@article {1377, title = {Official Correction 133: (Opinion 2452) {\textendash} Summary of Commissioners{\textquoteright} comments amended and (Opinion 2455) {\textendash} Ruling (1)(b) amended}, journal = {Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature}, volume = {77}, year = {2020}, month = {30/07/2020}, pages = {103-104}, issn = {2057-0570}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.21805/bzn.v77.a035}, url = {https://bioone.org/journals/the-bulletin-of-zoological-nomenclature/volume-77/issue-1/bzn.v77.a035/Official-Correction-133-Opinion-2452--Summary-of-Commissioners-comments/10.21805/bzn.v77.a035.full}, author = {ICZN} } @article {1376, title = {Opinion 2452: Geophilus bonensis Meinert, 1870 (Chilopoda): specific name not conserved}, journal = {Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature}, volume = {77}, year = {2020}, month = {30/04/2020}, pages = {59-60}, abstract = {

The International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature has declined to use its plenary power to conserve the specific name of\ Geophilus bonensis\ Meinert, 1870 (currently\ Gnathoribautia bonensis) for a species of geophilomorph centipede. As a result, the name\ punctiventris\ Newport, 1844, as published in the binomen\ Necrophloeophagus punctiventris, has priority over the name\ bonensis\ Meinert, 1870, as published in the binomen\ Geophilus bonensis, whenever they are considered synonyms.

}, keywords = {Arthronomalus mandibularis, Arthronomalus punctatus, Chilopoda, geophilomorph centipedes, Geophilus bonensis, Geophilus hirsutus, Gnathoribautia, Necrophloeophagus punctiventris, nomenclature, Taxonomy}, issn = {2057-0570}, doi = {https://doi.org/10.21805/bzn.v77.a018}, url = {https://bioone.org/journals/the-bulletin-of-zoological-nomenclature/volume-77/issue-1/bzn.v77.a018/Opinion-2452-Case-3680--Geophilus-bonensis-Meinert-1870-Chilopoda/10.21805/bzn.v77.a018.full}, author = {ICZN} }