INTRODUCTION

World catalogs for most of the subfamilies of the Staphylinidae were published recently (Löbl, 1997; Herman, 2001a–g), but three subfamilies, including the Paederinae, were omitted. A catalog for the Paederinae is essentially complete (Herman, ms) and requires only editing and some nomenclatural corrections. My intention is to publish the catalog for the Paederinae after revising the generic classification of the subfamily. That revision, which is currently in progress (Herman, in prep.), will result in over 1000 changes in the group, including many new synonyms and new combinations.

A catalog of the beetles of the Palaearctic Region is being prepared under the editorship of I. Löbl and A. Smetana. For that catalog the Paederinae of the region were extracted from the world catalog. Before either the world or the Palaearctic catalogs are published some nomenclatural problems require resolution.

The purpose of the present article is to resolve the nomenclatural problems that pertain directly to the Palaearctic fauna of the Paederinae. The nomenclatural problems discussed herein are similar to those included in an article published for other subfamilies (Herman, 2001h). Among the questions addressed herein are spelling errors, generic assignment for some species, newly recognized synonyms, resurrection of names in synonymy, replacement of some junior primary homonyms, and the conservation of other junior primary homonyms or junior synonyms that are currently in use as valid. Nearly all the problems considered concern taxa in the Palaearctic Region. The exception concerns junior primary homonyms; all of those found in the subfamily are considered herein. At least 13 secondary homonymic pairs require attention, but, with the exception of one pair of names, decisions concerning them will await completion of the revision of the generic classification because some of those homonymic pairs may not remain congeneric.

Twenty-eight junior primary homonyms are replaced. In no case have the conditions been met permitting automatic protection of the junior names under Articles 23.9.1 and 23.9.2 of the Code (ICZN, 1999). Likewise, application to the Commission for the conservation of the junior names was impossible as the replacement of none of those names would threaten stability or universality or cause confusion (Article 23.9.3), nor have the members of any primary homonymic pairs been in different genera since 1899 (Article 23.9.5). The junior homonyms have been cited only a few times and often were cited only in the original description. One name is shown to be valid, not a junior primary homonym as erroneously claimed.

Twenty names are junior synonyms or homonyms but are currently used as the valid name of the species. To avoid the instability and unnecessary confusion that would result from the replacement of those names, efforts have been made to maintain use of those junior names. Nine names are protected herein under provision of Articles 23.9.1 and 23.9.2. Six names have been submitted to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature for conservation under provisions of Article 23.9.3, and four homonymic pairs that are currently valid, but no longer congeneric, are submitted to the Commission as required by Article 23.9.5. The synonymy of the twentieth name must be verified.

SPELLING CORRECTIONS

The specific name of Procirrus lefebvrei Latreille, 1829: 436, has not been spelled correctly by any author. Latreille named the species for M. Lefevre, so the name should have been Procirrus lefevrei, however he named the species Procirrus lefeburi, and a few others used that spelling (Guérin-Méneville, 1829: pl. 9, fig. 6; Laporte, 1835: 124). Laporte (1840: 184, pl. 13, fig. 1) cited it as lefeburi in the text, but as lefebvrei for the illustration. Beginning with that article and Erichson's work (1840: 686) the name was cited as Procirrus lefebvrei by nearly every author thereafter. Procirrus lefebvrei is an incorrect subsequent spelling (Article 33.3), but is the commonly used spelling and has been attributed to the original publication of the original spelling by all subsequent authors and so is preserved and deemed herein the correct original spelling (Article 33.3.1).

Achenium jejunum Erichson, 1840: 587, was originally cited as “ieiunum” which is from the Latin adjective ieiunus, referring to hungry or lean. There is no Latin root for “jejunum”, but that name has a long history of use (Fairmaire and Laboulbène, 1856: 550; Kraatz, 1857: 690; Fauvel, 1902: 96; Koch, 1937: 74, 109; Porta, 1949: 151). The name ieiunum was not used again until a few authors began using it recently (Coiffait, 1971a: 22, 1982: 198; Ciceroni and Zanetti, 1995: 24). Achenium jejunum is an incorrect subsequent spelling, but has been the prevailing use and has always been attributed to Erichson. The subsequent spelling and attribution is maintained and the name is deemed the correct original spelling (Article 33.3.1).

NEW COMBINATIONS

Lithocharis stilicina (Cameron, 1931a: 149) (ex Medon), new combination, is transferred from Medon where it had been proposed as a replacement name for Medon lithocharoides (Cameron, 1924: 183) (ex Stilicus). Prior to the present article, L. stilicina had been assigned to Medon (Lithocharis); that subgenus is currently considered a genus.

Lobrathium alticola (Cameron, 1943: 36), Lobrathium badium (Cameron, 1924: 193), and Lobrathium cylindricolle (Cameron, 1924: 194), new combinations, are all transferred from Lathrobium. Lobrathium, with a long history as a subgenus of Lathrobium, is now listed as a genus. The aforementioned species were all named in Lathrobium (Lobrathium). Specimens of Lobrathium badium have been examined.

Micranops surinamensis (Herman, 1965: 87) (ex Orus), Micranops volans (Blackwelder, 1943: 277) (ex Orus), and Micranops yemenicus (Coiffait, 1981a: 19) (ex Scopaeus) are new combinations. Micranops surinamensis and M. volans are transferred on the basis of examination of specimens and M. yemenicus on the basis of characters provided by Coiffait (1981a: 19, 1984: 175). J. Frisch examined the type of Scopaeus yemenicus and concurs with the transfer (J. Frisch, personal commun.).

Pinobius longipennis (Cameron, 1931a: 219), new combination, is from India and is transferred from Dolicaon. Although specimens of this species have not been examined, it is moved to Pinobius because Dolicaon is restricted to southern Africa, and most of the species from tropical Africa, India, and southeastern Asia to Australia that had been in Dolicaon are in Pinobius (see Herman, 1981: 336–337).

Platydomene anguina (Sharp, 1874: 57) (ex Lathrobium), Platydomene carinicollis (Sharp, 1889: 255) (ex Lathrobium), Platydomene funebris (Sharp, 1889: 256) (ex Lathrobium), Platydomene nobilis (Sawada, 1965: 11) (ex Lobrathium), all new combinations, are transferred from their current assignments in Lobrathium. Platydomene, with a long history as a subgenus of Lathrobium or Lobrathium, is currently considered a genus. The preceding four species were all assigned to the subgenus Platydomene.

Sunius fungi (Cameron, 1943: 34), Sunius immsi (Bernhauer, 1914: 99), Sunius laevior (Cameron, 1943: 34), and Sunius monticola (Cameron, 1931a: 143) are all new combinations, were originally proposed in Medon, and were assigned to Medon (Hypomedon). Hypomedon is currently a subgenus of Sunius.

Tetartopeus cognatus (Sharp, 1889: 257) and Tetartopeus fulvipes (Adachi, 1955: 30, 35), both described in Lathrobium, are new combinations. Tetartopeus, with a long history as a subgenus of Lathrobium, is currently cited as a genus by many authors. Both of the species cited here were assigned to Lathrobium (Tetartopeus).

NEW, REVISITED, AND RESURRECTED SYNONYMS

Chloecharis Lynch, 1884: 257, was established for one Argentine species, C. rufula Lynch, 1884: 259, which is therefore its type species. That species has been a junior synonym of Hypomedon debilicornis (Wollaston, 1857) (ex Lithocharis), which is the type species of Hypomedon Mulsant and Rey, 1878, since at least 1889 (Fauvel, 1889: 257). Because the type species of Chloecharis and Hypomedon are still synonyms, the former genus-group name is a junior synonym of the latter and has been so cited (Blackwelder, 1952: 101, 366; Assing and Schülke, 2001: 154).

Echiaster japonicus variety unicolor Bernhauer, 1922: 230, was published before Echiaster japonicus Bernhauer, 1923: 123. The name of the subspecies from Taiwan becomes Echiaster unicolor unicolor Bernhauer, 1922; the population from Japan takes the name Echiaster unicolor japonicus Bernhauer, 1923 (Articles 45.6.4 and 47.2).

Lathrobium elongatulum (MacLeay, 1873: 143) (ex Dolicaon) has been listed as the invalid synonym of Lathrobium gratellum Fauvel, 1877: 229, since Lea (1923: 31) published the synonymy and stated that “elongatulum was used by Kraatz for a species of Lathrobium in 1858”. The species to which Lea referred was Lathrobium elegantulum Kraatz, 1857: 680; Kraatz never proposed the name “elongatulum”. Lathrobium elongatulum (MacLeay) is not a homonym and so is ressurected herein; Lathrobium gratellum Fauvel is reduced to an invalid synonym of it.

Medon abantensis Bordoni, 1980b: 117 (October 7) is a junior primary homonym and a new synonym of Medon abantensis Bordoni, 1980a: 76 (June 15). The type locality, collector, and illustrations are the same for both names.

Medon mersinus Bordoni, 1980b: 94 (October 7) is a junior primary homonym of Medon mersinus Bordoni, 1980a: 75 (June 15) and a new synonym of Medon haafi Scheerpeltz, 1956: 1095, with which M. mersinus Bordoni, 1980a, was synonymized (Assing and Wunderle, 2001: 39). The type locality, collector, and illustrations are the same for both descriptions of M. mersinus.

Medon siculus Coiffait, 1970b: 709, was replaced by Medon sicilianus Coiffait, 1970a: 909, because at the time of replacement M. siculus was a junior secondary homonym of Lithocharis sicula Kraatz, 1857: 716, when both names were in Medon. Lithocharis sicula Kraatz has been a junior synonym of Lithocharis nigritula Erichson, 1840, since 1873 (Fauvel, 1873: 324); both names were placed in Medon in 1878 (Mulsant and Rey, 1878: 150) and are currently in Luzea (see Coiffait, 1984: 121). Medon siculus Coiffait was replaced as a junior secondary homonym, but is no longer congeneric with the older Kraatz name so it is ressurected (Article 59.4) and M. sicilianus is the invalid name.

Ochthephilum biforme (Fauvel, 1895: 237) (ex Cryptobium) has been cited as the invalid synonym of Ochthephilum semiopacum (Eppelsheim, 1895: 402) (ex Cryptobium) since 1912 (Bernhauer and Schubert, 1912: 286). The Fauvel name appeared in August and is resurrected as the valid name of the species; the Eppelsheim name, published in October, is the invalid synonym.

Paederus (Dioncopaederus) Scheerpeltz, 1957a: 464, is a new synonym of Paederus (Poederomorphus) Gautier, 1862: 75. The type species of the Paederus (Poederomorphus), Poederomorphus pedoncularius Gautier, 1862, is a synonym of Paederus littoralis Gravenhorst, 1802, which is the type species of Paederus (Dioncopaederus).

Platydomene abdominalis (Hubenthal, 1911: 188) (ex Lathrobium) is the older synonym and is resurrected as the valid name for the species heretofore referred to as Platydomene domeniformis (Koch, 1938: 112) (ex Lathrobium). The Hubenthal name was used for a variety of Lathrobium picipes Erichson, 1840. Scheerpeltz (1963: 418) cited it in Lathrobium (Platydomene) as a valid species, and Schülke (1990: 219) cited it as an invalid synonym of P. domeniformis. In the last 50 years P. domeniformis has been cited as valid in only five articles by five authors (see Bordoni, 1982: 34; Coiffait, 1982: 306; Horion, 1965: 55; Schülke, 1990: 219; Smetana, 1963a: 72), and P. abdominalis was described after 1899, so provisions of Article 23.9.1 are inapplicable.

Panscopaeus Sharp, 1889: 262, type species Scopaeus lithocharoides Sharp, is a valid genus. The disposition of Panscopaeus is based on examination of specimens for a revision of the generic classification of the Paederinae (Herman, ms). The name, originally proposed for a genus, has been cited as a synonym (Fauvel, 1895: 227) or subgenus (Bernhauer and Schubert, 1912: 232) of Medon, or subgenus of Aderocharis (Blackwelder, 1943: 250) or Achenomorphus (Blackwelder, 1952: 288). In a recent checklist of the staphylinids of Japan, Panscopaeus was not cited (Shibata, 1977). The genus includes two species, Panscopaeus lithocharoides (Sharp, 1874: 63) (ex Scopaeus), from China and Japan, and Panscopaeus yakushimanus (Ito, 1992: 61) (ex Achenomorphus), new combination, from Japan.

PRIMARY HOMONYMS

Astenus montanus, new name, is proposed for Astenus montanellus Cameron, 1941: 436, from the Philippines, which is a junior primary homonym of Astenus montanellus Bernhauer, 1939: 258. The replacement name is based on the Latin for “of mountains” (montanus).

Astenus nepalicus, new name, is proposed for Astenus nepalensis Scheerpeltz, 1976: 115, which is a junior primary homonym of Astenus nepalensis Coiffait, 1975: 170. The replacement name is based on Nepal, the country from which the species was described.

Homaeotarsus torquatus, new name, is proposed for Homaeotarsus collaris (Sharp, 1885: 507) (ex Cryptobium), from Mexico and Central America, which is a junior primary homonym of Ochthephilum collare (Reitter, 1884: 84) (ex Cryptobium). The replacement name is based on the Latin for adorned with a necklace (torquatus).

Lathrobium austellum, new name, is proposed for Lathrobium abdominale Lea, 1923: 36, from Australia, which is a junior primary homonym of Platydomene abdominale (Hubenthal, 1911: 188) (ex Lathrobium). The replacement name is based on the Latin for gentle south wind (austellus).

Lathrobium fulvipenne (Gravenhorst, 1806: 104) (ex Staphylinus), from Europe and Asia, is the valid name of the species, but it was cited as a junior primary homonym of “Staphylinus fulvipennis Turton, 1802: 523”, by Ádám (1996a: 243) who then replaced it with the next oldest synonym, Lathrobium punctulatum Mannerheim, 1830: 37. Ádám's contention that Staphylinus fulvipennis Gravenhorst is a junior homonym is incorrect and its replacement is unjustified. Turton's work was a translation of Gmelin, 1790, with the addition of some species not included by Gmelin. Turton translated previously published descriptions, named a few species, and replaced the secondary homonyms that resulted when Oxyporus and Paederus were combined with Staphylinus. Usually he cited the author of the species for which he was translating the description and for those he was replacing, but did not always do so and did not for Staphylinus fulvipennis. Since Turton attributed the name to no one, Ádám considered it to be newly proposed. Herman (2001e: 2480) interpreted Turton's use of the name as referring to Paederus fulvipennis Fabricius, 1793: 537, which is now a junior synonym of Othius punctulatus (Goeze, 1777), because the characters cited by Turton are an exact translation of Fabricius's description of Paederus fulvipennis.

Lathrobium morsum, new name, is proposed for Lathrobium nanum Sharp, 1876: 244, from Brazil, which is a primary homonym of Lathrobium nanum Stephens, 1833: 270. The Stephens name has been a junior synonym of Lathrobium longulum Gravenhorst, 1802, since 1858 (Waterhouse, 1858: 27), but L. nanum Sharp is rarely cited. The replacement name is based on the Latin for a small piece (morsum) and is used in apposition.

Lathrobium pulchrum, new name, is proposed for Lathrobium pulchellum Lea, 1923: 35, from Australia, which is a junior primary homonym of Pseudolathra pulchella (Kraatz, 1859: 116) (ex Lathrobium), which is a junior synonym of Pseudolathra caffra (Boheman, 1848: 285). The replacement name is based on the Latin for beautiful (pulchrus).

Lathrobium sinense, new name, is proposed for Lathrobium chinense Bernhauer, 1938: 36, from China, which is a primary homonym of Charichirus chinensis (Boheman, 1858: 32) (ex Lathrobium). The Boheman name was moved to Medon in 1904 (Fauvel, 1904: 52). The replacement name is based on the Latin for China (Sina).

Lithocharis chyuluensis, new name, is proposed for Lithocharis simplex Cameron, 1942: 326, which is a junior primary homonym of Lithocharis simplex Sharp, 1876: 256, and Lithocharis simplex Casey, 1905: 149. The Casey name was replaced by Lithocharis californica (Bernhauer and Schubert, 1912) (ex Medon). The replacement name is based on the type locality, Chyulu Hill, Kenya.

Lithocharis sordidula, new name, is proposed for Lithocharis sordida Cameron, 1928: 245, from Malaysia, which is a junior primary homonym of Sciocharis sordida (Erichson, 1840: 626) (ex Lithocharis). The replacement name is based on the Latin for dirty (sordidus).

Lobrathium rubriventris, new name, is proposed for Lobrathium rufiventre (Coiffait, 1953a: 105) (ex Lathrobium), from France and Algeria, which is a junior primary homonym of Medon rufiventris (Nordmann, 1837: 137) (ex Lathrobium) and Lathrobium rufiventre Fauvel, 1878: 524. The Nordmann name was transferred to Lithocharis in 1839 (Erichson, 1839: 514) and later to Medon (Ganglbauer, 1895: 522) where it is currently valid. Lathrobium rufiventre Fauvel was named as L. cribrum β rufiventre and since then has been cited as a variety of L. cribrum (Bernhauer and Schubert, 1912: 258; Lea, 1923: 31). Although the Fauvel name was not used as valid after 1899, Lobrathium rufiventre (Coiffait) has been cited only a few times (see Coiffait, 1972: 136, 1982: 287; Drugmand and Outerelo, 1997: 76) and so cannot be protected automatically by Articles 23.9.1 and 23.9.2. The Fauvel and Coiffait names were congeneric until 1972, so Article 23.9.5 is inapplicable. The replacement name is based on the Latin for reddish or ruddy (ruber) and belly (venter).

Medon genialis, new name, is proposed for Medon lugubris Cameron, 1932: 129, from Malaysia, which is a junior primary homonym of Medon lugubris Lea, 1923: 24. The replacement name is based on the Latin for pleasant (genialis).

Medon hatchi, new name, is proposed for Medon capitalis Hatch, 1957: 157, from North America, which is a junior primary homonym of Medon capitalis Cameron, 1932: 129. The replacement name is a patronym in honor of Melville Hatch who originally named the species.

Medon insulanus, new name, is proposed for Medon insularis Cameron, 1941: 443, from the Philippines, which is a junior primary homonym of Medon insularis Casey, 1905: 163. The replacement name is based on the Latin adjective relating to an island (insulanus).

Medon maculosus, new name, is proposed for Medon maculipennis Fagel, 1965: 158, from Tanzania, which is a primary homonym of Medon maculipennis Fauvel, 1905: 162. The replacement name is based on the Latin for spotted (maculosus).

Medon papuensis, new name, is proposed for Medon papuanus Cameron, 1937: 99, which is a junior primary homonym of Medon papuanus Cameron, 1931b: 358. The replacement name is based on the country from which the species was collected, Papua New Guinea.

Medon umbrosus, new name, is proposed for Medon opacinus Scheerpeltz, 1933: 1263, from Madagascar, which is a primary homonym of Medon opacinus Cameron, 1932: 131. The replacement name is based on the Latin for shady (umbrosus).

Medon unicus, new name, is proposed for Medon uniformis Cameron, 1932: 130, from Malaysia, which is a junior primary homonym of Medon uniformis Lea, 1923: 25. The replacement name is based on the Latin for single (unicus).

Mimopinophilus petilus, new name, is proposed for Mimopinophilus gracilis (Fagel, 1963: 217) (ex Pinophilus), from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which is a junior primary homonym of Pinophilus gracilis Fall, 1932: 57. The replacement name is based on the Latin for slender (petilus).

Pseudolathra lineata, new name, is proposed for Pseudolathra seriata (Sharp, 1889: 259) (ex Lathrobium), from China, Japan, and Thailand, which is a junior primary homonym of Lathrobium seriatum LeConte, 1863: 44. The replacement name is based on the Latin for a string or line (linea).

Ochthephilum impavidum, new name, is proposed for Ochthephilum arrowi (Bernhauer, 1939: 259) (ex Cryptobium), from Cameroon, which is a junior primary homonym of Biocrypta arrowi (Bernhauer, 1934: 160) (ex Cryptobium). The replacement name is based on the Latin for intrepid (impavidus).

Ochthephilum silvestre, new name, is proposed for Ochthephilum silvaticum (Jarrige, 1970: 39) (ex Cryptobium), from Madagascar, which is a junior primary homonym of Pachycryptum silvaticum (Bernhauer, 1912: 476) (ex Cryptobium). The replacement name is based on the Latin for wooded or overgrown with woods (silvestris).

Oreopaederus macicornis, new name, is proposed for Oreopaederus filicornis (Fagel, 1954: 949) (ex Paederus), from Cameroon, which is a junior primary homonym of Paederus filicornis Sharp, 1886: 612. Frank (1988: 122) cited Oreopaederus filicornis (Fagel) as the invalid synonym of Oreopaederus minor (Bernhauer, 1942: 357), but Bernhauer provided no characters for that name, so it is a nomen nudum (Article 13.1) and a replacement name is needed. The replacement name is based on the Latin for thin (macer) and horn (cornu).

Palaminus lumiventris, new name, is proposed for Palaminus spiniventris Bernhauer, 1943a: 175, from Taiwan, which is a junior primary homonym of Palaminus spiniventris Bernhauer, 1918b: 81. The replacement name is based on the Latin for thorn (luma) and belly (venter).

Palaminus trapezimorphus, new name, is proposed for Palaminus trapezicollis Bernhauer, 1918a: 74, from Brazil, which is a junior primary homonym of Palaminus trapezicollis Fauvel, 1901: 76. The replacement name is based on the Greek for irregular four sided figure, a trapezium , and a form .

Pinophilus infragilis, new name, is proposed for Pinophilus robustus Bernhauer, 1915: 112, from tropical Africa, which is a junior primary homonym of Pinophilus robustus Lynch, 1884: 321; the latter name is currently a junior synonym of Pinophilus geniculatus Redtenbacher, 1867. The replacement name is based on the Latin for strong (infragilis).

Rugilus scaber, new name, is proposed for Rugilus rudis (Fagel, 1961: 272) (ex Stilicus), from South Africa, which is a junior primary homonym of Rugilus rudis (LeConte, 1863: 46) (ex Stilicus). The replacement name is based on the Latin for rough (scaber).

Scopaeus okei, new name, is proposed to replace Scopaeus gracilis Oke, 1933: 116, from Australia, which is a junior secondary homonym of the European Scopaeus gracilis (Sperk, 1835: 152) (ex Xantholinus). J. Frisch has examined the relevant types and concludes that both names are congeneric (J. Frisch, personal commun.). The name is a patronym for C. Oke, who first named the species.

Scymbalium scintillans, new name, is proposed for Scymbalium nitidum Bernhauer, 1943b: 287, from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, which is a junior primary homonym of Scymbalium nitidum Oke, 1933: 122. The replacement name is based on the Latin for to sparkle or glitter (scintillo).

Sunius impennatus, new name, is proposed for Sunius apterus (Coiffait, 1981b: 299) (ex Hypomedon), from the Galapagos Islands, which is a junior primary homonym of Sunius apterus (Fagel, 1956: 4) (ex Hypomedon) and Sunius apterus (Coiffait, 1975: 179) (ex Hypomedon); the latter name was replaced by Sunius galiberti (Coiffait, 1987: 497) (ex Hypomedon). The replacement name is based on the Latin for not (im-) and furnished with wings (pennatus).

Tetartopeus captiosus Casey, 1905: 106, is resurrected to replace Tetartopeus punctulatus (LeConte, 1863: 42) (ex Lathrobium) which is a junior primary homonym of Lathrobium punctulatum Mannerheim, 1830: 37. The Mannerheim name has been junior synonym of Lathrobium rufipenne Gyllenhal, 1813, or Lathrobium fulvipenne (Gravenhorst, 1806) since 1876 (Fauvel, 1876: 67). Tetartopeus punctulatus LeConte has an insufficient number of citations to permit its protection under Article 23.9.1, so it must be replaced by one of the synonyms, Tetartopeus captiosus Casey or Tetartopeus hebes Casey, 1905: 106.

JUNIOR PRIMARY HOMONYMS AND JUNIOR SYNONYMS: CONSERVATION OF PREVAILING USE

Achenium depressum (Gravenhorst, 1802: 182) (ex Lathrobium) has an older synonym, Achenium variegatum (Geoffroy, 1785: 172) (ex Staphylinus). Achenium variegatum has been a synonym of either Lathrobium elongatum (Linné, 1767) or Achenium depressum (Gravenhorst) since 1840 (Erichson, 1840: 589). Lathrobium depressum has been cited as valid since it was first described, was first listed in Achenium in 1819, and in the last 50 years has been cited in at least 25 articles by 21 authors (see below). Achenium depressum (Gravenhorst) is a nomen protectum and Achenium variegatum (Geoffroy) is a nomen oblitum (Articles 23.9.1 and 23.9.2). [Achenium depressum cited as valid: Blackwelder, 1952: 34; Boháč, 1993: 47; Bordoni, 1986b: 320; Burakowski et al., 1979: 242; Coiffait, 1971a: 19, 1982: 192; Drugmand, 1989: 11; Gerend and Braunert, 1997: 196; Gusarov, 1989: 9; Haghebaert, 1986: 314; Horion, 1965: 80; Lohse, 1964: 155; Lucht, 1987: 102; Outerelo and Gamarra, 1985: 32; Pope, 1977: 27; Scheerpeltz, 1957b: 152, 1964: 298, 1968: 58; Segers, 1986a: 35, 1986b: 41; Smetana, 1959: 207; Solodovnikov, 1998: 345; Szujecki, 1965a: 65; Terlutter, 1995: 76; Tikhomirova, 1973: 179; Tóth, 1983: 47.]

Achenium schatzmayri Koch, 1937: 98, may have an older synonym, Achenium reitteri Ganglbauer, 1895: 498. Koch named A. schatzmayri as a subspecies of Achenium depressum (Gravenhorst) where it remained until Bordoni (1986b: 320) cited it as a species. When Koch described A. schatzmayri he listed A. reitteri as an invalid synonym of both it and Achenium basale erichsoni Ragusa, 1891. Coiffait (1982: 192) listed A. reitteri as an invalid synonym of A. depressum schatzmayri, but only in part, and he failed to state the disposition of the other part. With the confusion over the identity of A. reitteri it is imprudent to replace A. schatzmayri with it. Achenium schatzmayri has a limited distribution and has been cited few times. In the last 50 year it has been cited as valid in at least six articles by five authors. Until A. schatzmayri and A. reitteri have been revised, the name of prevailing use is retained for the species. [Achenium schatzmayri cited as valid: Bordoni, 1986b: 320; Ciceroni and Zanetti, 1995: 24; Coiffait, 1971a: 20, 1982: 192, 194; Horion, 1965: 80; Tóth, 1983: 48.]

Astenus dimidiatus (Wollaston, 1864: 591) (ex Sunius), from the Canary Islands, is a junior secondary homonym of Astenus dimidiatus Stephens, 1833: 277, from Britain. Astenus dimidiatus Stephens was used only once (Stephens, 1839: 408) after its original description; none of the major British checklists cited it (see Waterhouse, 1858; Kloet and Hincks, 1945; Tottenham, 1949; Pope, 1977). The type material for the Stephens name was not found and the name was declared a nomen dubium (Lott and Herman, in press). The Wollaston name was proposed 25 years after the Stephens name had fallen into disuse. However, A. dimidiatus (Wollaston) is from a region for which the literature is only moderately abundant, and in the last 50 years the name has been used in only seven articles by six authors (see below). Consequently, the automatic protection provisions of Articles 23.9.1 and 23.9.2 are unavailable. To conserve the use of A. dimidiatus (Wollaston) under provisions of Article 23.9.3 an application was submitted to the Commission (Herman, in press a). [Astenus dimidiatus cited as valid: Assing, 2000: 116; Coiffait, 1954: 163, 1984: 284; Franz, 1995: 82; Hernández et al., 1994: 189; Israelson, 1971: 14, 20; Machado and Oromi, 2000: 46.]

Astenus filum (Aubé, 1850: 317) (ex Sunius) is a junior secondary homonym of Astenus filum (Waltl, 1838: 267) (ex Paederus). The Waltl name has been listed as a junior synonym of either Astenus procerus (Gravenhorst, 1806) or Astenus filiformis (Latreille, 1806) since 1840 (Erichson, 1840: 932). Astenus filum (Aubé) has always been cited as valid, but in the last 50 years has been used in only three articles by two authors (see Coiffait, 1960a: 61, 85, 1984: 285; Jarrige, 1952: 125). The next oldest synonym of A. filum (Aubé) is Astenus rutilipennis (Chevrolat, 1860: 410) (ex Sunius); the two have been synonyms since 1865 (Fauvel, 1865: 17). Astenus rutilipennis (Chevrolat) is older than the currently used Astenus rutilipennis Reitter, 1909: 151. If A. rutilipennis (Chevrolat) replaces A. filum, from North Africa, and if the junior secondary homonym, Astenus rutilipennis Reitter, from the Caucasus, Czech Republic, and Slovakia, is suppressed, then the name Astenus rutilipennis will continue to be used, but for a different species, in a different subgenus, from a different region. The use of A. rutilipennis in a new sense will be a potential source of misunderstanding and error. To avoid confusion, a petition was submitted to the Commission under Article 23.9.3 requesting that the current use of A. filum and A. rutilipennis Reitter be maintained (Herman, in press a). (See below for a discussion of Astenus rutilipennis Reitter.)

Astenus lyonessius (Joy, 1908: 177) (ex Sunius), originally named as a subspecies of Astenus angustatus (Paykull, 1789) and currently cited as a valid species, has an older synonym, Astenus brunneus Stephens, 1833: 276. Astenus brunneus, cited as a synonym of Astenus angustatus (Paykull, 1789) since 1858 (Waterhouse, 1858: 27), was shown to be synonymous with A. lyonessius (Joy) (Lott and Herman, in press). Astenus brunneus was last used as valid in 1839 (Stephens, 1839: 407), whereas in the last 50 years A. lyonessius has been cited in at least 25 articles by 21 authors (see below). Astenus brunneus Stephens is a nomen oblitum and A. lyonessius (Joy) is a nomen protectum (Articles 23.9.1, 23.9.2). This species has been referred to by many workers as Astenus longelytratus Palm, 1936: 79, but A. lyonessius has priority and is the correct name of the species. [Astenus lyonessius cited as valid: Anderson et al., 1997: 18; Assing, 1999: 32; Assing and Schülke, 2001: 132; Atty, 1983: 32; Brendell, 1976: 37; Bruge et al., 2001: 155; Carter and Owen, 1987: 13; Coiffait, 1984: 303; Duff, 1993: 99; Giddens et al., 1996: 260; Good, 1999: 33; Goreslavets et al., 2002: 348; Hansen et al., 2000: 90; Köhler, 2000b: 67; Lane, 1999: 11; Lane et al., 1999: 75, 2002: 83; Lott, 1986: 4; Owen, 1996: 12; Pope, 1977: 28; Rose, 2000: 145, 2001: 69; Tronquet, 2001: 61; Welch, 1993: 228; Whitehead, 1999: 24.]

Astenus rutilipennis Reitter, 1909: 151, is a junior secondary homonym of Astenus rutilipennis (Chevrolat, 1860: 410) (ex Sunius). The Chevrolat name has been a junior synonym of Astenus filum (Aubé, 1850: 317) (ex Sunius) since 1865 (Fauvel, 1865: 17). Astenus rutilipennis Reitter has never been cited as an invalid synonym, but in the last 50 years only eight articles by seven authors have been published using the name as valid. Because of the complications discussed above under Astenus filum (Aubé), a petition was sent to the Commission under Article 23.9.3 requesting that the use of A. rutilipennis Reitter [and Astenus filum (Aubé)] as valid be continued (Herman, in press a). [Astenus rutilipennis Reitter cited as valid: Boháč, 1985a: 380, 1993: 45; Coiffait, 1984: 298; Horion, 1965: 15; Lohse, 1964: 137; Lucht, 1987: 99; Tikhomirova, 1973: 176; Tóth, 1983: 15.]

Astenus unicolor (Mulsant and Rey, 1878: 276) (ex Sunius), from France and Italy, is a junior primary homonym of Pseudomedon unicolor (Stephens, 1839: 407) (ex Sunius) and Pseudomedon unicolor (Curtis, 1840: 277) (ex Sunius), both named from Britain. The Stephens and Curtis names were transferred out of Sunius in 1858, have been junior synonyms of Pseudomedon obsoletus (Nordmann, 1837) since then (Waterhouse, 1858: 27), and have never been congeneric with A. unicolor (Mulsant and Rey). Astenus unicolor (Mulsant and Rey) was described 20 years after the two older names had been removed from Sunius. Sunius unicolor Mulsant and Rey was transferred to Astenus in 1895 (Ganglbauer, 1895: 540). Neither the Stephens or Curtis names have been used in 140 years, but A. unicolor (Mulsant and Rey) has been used in only four articles by two authors in the last 50 years (see below) and thus cannot be protected automatically by Articles 23.9.1 and 23.9.2, and because the senior names are unused, they cannot be submitted to the Commission under provisions of Article 23.9.5. To conserve A. unicolor (Mulsant and Rey) an application was submitted to the Commission to conserve the name under Article 23.9.3 (Herman, in press a). [Astenus unicolor cited as valid: Ciceroni and Zanetti, 1995: 20; Coiffait, 1960a: 62, 88, 1976: 83, 1984: 274; Scheerpeltz, 1968: 48.]

Domene scabricollis (Erichson, 1840: 603) (ex Lathrobium) is a junior secondary homonym of Domene scabricollis (Heer, 1839: 231) (ex Rugilus), but the latter name is cited as the invalid synonym of the former. The Heer name has not been cited as valid since 1856 (Fairmaire and Laboulbène, 1856: 558) when the Erichson name was cited as a subsequent reference to the use by Heer. Since 1857 (Kraatz, 1857: 688) D. scabricollis (Heer) has been cited as the invalid synonym of D. scabricollis (Erichson), or Heer's name has been cited as a reference to D. scabricollis (Erichson) (see Gemminger and Harold, 1868: 611; Scheerpeltz, 1925: 86, 117). Domene scabricollis (Erichson), cited as valid in at least 33 articles by 29 authors in the last 50 years (see below), is a nomen protectum and D. scabricollis (Heer) is a nomen oblitum (Articles 23.9.1 and 23.9.2). [Domene scabricollis cited as valid: Assing, 2001: 75; Blackwelder, 1952: 132; Boháč, 1986: 365, 1993: 46; Bordoni, 1977: 150; Burakowski et al., 1979: 224; Ciceroni and Zanetti, 1995: 22; Coiffait, 1982: 413; Cunev, 1999: 69; M. Hansen, 1997: 16; Hennicke and Eckert, 2001: 340; Horion, 1965: 49; Jászay, 1999b: 138; Kellner and Dettner, 1992: 119; Lohse, 1964: 147; Lucht, 1987: 101; Nohel, 1971: 60; Outerelo and Gamarra, 1985: 33; Paśnik, 1998: 71; Schatz, 1989: 151; Scheerpeltz, 1968: 53, 1974: 176; Scholze et al., 1999: 92; Schülke et al., 1992: 161; Shibata, 1977: 61; Szujecki, 1965a: 47; Terlutter, 1995: 70; Tikhomirova, 1973: 178; Tóth, 1982: 128, 1983: 50; Uhlig et al., 1986: 8, 1990: 5; Wenzel, 1997: 346.]

Lathrobium geminum Kraatz, 1857: 673, has three older synonyms, Lathrobium bicolor Heer, 1839: 240, Lathrobium boreale Hochhuth, 1851: 41, and Lathrobium volgense Hochhuth, 1851: 42, and has been replaced at times by one or the other of two of them. The oldest name, L. bicolor Heer, is a junior primary homonym of Homaeotarsus bicolor (Gravenhorst, 1802: 179) (ex Lathrobium) and has been an invalid synonym since 1868 of either Lathrobium boreale Hochhuth (see Gemminger and Harold, 1868: 609) or L. geminum Kraatz (see Fauvel, 1873: 343). Lathrobium boreale Hochhuth was cited as valid (for example, see, Gusarov, 1992: 784) until 1998, when it was listed as an invalid synonym of L. volgense Hochhuth by Assing and Zerche (1998: 136) who attributed the synonymy to Boháč (1986: 380). However, seemingly overlooked by nearly all authors is the fact that Lathrobium boreale was proposed as a new species twice, once by Hochhuth and again by Thomson (1860: 198). It was the Thomson name, not the Hochhuth one, that was cited as an invalid synonym of L. geminum from 1895 (Ganglbauer, 1895: 511) until Burakowski et al. (1979: 241) cited the Thomson name as a junior synonym of L. volgense. Boháč (1986: 380, 1993: 47) also listed the Thomson name as a junior synonym of L. volgense; he never mentioned the Hochhuth name. Lathrobium boreale Hochhuth had never been listed as an invalid synonym before 1998. Since 1992 at least four authors in seven articles have cited L. boreale Hochhuth as valid (see below); two others cited it as invalid. Lathrobium volgense Hochhuth was cited as a variety of L. boreale Hochhuth in 1865 (Fauvel, 1865: 16), then as a junior synonym of it in 1867 (Kraatz, 1867: 414), and by 1895 (Ganglbauer, 1895: 511) it was listed as an invalid synonym of L. geminum. Since then it has been cited as an invalid synonym of L. geminum or L. boreale Hochhuth by various authors. Recently (see Burakowski et al., 1979: 241) the name was resurrected to replace L. geminum, and in the last 50 years it has been cited as valid in 27 articles by 23 authors (see below). Lathrobium geminum Kraatz has a long history of use as valid, but has been cited as an invalid synonym of L. boreale Thomson (see Thomson, 1860: 198), L. boreale Hochhuth, or L. volgense. In the last 50 years L. geminum has been cited as valid in at least 37 articles by 33 authors (see below). The synonymic precedence of L. boreale Hochhuth as the valid name over L. volgense Hochhuth and L. geminum Kraatz was established long ago (Fauvel, 1865: 16; Kraatz, 1867: 414; Gemminger and Harold, 1868: 609, and others). By the first reviser principle of the Code (Article 24.2) L. boreale Hochhuth should be the valid name of the species and recently it has been so cited by some authors (see below). The name of the species is confusing and unstable. In the last 50 years three names have been applied to the species. Twenty-five of the references that cite L. volgense as valid were published in the last 16 years; prior to 1953 the name was unused. The name that should be used according to the Code, L. boreale Hochhuth, has been cited as the name of the species only a few times in the last 50 years. Lathrobium geminum, on the other hand, has been used by many authors in many articles since 1857 and was used as recently as 2001 (Tamutis and Zolubas, 2001: 67). To preserve continuity of the literature and to stabilize the name for use by the greater biological community a request was submitted to the Commission under Article 23.9.3 to conserve L. geminum Kraatz as the valid name of the species (Herman, in press b). [Lathrobium boreale Hochhuth cited as valid: Ádám, 1996a: 243, 1996b: 55; Derunkov, 2000: 1059; Goreslavets et al., 2002: 349; Gusarov, 1992: 784; M. Hansen, 1996: 104; M. Hansen et al., 1996: 242, 1998: 72. Lathrobium volgense cited as valid: Ádám, 1987: 145, 1992: 115, 1995: 48; Assing and Zerche, 1998: 136; Boháč, 1986: 380, 1993: 47; Burakowski et al., 1979: 241; Ciceroni and Zanetti, 1995: 23; Coiffait, 1953a: 104; Cunev, 1999: 70; Eisinger, 1997: 170; M. Hansen et al., 1995: 28, 1999: 80; Hennicke and Eckert, 2001: 340; Jászay, 2001: 67; Kache, 2001: 55; Köhler, 2000a: 186; Lohse and Lucht, 1989: 154, 296; Majzlan and Jászay, 1997: 64; Nowosad, 1990: 81; Paśnik, 1998: 71; Rose, 2000: 147; Silfverberg, 1992: 19; Smoleński, 1995: 272; Telnov et al., 1997: 41; Terlutter, 1995: 73; Wenzel, 1997: 346. Lathrobium geminum cited as valid: Assing, 1988: 119; Bordoni, 1986a: 393; Coiffait, 1953a: 104, 109, 1982: 362; Drugmand, 1989: 15; Frank, 1982: 20; Haghebaert, 1986: 314; M. Hansen et al., 1991: 107; V. Hansen et al., 1960: 134–137; Horion, 1965: 68; Lohse, 1964: 151; Lucht, 1987: 101; Muona, 1979: 17; Muona and Viramo, 1986: 14; Palm, 1963: 33; Pope, 1977: 27; Pototskaia, 1965: 1268, 1967: 39; Scheerpeltz, 1968: 56; Segers, 1986a: 36; Smetana, 1964: 70; Szujecki, 1965a: 63, 1968: 724; Šustek, 1995: 395; Tamutis and Zolubas, 2001: 67; Tikhomirova, 1973 178; Tóth, 1981: 100, 1982: 130, 1983: 66; Uhlig, 1979: 250; Uhlig and Vogel, 1981: 105; Uhlig, Vogel, and Sieber, 1980: 244; Uhlig and Zerche, 1981: 154; Waterston et al., 1981: 274; Welch, 1983: 516, 1993: 228.]

Lathrobium pallipes Sharp, 1889: 257, from Japan, Korea, and China, is a junior primary homonym of Homaeotarsus pallipes (Gravenhorst, 1802: 179) (ex Lathrobium), from North America. The Gravenhorst name has been included in Cryptobium, Hesperobium, or Homaeotarsus since 1837 (Nordmann, 1837: 149). Both the Sharp and Gravenhorst names are currently cited as valid and they have never been congeneric; the Sharp name was proposed over 50 years after the Gravenhorst name was transferred out of Lathrobium. As required by Article 23.9.5 this problem was submitted to the Commission (Herman, in press a).

Lobrathium badium (Cameron, 1924: 193) (ex Lathrobium), from India, is a junior primary homonym of the North American Homaeotarsus badius (Gravenhorst, 1802: 53) (ex Lathrobium); the latter name has been in Cryptobium, Gastrolobium, or Homaeotarsus since 1840 (Erichson, 1840: 562). Both names are currently valid, and L. badium (Cameron) was proposed more than 80 years after the Gravenhorst name was transferred out of Lathrobium, so the two names have never been congeneric. To preserve the use of Lobrathium badium (Cameron), this case was submitted to the Commission as required by Article 23.9.5 (Herman, in press a).

Lobrathium multipunctum (Gravenhorst, 1802: 52) (ex Lathrobium) has an older synonym, Lobrathium testaceum (Paykull, 1789: 28) (ex Staphylinus). The Paykull name has been an invalid synonym of L. multipunctum since 1839 (Erichson, 1839: 503) and was not cited as valid after 1899. Lobrathium multipunctum is a widespread, well-known European and North African species that has been cited in at least 69 articles by 48 authors in the last 50 years (see below). Lobrathium testaceum (Paykull, 1789) is a nomen oblitum and Lobrathium multipunctum (Gravenhorst, 1802) is a nomen protectum (Articles 23.9.1 and 23.9.2). [Lobrathium multipunctum cited as valid: Ádám, 1987: 145 (multipunctatum), 1995: 47; Anderson et al., 1997: 18; Assing, 1988: 119, 1992: 178, 1994: 12, 2001: 75; Assing, and Schülke, 2001: 132; Boháč, 1986: 367, 1993: 46; Bordoni, 1984: 289, 1986a: 388; Borges, 1990: Table II (as multipunctatum); Burakowski et al., 1979: 225; Campbell and Davies, 1991: 116; Ciceroni and Zanetti, 1995: 22, 2000: 123; Coiffait, 1953a: 89, 108, 1968b: 505, 1972: 133, 1982: 286; Drugmand, 1989: 17; Fagel, 1959: 91; Frank, 1982: 23; Franz, 1995: 83 (as multipunctatum); Gusarov, 1989: 8 (as multipunctatum); Haghebaert, 1986: 314 (as multipunctatum); M. Hansen, 1996: 104; V. Hansen et al., 1960: 134–137 (as multipunctum and multipunctatum); Hatch, 1957: 167 (as multipunctatum); Horion, 1965: 51; Kache, 2001: 55; Kellner and Dettner, 1992: 119; Klimaszewski, 2000: 101 (as multipunctatum); Kocian, 1993: 94; Lohse, 1964: 148; Lucht, 1987: 101; Maachi, 1991: 250 (as multipunctatum); Moore and Legner, 1975: 119 (as multipunctatum); Muona, 1979: 17; Nowosad, 1990: 79; Osella and Zanetti, 1975: 104; Outerelo and Gamarra, 1985: 34; Outerelo, 1980: 55; Owen, 1999: 15, 2000: 251; Palm, 1963: 29; Pedersen et al., 2001: 89; Pope, 1977: 27; Scheerpeltz, 1960: 135, 1961: 125, 1965a: 398, 1965b: 503, 1968: 53; Segers, 1986a: 35; Shibata, 1977: 72; Silfverberg, 1992: 19; Smetana, 1959: 206, 1963b: 34, 1970: 58; Šustek, 1995: 396 (as multipunctatum); Szujecki, 1965a: 48; Telnov et al., 1997: 41; Terlutter, 1995: 71; Tikhomirova, 1973: 178 (as multipunctatum); Tóth, 1983: 52; Wagner, 1997: 234; Welch, 1983: 516, 1993: 228.]

Paederus limnophilus Erichson, 1840: 653, has an older synonym, Paederus limophilus Heer, 1839: 235. The Heer name was cited as the invalid synonym of P. limnophilus from 1857 (Kraatz, 1857: 729) until it was resurrected in 1988 (Frank, 1988: 118; see also Willers, 2001: 189 and Assing and Schülke, 2001: 131, 134). Since 1840 P. limnophilus Erichson has been cited in numerous articles by many authors. In the last 50 years at least 27 articles by 21 authors have used it as the name of the species (see below). The three uses of P. limophilus as valid compromise the application of Articles 23.9.1 and 23.9.2 to automatically protect P. limnophilus. The similarity of spelling of the two names will almost certainly result in numerous misspellings. To conserve the use of P. limnophilus Erichson an application was submitted to the Commission under Article 23.9.3 (Herman, in press a). [Paederus limnophilus cited as valid: Ádám, 1987: 143, 1995: 46, 1996a: 242, 1996b: 53; Adorno and Zanetti, 1999: 194, 198; Boháč, 1985a: 372, 1993: 45; Burakowski et al., 1979: 198; Ciceroni and Zanetti, 1995: 20; Coiffait, 1982: 53; Cunev, 1999: 69; Frank and Kanamitsu, 1987; Horion, 1965: 5; Jászay, 2001: 65; Lęgosz-Owsianna, 1963: 323, 331; Lohse, 1964: 135; Lucht, 1987: 99; Osella and Zanetti, 1975: 97; Paśnik, 1998: 70; Scheerpeltz, 1957a: 459, 1968: 47; Silfverberg, 1992: 19; Szujecki, 1965a: 29; Terlutter, 1995: 57; Tikhomirova, 1973: 175; Tóth, 1981: 99, 1983: 8.]

Pinophilus tenuis Fagel, 1963: 216, from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, is a junior primary homonym of the Brazilian Pinophilus tenuis Sharp, 1876: 323. The Sharp name was moved to Lathropinus in 1886 (Sharp, 1886: 628) where it remains. The Fagel name is currently cited in Mimopinophilus and has been cited only once (Coiffait, 1978: 323) after the original description. The Sharp name was moved out of Pinophilus over 75 years before Fagel used the same name, so they have never been congeneric. To conserve P. tenuis Fagel, and as required by Article 23.9.5, the case was submitted to the Commission (Herman, in press a).

Platydomene bicolor (Erichson, 1840: 593) (ex Lathrobium), from Europe and North Africa, is a junior primary homonym of Homaeotarsus bicolor (Gravenhorst, 1802: 179) (ex Lathrobium), from North America, and Lathrobium bicolor Heer, 1839: 240, described from Switzerland. The Heer name is a junior primary homonym and has been an invalid synonym of Lathrobium boreale Hochhuth, 1851, or Lathrobium geminum Kraatz, 1857, since at least 1868 (Gemminger and Harold, 1868: 609) (Article 23.9.1.1). Platydomene bicolor has been cited as valid in at least 26 articles by 21 authors in the last 50 years (see below) (Article 23.9.1.2). Lathrobium bicolor Heer is a nomen oblitum and P. bicolor (Erichson) is a nomen protectum with respect to one another (Article 23.9.2). Homaeotarsus bicolor (Gravenhorst) has been in Cryptobium, Gastrolobium, or Homaeotarsus since 1840 (Erichson, 1840: 563). The Erichson name has been included in Lathrobium (Platydomene) since 1895 (Ganglbauer, 1895: 508), and Platydomene has been cited either as a subgenus of Lathrobium or as a valid genus since then. Both P. bicolor (Erichson) and H. bicolor (Gravenhorst) are currently cited as valid and they have not been congeneric since 1899. An application was submitted to the Commission concerning P. bicolor (Erichson) as required by Article 23.9.5 (Herman, in press a). [Platydomene bicolor cited as valid: Assing, and Schülke, 2001: 132; Boháč, 1986: 370, 1993: 46; Bordoni, 1982: 33; Burakowski et al., 1979: 226; Ciceroni and Zanetti, 1995: 22; Coiffait, 1953a: 92, 108, 1972: 136, 1982: 305; Horion, 1965: 54; Kofler, 1980: 125; Köhler and Klausnitzer, 1998: 75; Lohse, 1964: 148; Lucht, 1987: 101; Nohel, 1971: 61; Outerelo and Gamarra, 1985: 34; Schatz, 1996: 263; Scheerpeltz, 1968: 54; Schülke, 1990: 217; Shibata, 1977: 73; Smetana, 1959: 207, 1960: 258; Szujecki, 1965a: 50; Tikhomirova, 1973: 178; Tóth, 1983: 52; Tronquet, 2001: 57 (cited as P. bicolour).]

Rugilus angustatus (Geoffroy, 1785: 172) (ex Staphylinus) is a junior primary homonym of Staphylinus angustatus Schrank, 1781: 233; the latter name has not been used since its original description (Article 23.9.1.1) and is currently listed as a nomen dubium (Herman, 2001a: 3482). Rugilus angustatus (Geoffroy), which has been cited as the valid name of the species in at least 32 articles by 28 authors (see below), is a nomen protectum and S. angustatus Schrank is a nomen oblitum (Articles 23.9.1 and 23.9.2). Rugilus angustatus has three junior synonyms: Rugilus fragilis (Latreille, 1804: 347) (ex Paederus), Rugilus fragilis (Gravenhorst, 1806: 140) (ex Paederus), and Rugilus scutellatus Motschulsky, 1858: 640. Because R. angustatus is a junior primary homonym, two of these names, R. fragilis (Gravenhorst) and R. scutellatus Motschulsky, have been used to replace R. angustatus. As recently as 1995 the species was referred to as R. angustatus (see Terlutter, 1995: 61), R. fragilis (see Hoebeke, 1995: 73), and R. scutellatus (see Ádám, 1995: 47), but most workers still refer to the species as R. angustatus. In the last 50 years the species has been referred to as R. angustatus (Geoffroy) (32 articles by 28 authors, see below), Rugilus fragilis (Gravenhorst) (five articles by five authors, see below), and Rugilus scutellatus Motschulsky (11 articles by eight authors, see below). Because of the homonymy, the proper name for the species is confusing and unstable. However, since the senior homonym was never used and is a nomen oblitum, the correct name for this species is Rugilus angustatus (Geoffroy) and the junior synonyms should not replace it. [Rugilus angustatus cited as valid: Assing and Schülke, 1999: 7; Assing and Wunderle, 2001: 36; Boháč, 1985b: 432; Burakowski et al., 1979: 206; Ciceroni and Zanetti, 1995: 20; Coiffait, 1970c: 148, 1984: 331; Drugmand, 1989: 22; Eisinger, 1997: 170; Gusarov, 1989: 8; V. Hansen et al., 1960: 130–133; Horion, 1965: 17; Janák, 1992: 87, 1993: 6; Kellner and Dettner, 1992: 119; Lohse, 1964: 138; Lucht, 1987: 99; Nohel, 1971: 60; Outerelo and Gamarra, 1985: 41; Palm, 1963: 12; Paśnik, 1998: 71; Rougemont, 1988: 516; Scheerpeltz, 1968: 49; Schülke and Uhlig, 1988: 8; Segers, 1986a: 38; Solodovnikov, 1998: 347; Szujecki, 1965a: 32, 1968: 723; Terlutter, 1995: 61; Tikhomirova, 1973: 176; Tóth, 1982: 123, 1983: 17; Wagner, 1997: 234.] [Rugilus fragilis (Gravenhorst) cited as valid: Assing and Schülke, 1999: 7; Campbell and Davies, 1991: 114; Frank, 1982: 28; Hoebeke, 1995: 73; Pope, 1977: 28.] [Rugilus scutellatus cited as valid: Ádám, 1987: 144, 1995: 47, 1996a: 242, 1996b: 54; Assing et al., 1998: 131; Boháč, 1993: 46; Jászay, 2001: 66; Muona, 1979: 16; Schülke et al., 1992: 168; Silfverberg, 1992: 19; Telnov et al., 1997: 41.]

Rugilus geniculatus (Erichson, 1839: 522) (ex Stilicus) has an older synonym, Rugilus punctipennis Stephens, 1833: 278, which has been cited as an invalid synonym of R. geniculatus or Rugilus orbiculatus (Paykull) since 1858 (Waterhouse, 1858: 27). Rugilus geniculatus has been cited as valid since it was described, and in the last 50 years at least 28 articles by 24 authors have used the name as valid (see below). Rugilus geniculatus (Erichson) is a nomen protectum and R. punctipennis Stephens is a nomen oblitum (Articles 23.9.1 and 23.9.2). [Rugilus geniculatus cited as valid: Assing, 1994: 12; Boháč, 1985b: 434, 1993: 45; Burakowski et al., 1979: 208; Ciceroni and Zanetti, 1995: 20; Coiffait, 1970c: 154, 1984: 339; Drugmand, 1989: 22; Frank, 1982: 29; Hansen, 1996: 103; Horion, 1965: 20; Kellner and Dettner, 1992: 119; Lohse, 1964: 139; Lucht, 1987: 99; Muona, 1979: 16; Palm, 1963: 14; Pope, 1977: 28; Rougemont, 1988: 516; Scheerpeltz, 1958: 181, 1968: 49; Schülke et al., 1992: 158; Segers, 1986a: 39; Silfverberg, 1992: 19; Szujecki, 1965a: 33, 1968: 723; Terlutter, 1995: 63; Tikhomirova, 1973: 176; Tóth, 1983: 19.]

Rugilus rufipes Germar, 1836: 4, has an older synonym, Rugilus immunis Stephens, 1833: 278. The Stephens has been an invalid synonym of R. rufipes since 1851 (Hardy, 1851: 41). Rugilus rufipes has never been listed as an invalid name, and in the last 50 years at least 75 articles by 55 authors have been published using the name as valid (see below). Rugilus rufipes (Germar) is a nomen protectum and Rugilus immunis Stephens is a nomen oblitum (Articles 23.9.1 and 23.9.2). [Rugilus rufipes cited as valid: Ádám, 1987: 144, 1992: 115, 1995: 46, 1996a: 242, 1996b: 54; Assing, 1988: 119, 1992: 178, 1994: 12; Blackwelder and Arnett, 1974: 61; Bocák, 1998: 202; Boháč, 1985b: 434, 1993: 46; Bordoni, 1974: 3; Burakowski et al., 1979: 209; Campbell and Davies, 1991: 114; Ciceroni and Zanetti, 1995: 21; Coiffait, 1970c: 150, 1984: 334; Cooke and Lane, 2001: 237; Cunev, 1999: 69; Drugmand, 1989: 23; Eisinger, 1997: 170; Frank, 1982: 29; Haghebaert, 1986: 314; M. Hansen, 1996: 103, 1997: 16; V. Hansen et al., 1960: 130; Hennicke and Eckert, 2001: 340; Hoebeke, 1995: 72; Horion, 1965: 19; Janák and Vysoký, 1992: 135; Jászay, 1999a: 104, 2001: 66; Kache, 2001: 55; Kellner and Dettner, 1992: 119; Kkocian, 1993: 94; Köhler, 2000a: 186; Li, 1993: 30; Lohse, 1964: 138; Lucht, 1987: 99; Majzlan and Jászay, 1997: 64; Moore and Legner, 1975: 136; Nowosad, 1990: 71; Osella and Zanetti, 1975: 97; Owen, 1997: 150, 2000: 251; Palm, 1963: 12; Paśnik, 1998: 71; Pope, 1977: 28; Pototskaia, 1967: 38; Rougemont, 1988: 518; Scheerpeltz, 1965a: 398, 1968: 49; Segers, 1986a: 39; Silfverberg, 1992: 19; Smetana, 1964: 69; Smoleński, 1995: 264, 1997; Šustek, 1995: 396; Szujecki, 1965a: 34, 1968: 723; Telnov et al., 1997: 41; Terlutter, 1995: 62; Tikhomirova, 1973: 176; Tóth, 1981: 99, 1982: 123, 1983: 18; Uhlig, 1979: 248; Uhlig and Vogel, 1981: 103; Uhlig and Zerche, 1981: 154; Uhlig, Vogel, and Herger, 1992: 64; Uhlig, Vogel, and Sieber, 1980: 243; Wagner, 1997: 234; Welch, 1993: 228; Wenzel, 1997: 346.]

Scopaeus minutus Erichson, 1840: 606, has an older synonym, Scopaeus pumilus (Heer, 1839: 236) (ex Lathrobium). The Heer name has been cited as an invalid synonym of either S. minutus or Scopaeus sulcicollis (Stephens, 1833: 277) (ex Astenus). Scopaeus minutus has been cited as valid name in at least 37 articles by 27 authors in the last 50 years (see below). Scopaeus minutus (Erichson) is a nomen protectum; Scopaeus pumilus (Heer) is a nomen oblitum. [Scopaeus minutus cited as valid: Ádám, 1995: 47; Allen, 1969: 200, 204; Assing, 1994: 12; Boháč, 1985b: 458, 1993: 46; Borges, 1990: Table II; Burakowski et al., 1979: 221; Ciceroni and Zanetti, 1995: 22; Coiffait, 1952: 15, 1953b: 269, 1960b: 285, 1968a: 418, 1984: 186; Drugmand, 1989: 25; Frisch, 1997: 530, 1998: 133, 135; M. Hansen, 1996: 103; V. Hansen et al., 1960: 134; Hodge and Jones, 1995: 36; Horion, 1965: 43; Janák, 1992: 87; Lohse, 1964: 146; Lohse and Lucht, 1989: 153; Lucht, 1987: 100; Muona, 1979: 17; Outerelo and Gamarra, 1985: 39; Palm, 1963: 17; Pope, 1977: 27; Scheerpeltz, 1958: 182, 1968: 52; Schülke et al., 1992: 169; Segers, 1986a: 38; Silfverberg, 1992: 19; Szujecki, 1965a: 39; Terlutter, 1995: 69; Tikhomirova, 1973: 177; Tóth, 1983: 25.]

Tetartopeus fulvipes (Adachi, 1955: 35) (ex Lathrobium), from Japan, is a junior primary homonym of Pinophilus fulvipes (Blanchard, 1842: 85) (ex Lathrobium) from Argentina and Uruguay. Pinophilus fulvipes (Blanchard) has been in either Lathropinus or Pinophilus since 1887 (Fauvel, 1887: 233) and was replaced (with Pinophilus blanchardi Fauvel, 1887) as a junior secondary homonym of Lathropinus fulvipes (Erichson, 1840: 676) (ex Pinophilus) when both names were in Pinophilus. Although P. fulvipes (Blanchard) has been a junior synonym since 1887, the Adachi name has been cited too few times (see Adachi, 1957: 15; Nakane, 1963: 89; Shibata, 1974: 15, 1977: 66) to permit its automatic protection under Articles 23.9.1 and 23.9.2, and since only the Adachi name is currently valid, the requirements of Article 23.9.5 are inapplicable. However, since Lathrobium fulvipes Adachi was described more than 60 years after the Blanchard name was removed from Lathrobium, and because the two names have never been congeneric, the Adachi name was submitted to the Commission for conservation under Article 23.9.3 (Herman, in press a).