Maylandia Meyer & Foerster 1984
Creators: name: Scharpf, Christopher
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2025
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Chordata
Perciformes
Cichlidae
Maylandia

description: Maylandia: a valid genus-group name
Stauffer et al. (1997) state that Maylandia is a nomen nudum because “no description or diagnosis accompanied” its proposal. A review of Meyer and Foerster’s paper is therefore essential to see if their description of Maylandia complies with Art. 13a(i) of the second (1964) edition of the ICZN Code (the edition in force at the time), which stipulates that nomina published after 1931 (except for replacement names and names referring to a previously published description, definition or figure) are to be “accompanied by a statement that purports to give characters differentiating the taxon” (ICZN, 1964). The original description of Maylandia does.
Meyer and Foerster’s paper is divided into two parts. In the first part, the authors describe a new species, Pseudotropheus greshakei, clearly indicating in the English abstract that it is the type species of the new subgenus Maylandia. In the second section, they propose Maylandia itself, again clearly stating that Ps. greshakei is the type species. The diagnostic portion of the Maylandia description is brief, just 215 words. It should be noted that Meyer and Foerster were not professional ichthyologists; they were aquarists. This may explain the somewhat indirect manner in which they describe Maylandia, which has given some readers the impression that the taxon was inadequately or incompletely described. It should also be noted that their manuscript was reviewed and presumably approved by two ichthyologists, Ethelwynn Trewavas and Jacques Géry. A summary of the contested portion of their paper (with quotations translated from the French) follows.
Meyer and Foerster do not describe Maylandia by stating that it is defined by a unique set of characters. Instead, they compare and diagnose the type species of the two subgenera, explaining how Ps. (M.) greshakei “differs in several points” from Ps. williamsi. This approach is introduced in the English abstract: “The differences between Ps. greshakei and the type-species of Pseudotropheus are considered to entitle it to subgeneric status together with some other species.” Meyer and Foerster describe Ps. williamsi (and by implication the subgenus Pseudotropheus) as having these characters: teeth regularly arranged in curved bands, tricuspid teeth on the inner row, pharyngeal teeth loosely packed and fairly large, and a color pattern of longitudinal rows of spots or broken lines instead of vertical bars. Next, Meyer and Foerster describe how other species of Pseudotropheus —members of the “zebra complex”—resemble Ps. greshakei but differ from Ps. williamsi in the following respects: a lessregular arrangement of teeth, unicuspid teeth in the inner row (at least in adults), small pharyngeal teeth that are strongly serrated posteriorly, and a color pattern in which vertical bars are “more or less prominent.” Finally, Meyer and Foerster “suggest,” or “propose,” depending on the translation, that both Ps. greshakei and the zebra complex be included in Maylandia. By piecing together Meyer and Foerster’s descriptive accounts of Ps. greshakei, Ps. williamsi and the zebra complex, one can see how Maylandia is purported to differ from the nominate subgenus Pseudotropheus, summarized in Table 1.
Do these characters positively and consistently distinguish Pseudotropheus from Maylandia? No, they do not. The description of Metriaclima in Stauffer et al. (1997) provides a more detailed and functional diagnosis of the genus. But functionality is not a requirement of the ICZN. Article 13a(i) of the second (1964) edition of the Code stipulates that names published after 1930 are to be “accompanied by a statement that purports to give characters differentiating the taxon.” The key word here is “purports.” The characters need not actually permit recognition of the taxon; the author(s) need only assert that they do. Meyer and Foerster’s Maylandia may be a scantily clad name, but it is not a naked one. Maylandia is a nomenclaturally available genus-group name that has priority over Metriaclima.
description: Published as part of Scharpf, Christopher, 2025, Scantily clad but not naked: an analysis of the Metriaclima vs. Maylandia (Teleostei: Cichlidae) debate, pp. 461-469 in Zootaxa 5620 (3) on page 462, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5620.3.5, http://zenodo.org/record/15219746