Wash., 40 : 123-144. WOUTS,W. H. (1970). A revision (to genus level) of the sub- TARJAN,A. C. & HOPPER,B. E. (1974). Nomenclatorial com- family Heteroderinae (Nematoda: Tylenchida) with a descrip- pilation of plant and soi1 nematodes. Society of Nematolo- tion of two new genera. PhD Thesis, Univ. Calif., Riverside, gists, 419 p. 72 p.

Accepté pour publication le 27 novembre 1984.

Revue Néinatol. 8 (1) : 77-83 (1985) 83