WoRMS name details

Checked: verified by a taxonomic editorMusculus svecicus (Fabricius, 1788)

506133 (urn:lsid:marinespecies.org:taxname:506133)
Unaccepted: synonym, or anything that is not accepted unaccepted (declared nomen oblitum by Cosel et al. (2014))
Species
marine
Checked: verified by a taxonomic editorNomenclature The earlier name Musculus svecicus (Fabricius,...  
Checked: verified by a taxonomic editorNomenclature The earlier name Musculus svecicus (Fabricius, 1788) has been put forward by Huber (2010) as the valid name to be used for this species. However the name Musculus niger (J.E. Gray, 1824) is in usage and the provisions of ICZN art. 23.9 may apply. Awaiting either confirmation that the requirements of this article are met, and formal declaration of respectively “nomen oblitum” and “nomen protectum”, or bringing the case to the ICZN, the name in prevailing usage is here maintained as “accepted”.  [details]
Gofas, S.; Huber, M. (2014). Musculus svecicus (Fabricius, 1788). In: MolluscaBase (2017). Accessed through: World Register of Marine Species at http://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=taxdetails&id=506133 on 2017-11-23

Date
action
by
2010-08-18 08:38:17Z
created
2010-09-15 11:43:10Z
checked
2014-03-04 16:00:58Z
changed

Creative Commons License The webpage text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License



basis of record Huber, M. (2010). Compendium of bivalves. A full-color guide to 3,300 of the world’s marine bivalves. A status on Bivalvia after 250 years of research. Hackenheim: ConchBooks. 901 pp., 1 CD-ROM. (look up in IMIS[details]   
From editor or global species database
Checked: verified by a taxonomic editorNomenclature The earlier name Musculus svecicus (Fabricius, 1788) has been put forward by Huber (2010) as the valid name to be used for this species. However the name Musculus niger (J.E. Gray, 1824) is in usage and the provisions of ICZN art. 23.9 may apply. Awaiting either confirmation that the requirements of this article are met, and formal declaration of respectively “nomen oblitum” and “nomen protectum”, or bringing the case to the ICZN, the name in prevailing usage is here maintained as “accepted”.  [details]