Alitene Gistel 1856
Creators: name: Bezděk, Jan
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2020
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Coleoptera
Chrysomelidae
Alitene

description: Alitene Gistel, 1856, nomen oblitum   
 Alitene Gistel, 1856a: 380.   
 Originally included names:   
 1. pyritosa Ross. = Chrysomela pyritosus Rossi, 1792; now Neophaedon pyritosus (Rossi, 1792); genus Neophaedon Jacobson, 1901 (Chrysomelinae)   
 2. betulae Lin. = Chrysomela betulae Linnaeus, 1758; treated as a nomen dubium in the genus Chrysolina Motschulsky, 1860 (Chrysomelinae)   
 3. var. nasturtii unavailable, nomen nudum.   
 4. aucta = Chrysomela aucta Fabricius, 1787; synonym of Prasocuris (Hydrothassa) glabra (Herbst, 1783); genus Prasocuris Latreille, 1802 (Chrysomelinae)   
 Type species. Chrysomela pyritosus Rossi, 1792, by present designation.   
 Current status. The name is available based on Article 12.2.5 (ICZN 1999). Designated here as a nomen oblitum for Neophaedon Jacobson, 1901 (nomen protectum).   
 Comments. For many decades the description of Alitene nasturtii was attributed to GISTEL (1857b) who on p. 531 described ‘ Phaedon nasturtii (Alitene Gistel)’ and on p. 547 published the second description under the name ‘ Alitene nasturtii Gistel (var. Alit. betulae Lin.; Phaedon auct.)’. STRAND (1917) suggested that Alitene is a synonym of Phaedon, which was followed in all subsequent publications (e.g. MONRÓS & BECHYNÉ 1956, SEENO & WILCOX 1982, KIPPENBERG 2010). Alitene nasturtii was considered the type species of Alitene by monotypy.   
 When verifying Gistelʼs publications I discovered that Alitene was already proposed in 1856 (GISTEL 1856a) and he included three available species names in it (see above). However, the type species has to be changed because the name ‘ nasturtii ’ is a nomen nudum in GISTEL (1856a) and thus unavailable.   
 Although the name Prasocuris Latreille, 1802 is older than Alitene I would like to avoid designating Chrysomela aucta Fabricius, 1787 as the type species of Alitene. Chrysomela aucta is a synonym of Prasocuris (Hydrothassa) glabra (Herbst, 1783) and belongs to the subgenus Hydrothassa C. G. Thomson, 1859 of Prasocuris. If Chrysomela aucta is designated as type species, Alitene will have the priority over the well-known Hydrothassa. I would also like to avoid designating Chrysomela betulae Linnaeus, 1758 as the type species as it is a nomen dubium in the genus Chrysolina Motschulsky, 1860 and its identity remains unclear.   
 Therefore, in order to preserve the stability, I designate Chrysomela pyritosus Rossi, 1792 as the type species of Alitene, and apply Article 23.9 of ICZN (1999), considering Alitene a nomen oblitum and Neophaedon Jacobson, 1901 a nomen protectum. To my knowledge, Alitene was not treated as a valid name after 1899; thus, the requirements of Article 23.9.1.1 are fulfilled. According to Article 23.9.1.2 I supply the references of 25 papers, published by at least 10 authors in the immediately preceding 50 years, and encompassing a span of not less than 10 years, where Neophaedon Jacobson, 1901 is used as a valid genus name: BERGEAL (2001), DACCORDI (1994), ESSER (2013), FUCHS & BUSSLER (2014), GE et al. (2013), GEISER (2001), JOLIVET   
& HAWKESWOOD (1995), KOFLER (2011), KÖHLER (2001), LOPATIN (1977, 2006, 2010), LOPATIN & KULENOVA (1986), LOPATIN & NESTEROVA (2005), MAICAN & SERAFIM (2012), MEDVEDEV (2015), MIRZOEVA (2001), ÖZDIKMEN (2016), RHEINHEIMER & HASSLER (2018), SAMIN et al. (2019), ŞEN & GÖK (2014), WARCHAŁOWSKI (2010), WINKELMAN (2013), WINKELMAN & DEBREUIL (2008), YANG et al. (2015).
description: Published as part of Bezděk, Jan, 2020, Review of the genus-level names proposed by Johannes Gistel in Chrysomelidae (Coleoptera), pp. 173-188 in Acta Entomologica Musei Nationalis Pragae 60 (1) on pages 179-180, DOI: 10.37520/aemnp.2020.011, http://zenodo.org/record/3879369