Stenocrates haackae Ratcliffe, 1977

Hielkema, Auke J., 2017, Some corrections and remarks regarding the nomenclature of Neotropical Athyreini, Passalini, Phanaeini, Rutelini, Cyclocephalini, Dynastini and Oryctini (Coleoptera: Scarabaeoidea), Insecta Mundi 2017 (561), pp. 1-18 : 9

The spelling Stenocrates haackae Ratcliffe, 1977 is preserved and deemed to be the correct original spelling ( Scarabaeidae : Dynastinae: Cyclocephalini)

The etymology of the species originally named Stenocrates haacki Ratcliffe, 1977 (p. 433) is, in the describing publication, given as “This species is named after Martha J. Haack, Scientific Illustrator at the University of Nebraska State Museum, Lincoln, Nebraska, U.S.A., in recognition of her superb renditions of entomological subjects.” Obviously, if not by the name “Martha” then by the possessive determiner “her,” the person honored with the name S. haacki is a woman. As is explained in ICZN (2012) Article 31.1.2, the suffix “i” behind a name’s stem refers to a man, while the correct way to refer to a woman is by adding the letters “ae” to the stem. Thus, the name is unfortunately malformed for its intended purpose, but does not correspond to any of the categories of mandatory corrections listed under Article 32, and thus cannot be corrected under the ICZN.

In a paper published in 1978 (p. 494), Ratcliffe describes additional species of the genus Stenocrates , as well as the female of the species S. haacki , which he lacked while writing the original description. Interestingly, he spells the name here as S. haackae , presumably because he was made aware of his earlier error. He does not, however, allude to the difference in spelling. The species is again mentioned by Endrödi (1985: 178), who refers to it as “ Stenocrates haacki (recte haackae , because Martha Haack) Ratcliffe, 1978.” The other uses I have found of the name are in Krajcik (2012: 247, 2013: 110), Ratcliffe (2015: 778) and Ratcliffe et al. (2015: 202). The latter four publications all exclusively use the spelling S. haackae .

It should be noted that the spelling used in the describing publication from 1977 is the “correct original spelling” as defined in Article 32.2. The amended spelling is, according to Article 33.3, an “incorrect subsequent spelling,” and thus not to be used as a substitute name except if the conditions of Article 33.3.1 are met. Accordingly, it must be noted that six out of seven publications, written by a total of three authors (and eight coauthors), use the incorrect subsequent spelling. It can thus be argued that the latter name is in prevailing usage, defined in the Glossary of the Code as “that usage of the name which is adopted by at least a substantial majority of the most recent authors concerned with the relevant taxon, irrespective of how long ago their work was published.” Given the prevailing usage of the spelling S. haackae , I hereby invoke Article 33.3.1 and deem the subsequent spelling as the correct original spelling, to be used as the only valid spelling from now on.