Discussion:Odonates du Monde

Yesterday I made two steps: (1) that of checking the consistency of the main names given on the IUCN Red List and their correct synchronization with the WOL. The IUCN presents 4080 species, of which 3592 are perfectly consistent with those of the WOL, 378 have the same species name but not exactly the same descriptors (errors of dates, parentheses, commas or more complex). Finally 110 species do not synchronize with the WOL and in this case a more precise examination will be necessary.
(2) I also checked the consistency between the WOL and its XLS version for the main / valid names (not for synonyms), and compared these names with my notes. I discovered about thirty cases to correct in a more or less complex way.

Two main difficulties concern the follow-up and the management of the WOL : (1) the synchronization between the online version and the XLS version. I think that a method of copy-paste of the XLS version on the online HTML page should solve this difficulty.
(2) regular updates and the difficulty to highlight the details of these updates. Several proposals have been made by others to solve this issue. It will be necessary to move forward on this one and find the best solution.
As a first step, I propose to put aside synonyms and concentrate my remarks on the main / valid names of the species. These are propositions...

• We have on the WOL Acanthagrion chicomendesi as a good species but on XLS it is done as synonym of Acanthagrion apicale. The first solution seems correct.
• Same thing for Acanthagrion hartei good species on the WOL but synonym of Acanthagrion obsoletum on XLS. The first solution seems correct.
• We have simply Anax selysii Förster, 1900. The exact Schegel’s name is Libellula selysii, this is not an exact homonym then the name is not preoccupied. Libellula selysii Schlegel, 1849 is a synonym of Anax guttatus.
• On XLS correct the authors for Argia acridens Garrison & von Ellenrieder, 2018.
• Calopteryx angustipennis (Hagen in Selys, 1853) is correct on the WOL but to complete on XLS version.
• Chlorocypha jejuna (Karsch, 1898) is correct on the WOL but without bracket and coma to add on XLS.
• Stay only with Dasythemis venosa (Burmeister, 1839) / Libellula venosa Burmeister, 1839. As proposed by R.W.Garrison, de Haan could have participed but is not the descriptor.
• Euthore terminalis is correct on the WOL but need a first bracket on XLS version.
• I think that the correct form is van der Weele and not Van der Weele for Indolestes risi / Lestes risi. van is generaly with a minuscule in netherland I think.
• Stay only with Orthetrum pruinosum (Burmeister, 1839) / Libellula pruinosa Burmeister, 1839. Hagenbach should not be the descriptor.
• Palaiargia tydecksjuerging Orr, Kalkman & Richards, 2014 is not perfect on XLS version.
• As other cases we have Procordulia smithii (White in White & Gardiner Butler, 1846) / Cordulia smithii White in White & Gardiner Butler, 1846
  • White A. & Gardiner Butler A. 1846 - Zoology of the voyage of the H.M.S. Erebus & Terror. Insects. - London. - ONLINE
    
• We have as other cases Sympetrum pallipes (Hagen, 1874 in Hayden, 1874) / Diplax pallipes Hagen in Hayden, 1874 [To confirm ?]. We can interpret Hayden as a director of a « journal » and not as the author of a principal work ?
  • Hagen H.A. 1874 - Report on the Pseudo-Neuroptera and Neuroptera collected by Lieut. W.L. Carpenter in 1873 in Colorado. in Hayden F.V. - Annual report of the United States Geological and Geographical Survey of the Territories, 7 : 571-606.
    
• Uropetala carovei is yet describe in 1843 in [Dieffenbach E. 1843 - Travels in New Zealand, with contributions to the geography, geology, botany and natural history of the country. - Murray, London, vol. 2 : 281-282. - ONLINE
  ] by White. We have finally Uropetala carovei (White in Dieffenbach, 1843) / Petalura carovei White in Dieffenbach, 1843.
• Complete on XLS version Zygonyx luctifera Selys, 1869.
• I think that we need to strike the minor synonym Libellula rufa Müller, 1767 for Aeshna grandis : this is quite right, but this name is done under Libellula quadrifasciata Müller, 1767 as a proposed name for a possible species. This resolve the problem of Rhodothemis rufa (Rambur, 1842) / Libellula rufa Rambur, 1842 which seems without that preoccupied. It is not the case !
• We have Triacanthagyna obscuripennis (Blanchard in d'Orbigny, 1846) / Aeschna obscuripennis Blanchard in d'Orbigny, 1846 as other cases.
  • Modèle:Blanchard1846
• I get further six more cases but I want to study them more, generally problems of dates : Nesoxenia lineage (Selys, 1879), Phyllocycla brasilia Belle 1988, Polythore batesi Selys, 1869, Rhinocypha ogasawarensis Oguma, 1913 (but 3 publications of this name the same year), Sympecma paedisca Brauer in Fedstchenko, 1877 (need perhaps a publication !), Synthemis macrostigma Hagen in Selys, 1871 (I must verify the descriptor first).

No more things...