Sauricesa Kocak & Kemal 2010

Sauricesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 (Diptera, Cecidomyiidae)

This is a remarkable example of what can go wrong when junior primary homonyms are carelessly renamed. Koçak & Kemal (2010 b: 6) proposed Sauricesa as a new replacement name for Allomyia Fedotova, 1991 (Diptera, Cecidomyiidae [not Tabanidae as cited by Koçak & Kemal 2010 b]), preoccupied by Allomyia Banks, 1916 (Trichoptera, Apataniidae). They were apparently unaware that Allomyia Fedotova, 1991 is also preoccupied by Allomyia Felt, 1918 (Diptera, Cecidomyiidae) and Allomyia Malloch, 1919 (Diptera, Scathophagidae), and predates Allomyia Ren, 1998 (Diptera, Tabanidae). They listed 20 new combinations, all with Sauricesa as the valid genus and all supposedly belonging to the dipteran family Tabanidae.

Koçak & Kemal (2010 b) made a number of significant errors in their assessment of Allomyia names:

1) Gagné (2004) recognized Allomyia Fedotova, 1991 as preoccupied by Allomyia Banks, 1916 and replaced it with Alliomyia Gagné, 2004. The genus contains a single species, Alliomyia saurica (Fedotova), known only from Kazakhstan (Gagné 2004, 2010). Koçak & Kemal (2010 b: 6) unnecessarily replaced Allomyia Fedotova, 1991 with Sauricesa and recognized S. saurica (Fedotova) as a new combination.

2) Koçak & Kemal (2010 b: 6) mistakenly cited Sauricesa as a genus-group name in the Tabanidae. The correct placement of Sauricesa is in the Cecidomyiidae.

3) Allomyia Banks, 1916 is a valid trichopteran genus in the family Apataniidae (Morse 2011). Koçak & Kemal (2010 b: 6) transferred 16 species of Allomyia Banks to Sauricesa (i.e., they moved 16 trichopteran species to Diptera).

4) Allomyia Felt, 1918 (Cecidomyiidae) is a junior subjective synonym of Oligotrophus Latreille, 1805 (Gagné 2004, 2010). One Nearctic species of this Holarctic genus, O. juniperi (Felt), the type species of Allomyia Felt, was reassigned to Sauricesa by Koçak & Kemal (2010 b: 6) (i.e., they moved a cecidomyiid species validly placed in Oligotrophus to Sauricesa).

5) Malloch (1923) recognized Allomyia Malloch, 1919 (Diptera, Scathophagidae) as preoccupied by Allomyia Banks, 1916 and replaced it with Allomyella Malloch, 1923. Allomyella is a valid genus with a small number of species in the Nearctic and Palaearctic Regions (Gorodkov 1986; Poole & Lewis 1996). Allomyella unguiculata (Malloch), the type species of Allomyia Malloch, was reassigned to Sauricesa by Koçak & Kemal (2010 b: 6) (i.e., they moved the species from Scathophagidae to Cecidomyiidae).

6) Allomyia Ren, 1998 (Diptera, Tabanidae) is a junior primary homonym of Allomyia Banks, 1916 but has not been given a replacement name. Ren (1998) named the genus for a single fossil species of Tabanidae, Allomyia ruderalis Ren, 1998. Koçak & Kemal (2010 b: 6) reassigned A. ruderalis Ren to Sauricesa (i.e., they moved the species from Tabanidae to Cecidomyiidae). Even though Allomyia Ren is preoccupied by Allomyia Banks, it is not replaced by Sauricesa because that name was proposed to replace Allomyia Fedotova, 1991, a genus-group name in the Cecidomyiidae. No action is taken here to replace the preoccupied name Allomyia Ren, 1998. That is best left to a specialist in the group.

As an outcome of the foregoing, not a single new combination of Koçak & Kemal (2010 b) is tenable. All names should revert back to their prior combinations with the caveat that Allomyia Ren, 1998 needs a new name. Herewith are the 20 new combinations of Koçak & Kemal (2010 b: 6) along with their proper placements and an indication of the higher taxon to which each belongs:

The findings above result in Sauricesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 falling into objective synonymy with Alliomyia Gagné, 2004:

Alliomyia Gagné, 2004 (Diptera, Cecidomyiidae)

Allomyia Fedotova, 1991: 21 (junior primary homonym of Allomyia Banks, 1916: 120, 122). Type species: Allomyia saurica Fedotova, 1991, by original designation.

Alliomyia Gagné, 2004: 66 (nomen novum for Allomyia Fedotova, 1991).

Sauricesa Koçak & Kemal, 2010 b: 6 (unnecessary nomen novum for Allomyia Fedotova, 1991). New synonymy.

No systematist can master all the literature and names of the entire Insecta. There is thus an inherent danger in homonym-hunting beyond one’s area of expertise, as graphically illustrated by the examples above. Homonymhunting is not difficult, but once a junior primary homonym is found there is an expectation that careful research into the consequences of renaming it will be pursued prior to the publication of a new replacement name. This is not always easy to accomplish given the specialized literature associated with each preoccupied name. Cyber nomenclaturalists may believe they are capable of thoroughly researching every name that appears to be preoccupied, but in reality it is a perilous activity with possibly inaccurate outcomes. The examples above may serve as a warning to the authors involved and to others who might follow in their footsteps to reconsider this practise of renaming junior primary homonyms as an end unto itself. Yielding to the “CESA-itch” does not fulfill a pressing need in taxonomy and is not generally welcomed by other taxonomists. This is precisely why so few taxonomists engage in this activity. It is safe to say that most taxonomists believe it is more appropriate to leave new replacement names to specialists of the taxa involved. If this suggestion is not heeded and the renaming of junior homonyms continues unabated, then I caution my fellow taxonomists: Beware, a CESA name may be coming to a taxon near you!