ArticlePDF Available

Authorship, availability and validity of fish names described by Peter (Pehr) Simon Forsskål and Johann Christian Fabricius in the 'Descriptiones animalium' by Carsten Niebuhr in 1775 (Pisces)

January 2008

Authors:

Ronald Fricke

State Museum of Natural History Stuttgart

Content uploaded by Ronald Fricke

Content may be subject to copyright.

Authorship, availability and validity of fish names described by

Pe t e r (Pe h r ) Si m o n Fo r S S k å l and Jo h a n n Ch r i S t i a n Fa b r i C i u S in the

‘Descriptiones animalium’ by Ca r S t e n ni e b u h r in 1775 (Pisces)

ro n a l d Fr i C k e

Abstract

The work of Pe t e r (Pe h r ) Si m o n Fo r S S k å l , which has greatly influenced Mediterranean, African and Indo-Pa-

cific ichthyology, has been published posthumously by Ca r S t e n ni e b u h r in 1775. Fo r S S k å l left small sheets with

manuscript descriptions and names of various fish taxa, which were later compiled and edited by Jo h a n n Ch r i S t i a n

Fa b r i C i u S . Authorship, availability and validity of the fish names published by ni e b u h r (1775a) are examined and

discussed in the present paper. Several subsequent authors used Fo r S S k å l ’s fish descriptions to interpret, redescribe

or rename fish species. These include br o u S S o n e t (1782), bo n n a t e r r e (1788), Gm e l i n (1789), Wa l b a u m (1792),

la C e P è d e (1798–1803), bl o C h & SC h n e i d e r (1801), Ge o F F r o y Sa i n t -hi l a i r e (1809, 1827), Cu v i e r (1819), rü P P e l l

(1828–1830, 1835–1838), Cu v i e r & va l e n C i e n n e S (1835), bl e e k e r (1862), and kl u n z i n G e r (1871).

A total of 324 taxa in 114 families were treated by ni e b u h r . Among these, a total of 153 new species (90 valid),

and 5 new genera (all valid), were described. 26 additional nomina nuda were listed. A total of 126 names described

in ni e b u h r (1775a) are available, while 49 names are not available; 22 of these were subsequently made available.

Though ni e b u h r (1775a) is not consistently binominal, and would have to be rejected when strictly following Art.

11.4 of ICZN, it is here advised not to apply Art. 11.4 in this case to follow the principal aim of the Code, i. e. stabil-

ity of nomenclature. Fo r S S k å l is the author of 68 available new taxa, while Fa b r i C i u S authored 67; 22 taxa were

subsequently made available by ba t h , bl e e k e r , bl o C h & SC h n e i d e r , bo n n a t e r r e , Cu v i e r , Fo u r m a n o i r & Gu é z é ,

Gm e l i n , la C e P è d e , rü P P e l l , and Wa l b a u m . Four valid species require obligatory changes of their names: Labeo

vulgaris Heckel, 1847 replaces Labeo niloticus (non Linnaeus, 1758, sensu Forsskål, 1775) (Cyprinidae); Disticho-

dus nefasch (Bonnaterre [ex Forsskål], 1788) replaces Distichodus niloticus (Hasselquist, 1762) (Citharinidae);

Cheilodipterus arabicus (Gmelin [ex Forsskål], 1789) replaces Cheilodipterus lineatus (non Linnaeus, 1758) sensu

Forsskål in Niebuhr, 1775 (Apogonidae); Symphodus ocellatus (Linnaeus, 1758) replaces Symphodus ocellaris (Lin-

naeus, 1758) and Symphodus ocellatus (Forsskål in Niebuhr, 1775) (Labridae). 85 additional taxa require changes of

authorship. In the case of Fa b r i C i u S ’ authorship, and in 13 additional cases, where commonly used species names

are threatened by unused names published in ni e b u h r (1775a), applications to the International Commission on

Zoological Nomenclature are required to stabilise current usage.

K e y w o r d s : Pe t e r Si m o n Fo r S S k å l , Jo h a n n Ch r i S t i a n Fa b r i C i u S , fishes, nomenclature, authorship, avail-

ability, validity, ICZN, Egypt, Mediterranean Sea, Red Sea.

Zusammenfassung

Die Arbeit von Pe t e r (Pe h r ) Si m o n Fo r S S k å l hat die Ichthyologie der Mittelmeers, Afrikas und des Indo-Pazi-

fik stark beeinf lusst; sie wurde posthum von Ca r S t e n ni e b u h r im Jahre 1775 veröffentlicht. Fo r S S k å l hinterließ

kleine Zettel mit Manuskriptbeschreibungen und Namen verschiedener Fischtaxa, die später von Jo h a n n Ch r i S t i a n

Fa b r i C i u S zusammengestellt und herausgegeben wurden. In der vorliegenden Arbeit werden die Autorenschaft,

Verfügbarkeit und Gültigkeit der von ni e b u h r (1775a) publizierten Fischnamen untersucht und diskutiert. Mehrere

spätere Autoren verwendeten Fo r S S k å l s Beschreibungen, um Fischarten neu zu interpretieren, wiederzubeschrei-

ben oder umzubenennen. Hierzu zählen br o u S S o n e t (1782), bo n n a t e r r e (1788), Gm e l i n (1789), Wa l b a u m (1792),

la C e P è d e (1798–1803), bl o C h & SC h n e i d e r (1801), Ge o F F r o y Sa i n t -hi l a i r e (1809, 1827), Cu v i e r (1819), rü P P e l l

(1828–1830, 1835–1838), Cu v i e r & va l e n C i e n n e S (1835), bl e e k e r (1862) und kl u n z i n G e r (1871).

ni e b u h r behandelte insgesamt 324 Taxa in 114 Familien. Darunter befinden sich 153 Beschreibungen neuer

Arten (davon 90 gültige Arten) und fünf neue Gattungen (alle gültig). Zusätzlich wurden 26 Nomina nuda auf-

geführt. Insgesamt 126 der Artnamen sind verfügbar, während 49 Namen nicht verfügbar sind; 22 der letzteren

Namen wurden später durch andere Autoren verfügbar gemacht. Obwohl die Nomenklatur in der Arbeit von ni e -

b u h r (1775a) nicht durchgehend binominal ist und eigentlich bei strikter Anwendung von Art. 11.4 der Internatio-

nalen Nomenklaturregeln ungültig wäre, wird empfohlen, in diesem Fall nicht dem Art. 11.4 zu folgen, in Einklang

mit dem Hauptziel der Nomenklaturregeln, der Stabilität der Nomenklatur. Fo r S S k å l ist der Autor von 68 verfüg-

baren neuen Taxa, Fa b r i C i u S von 67; 22 Taxa wurden später durch ba t h , bl e e k e r , bl o C h & SC h n e i d e r , bo n n a t e r r e ,

Cu v i e r , Fo u r m a n o i r & Gu é z é , Gm e l i n , la C e P è d e , rü P P e l l und Wa l b a u m verfügbar gemacht. Vier Artnamen müs-

sen obligatorisch geändert werden: Labeo vulgaris Heckel, 1847 ersetzt Labeo niloticus (non Linnaeus, 1758, sensu

Forsskål, 1775) (Cyprinidae); Distichodus nefasch (Bonnaterre [ex Forsskål], 1788) ersetzt Distichodus niloticus

(Hasselquist, 1762) (Citharinidae); Cheilodipterus arabicus (Gmelin [ex Forsskål], 1789) ersetzt Cheilodipterus

lineatus (non Linnaeus, 1758) sensu Forsskål in Niebuhr, 1775 (Apogonidae); und Symphodus ocellatus (Linnaeus,

1758) ersetzt Symphodus ocellaris (Linnaeus, 1758) und Symphodus ocellatus (Forsskål in Niebuhr, 1775) (Labri-

dae). Außerdem bedürfen 85 weitere Taxa einer Änderung der Autorenschaft. Im Fall der Autorenschaft des Fa b r i -

Stuttgarter Beiträge zur Naturkunde A, Neue Serie 1: 1–76; Stuttgart, 30.IV.2008. 1

2 S t u t t G a r t e r b e i t r ä G e z u r n a t u r k u n d e a Neue Serie 1

1 Introduction

The work of Pe t e r (Pe h r ) Si m o n Fo r S S k å l has greatly

influenced Mediterranean, African and Indo-Pacific ich-

thyology. Fo r S S k å l was one of the so-called ‘Linnaeus

Apostles’, who were sent out to discover the natural his-

tory of unknown parts of the world. During a Danish ex-

pedition in 1761–1763, Fo r S S k å l was the first to collect

and examine plants and animals, including fishes, in the

Red Sea area. On his way there, he had the chance to work

in the field in parts of the Mediterranean Sea and the Nile

in Egypt, and compared his findings with previously pub-

lished works (ha S S e l q u i S t 1757, li n n a e u S 1758). This in-

cluded numerous fishes he collected and started to de-

scribe. Fo r S S k å l died in Yemen during the expedition, and

the only survivor, Ca r S t e n ni e b u h r , returned with some

collections and Fo r S S k å l ’s manuscript notes, and pub-

lished the fish descriptions posthumously (ni e b u h r

1775a).

We do not have much direct evidence about Fo r S S k å l ’s

work, the expedition and his findings. Most information is

found in ni e b u h r ’s copies and translations; the original

Fo r S S k å l documents are either missing or lost. It is there-

fore essential to understand ni e b u h r ’s role.

Ca r S t e n ni e b u h r (Fig. 1) was born on 17 March 1733

in Lüdingworth-Westerende, Hadeln region, Hannover/

Germany (ni e b u h r 1817, Ca r S t e n S 1886, eh r e n C r o n -

mü l l e r 1929, lo h m e i e r 2002). He worked as a farmer in

his early years, but managed to learn surveying, studied in

Göttingen in 1757–1760, then moved to Denmark and ac-

cepted a position as Lieutenant Engineer in 1760. On the

order of the King of Denmark Fr e d e r i k V, he joined the

expedition to ‘Arabia Felix’, i. e. Yemen, as the geographer.

The other participants were Prof. Pe t e r (Pe h r ) Si m o n

Fo r S S k å l as a naturalist (biography see below), Ch r i S t i a n

Ca r l Cr a m e r (kr a m e r ) (1732–1764) as a surgeon and

naturalist (see eh r e n C r o n -mü l l e r 1925: 293–294), Ge o r G

Wi l h e l m ba u r e n F e i n d as an artist and painter, Prof. Fr e -

d e r i k (Fr i d e r i C h ) Ch r i S t i a n v o n ha v e n (1727–1763) as the

philologist and Arabist (see eh r e n C r o n -mü l l e r 1926:

450–451), and be r G r r e n , a Danish soldier, who joined as

the servant. The expedition left Copenhagen on 4 January

1761 (ha n S e n 1965), travelled via Marseille (13 May–14

June 1761), Malta (14–20 June 1761), the Greek Archipela-

go (including Milos and Andros) and Smyrna (İzmir/Tur-

key; 20 June–30 July 1761) to Constantinopolis (İstanbul/

Turkey; 30 July–26 Sep. 1761), then to Alexandria/Egypt.

After spending a year in Egypt, ascending the Nile etc.,

they crossed the Red Sea and travelled along its eastern

coast towards Yemen. The participants did not get along

well with each other and had severe disputes even before

reaching Alexandria. Especially v o n ha v e n and Fo r S S k å l

were declared enemies; v o n ha v e n even purchased arsenic

in Constantinople and declared that he would find a way to

get rid of Fo r S S k å l during the expedition, while ni e b u h r

wrote to the ministry he would be prepared to shoot down

v o n ha v e n if he would start poisoning the others (accord-

ing to ha n S e n 1965: 96). When they departed from Con-

stantinople, they changed to local clothing pretending to

be Muslim pilgrims. In Cairo, Fo r S S k å l compiled a first

version of his ‘Descriptiones animalium’ in spring 1762,

and sent it back to Copenhagen; this version included spe-

C i u S sowie in 13 weiteren Fällen, in denen häufig verwendete Artnamen durch ältere Synonyme von Fo r S S k å l -

Arten bedroht werden, sind Anträge an die Nomenklaturkommission erforderlich.

Contents

1 Introduction ..............................................................................2

2 Methods .................................................................................5

3 Authorship and availability of Fo r S S k å l ’s fish species .............................................5

4 Fish taxa described by Fo r S S k å l and Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r (1775a) ...................................8

5 References .............................................................................. 59

6 Index ...................................................................................63

Fig. 1. Ca r S t e n ni e b u h r , portrait (from tr a P 1868: 251).

F r i C k e , F o r S S k å l F i S h n a m e S i n n i e b u h r 3

cies observed in the Mediterranean Sea and in Egypt. The

expedition then left Egypt by mule and small coastal ves-

sels and finally arrived in Yemen in December 1762. Their

orders required that they should stay for 2–3 years. Appar-

ently, all of them soon got various diseases, probably diar-

rhoea, possibly also malaria. Within a year, the partici-

pants of the expedition died one by one under mysterious

circumstances, v o n ha v e n as the first in Móchha on

25 May 1763, then Fo r S S k å l in Jerim on 11 July 1763; the

others decided to leave Yemen on the next vessel from

Móchha (Al-Mukhā/Yemen) towards Bombay, but ba u -

r e n F e i n d and be r G G r e n died on board the ship, and Cr a -

m e r passed away on 10 February 1764 in Bombay. Ca r S t e n

ni e b u h r was the only survivor; he left India in the autumn

of 1764, continued the expedition and returned via Mus-

cat/Oman, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Cyprus, Palestine and Turkey

to Denmark, where he arrived on 20 November 1767.

After his return, he immediately started publishing an

expedition report (ni e b u h r 1772), and, posthumously, the

work of his colleagues, especially Fo r S S k å l . The fish

specimens were described in ni e b u h r (1775a), and a few

illustrations were published by ni e b u h r (1776). ni e b u h r

received the full credit of a successful expedition, despite

the fact that his companions had died en route. In 1768, he

was appointed captain of the army; he retired in 1778 and

moved back to Germany, where he continued his scientific

career. ni e b u h r died on 26 April 1815 in Meldorf/Germa-

ny.

Pe t e r (Pe h r ) Si m o n Fo r S S k å l (Fig. 2) (spelling of fam-

ily name see Fr i i S & th u l i n 1984) was born on 11 January

1732 in Helsingfors (Helsinki); he studied in Uppsala in

1742–1753 and 1756–1759, was a scholar of Ca r o l u S li n -

n a e u S (Ca r l v o n li n n é ) and became a botanist (SP ä r C k

1963: 110–136; hi l d e b r a n d & ma t i n o l l i 1966: 359–362).

From 1753–1756, he moved to Göttingen/Germany and

became of student of Jo h a n n da v i d mi C h a e l i S , who origi-

nally had the idea of an expedition to Yemen. Fo r S S k å l

was a radical moderniser (in 1759, he had published

‘Thoughts about the freedom of citizens’), and when he

joined the Arabian expedition, he soon had disputes on

this topic with v o n ha v e n and others. We know what hap-

pened during the later expedition through the sparing

notes in v o n ha v e n ’s and Fo r S S k å l ’s diaries, but mostly

through ni e b u h r ’s reports. Mainly interested in botany

and having collected and described many plants, had he

previously also examined numerous fish, other vertebrate

and invertebrate species. Fo r S S k å l , however, had pre-

served relatively few specimens following a strong dis-

agreement with a letter from the Danish government he

received in Cairo. He knew that against his intentions he

would have to return the specimens to Copenhagen. He

did not trust the Danish government any longer. However,

he would have been allowed to keep his notes and descrip-

tions and take them back to Sweden (as a ‘Linnaeus Apos-

tle’, he would have been expected to report directly to

li n n a e u S himself). Therefore, he concentrated on taking

notes and diagnoses of the fish species he found. At Jed-

dah, the expedition stayed for six weeks, and Fo r S S k å l ’s

official diary entries were very brief, lacking any detailed

information about the town (Fo r S S k å l 1950: 112), so that

ha n S e n (1965: 229) suspected that he was tired and not

active any more. The contrary is true; we know from the

Descriptiones animalium (Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r 1775a)

that most of the Red Sea fish descriptions were taken in

Jeddah, and there were a total of 70 fish species described

from there. At Jeddah, Fo r S S k å l just did not bother to

write entries for a diary that he had to send to Copenha-

gen. Fo r S S k å l wrote an (illegal, as he was not allowed to

give scientific information to anybody outside the Danish

government) letter to Ca r l v o n li n n é in Uppsala with in-

formation on some of his findings, and that his only aim

was to stay alive long enough to present him his findings

in person; if not, this would be a severe loss for science.

Previously, he had sent a shipment of marine speci-

mens from Constantinople (İstanbul) in 1761, which took

two years to arrive in Copenhagen. The material was com-

pletely disintegrated on arrival, and had to be discarded

(ha n S e n 1965: 306). Another shipment from Egypt was

severely damaged by pirates during its journey, and a par-

cel from Suez was lost on its way. More alcohol-preserved

material had to be discarded during the trip on board the

vessel from Jeddah to Al-Luhayya, as alcohol rapidly

evaporated in the hot climate and the material started de-

caying, so that the smell became unbearable on board the

small vessel.

Fig. 2. Pe t e r (Pe h r ) Si m o n Fo r S S k å l , portrait (Botanisk Central-

bibliotek, Botanisk Have & Museum, Copenhagen).

4 S t u t t G a r t e r b e i t r ä G e z u r n a t u r k u n d e a Neue Serie 1

In Lohaja (Al-Luhayya/Yemen), the first stop in ‘Ara-

bia felix’ (Lucky Arabia/Yemen), the Danish expedition

had temporarily a relatively good and happy time.

Fo r S S k å l , who was mainly interested in botany and made

long excursions into the desert, still found some time to

work on his fish descriptions. However, he did not collect

much material, apparently only a few small bottles with

fishes in alcohol. This collection was sent to Al-Mukhā,

while the expedition planned to spend the hot summer in

the Yemeni mountains, but as they were all ill, they de-

cided to visit Al-Mukhā immediately, which was, in the

end, not a wise decision. The (small) remaining fish col-

lection was inspected and mostly destroyed by a customs

officer (ha n S e n 1965: 270–271), and the members of the

expedition, including v o n ha v e n who was severely ill, had

even problems with finding accommodation in town.

After the raid in Al-Mukhā and the death of Fo r S S k å l ,

the remaining material was taken by ni e b u h r to Bombay

and then shipped to Copenhagen via Tranquebar. During

the long voyage, some material was destroyed by salt wa-

ter or disintegration, and had to be discarded in Tranque-

bar. Ten parcels with Fo r S S k å l materials were received by

aS C a n i u S , curator of the natural history collection in Co-

penhagen (ha n S e n 1965: 309). Unfortunately, aS C a n i u S

did not curate the materials, but left the parcels unopened

for several years. In 1765 li n n a e u S asked the young zoolo-

gist br ü n n i C h about the state of the collections, who in-

formed him that they were still locked up by aS C a n i u S and

neither curated nor available for research (ha n S e n 1965:

30 9 –310).

The remaining material was finally returned to Co-

penhagen and survived serious miscuration by aS C a n i u S

(ha n S e n 1965: 308–310). br ü n n i C h , the new curator of the

Copenhagen natural history collection, reopened Fo r S S -

k å l’s parcels in 1772, sorted out the material which could

still be used, and discarded rotten material. Unfortunately,

since the bombardment of Copenhagen in 1807, the speci-

mens were deposited in the magazine without curation and

respiriting for another 30 years, and additional material

was lost (ha n S e n 1965: 310–311). Today, only 99 speci-

mens of fishes, exclusively consisting of the dried fish

skins that Forsskål mainly collected in Jeddah, are re-

maining (kl a u S e W i t z & ni e l S e n 1965, ra S m u S S e n 2002:

45). Types of Fo r S S k å l species in ZMUC are listed by

ni e l S e n (1974). In addition, specimens collected by

Fo r S S k å l were used for species descriptions by br ü n n i C h

1768 (ha n S e n 1965: 310).

The work published by ni e b u h r (1775a) is extremely

inconsistent and full or errors; nevertheless, many fish

species that are still considered valid were described in

this work. The author has generally been given as Fo r S S k å l ,

but several names, diagnoses and descriptions were com-

piled subsequently, and Fo r S S k å l neither knew about this

usage nor would have intended to name the genera and

species that way. Therefore, authorship, availability and

validity of the fish names published by ni e b u h r (1775a)

are examined and discussed in the present paper.

Acknowledgments

I would like to thank the following individuals for providing

information about Fo r S S k å l ’s materials and history, and for dis-

cussing taxonomical questions and rules: Wi l l i a m n. eS C h m e y e r

(California Academy of Sciences, San Francisco, USA); Ge r -

h a r d Fa l k n e r (SMNS); Pe t e r r. mø l l e r , Cl a u S ni e l S e n , Jø r -

G e n G. ni e l S e n and th o m a S Pa P e (ZMUC); Ph i l i P P e Pr o v e n ç a l

(Århus University, Århus, Denmark); St i G t. ra S m u S S e n (Det

Kongelige Bibliotek, Copenhagen, Denmark). I am grateful to

Sa b i n e Pe t r i (SMNS) who assisted with loans of rare books, and

with historical research. Librarians of the Botanisk Central-

bibliotek, Botanisk Have & Museum (Copenhagen, Denmark),

National Library, University of Helsinki (Helsinki, Finland), the

Science Library, Viikii University Campus (Helsinki, Finland),

the Staats- und Universitätsbibliothek, Forschungsbibliothek

(Göttingen, Germany), the Universitätsbibliothek, Christian-

Albrechts-Universität (Kiel, Germany), and the Württembergi-

Tab. 1. Authors of nominal taxa of fishes based on Fo r S S k å l ’s descriptions.

Author Name Lifetime

Anonymus Unknown Maltese father who provided a list of Maltese fishes during Fo r S S k å l ’s visit in

La Valletta, 14–20 June 1761; he was called a ‘learned friend’ in Fo r S S k å l ’s diary

bl e e k e r Pi e t e r bl e e k e r 1819–1878

bl o C h ma r C u S el i e S e r bl o C h 1728–1799

bo n n a t e r r e Pi e r r e Jo S e P h bo n n a t e r r e 1747(?)–180 4

Fa b r i C i u S Jo h a n n Ch r i S t i a n Fa b r i C i u S 1745 –1808

Fo r S S k å l Pe t e r (Pe h r ) Si m o n Fo r S S k å l 1732–1763

Gm e l i n Jo h a n n Fr i e d r i C h Gm e l i n 1748–1804

kl u n z i n G e r Ca r l be n J a m i n kl u n z i n G e r 1834–1914

la C e P è d e be r n a r d et i e n n e Ge r m a i n d e l a vi l l e -S u r -il l o n , Comte de la C e P è d e 1756–1825

ni e b u h r Ca r S t e n ni e b u h r 1733–1815

rü P P e l l (Wi l h e l m Pe t e r ) ed u a r d (Si m o n ) rü P P e l l 1794 –188 4

SC h n e i d e r Jo h a n n Go t t l o b SC h n e i d e r 1750–1822

va l e n C i e n n e S aC h i l l e va l e n C i e n n e S 1794 –1865

Wa l b a u m Jo h a n n Ju l i u S Wa l b a u m 1724 –1799

F r i C k e , F o r S S k å l F i S h n a m e S i n n i e b u h r 5

sche Landesbibliothek (Stuttgart, Germany) gave access to rare

literature and documents in their care. I appreciate the excellent

work of Fr i e d h e l m kr u P P (Forschungsinstitut und Naturmuse-

um Senckenberg, Frankfurt/Main, Germany) and Jø r G e n G.

ni e l S e n (ZMUC) who critically read the manuscript.

2 Methods

The authorship, availability and validity of fish names listed

and described in ni e b u h r (1775a) are examined. For each of

these taxa, the currently used name is given first; then, the

original reference(s) of ni e b u h r (1775a) are quoted with exactly

the same typesetting as in the original text, including errors. In

the case of new taxa, the type locality, type materials, the genus

and species names used by Fo r S S k å l and Fa b r i C i u S , and the La-

tinised Arabic names are given. Families are arranged according

to ne l S o n (2006). In a ‘Remarks’ section, authorship, criteria of

availability, validity, and eventual synonymies of subsequently

described names based on Fo r S S k å l ’s description, are discussed.

The spelling of the name Fo r S S k å l follows Fr i i S & th u l i n

(1984), though the name was spelled ‘Fo r S k å l ’ in the original

publication (ni e b u h r 1775a).

Type material and other Fo r S S k å l material is listed if avail-

able; if no types or materials are known, they are omitted in the

species accounts.

In accordance with the International Code on Zoological

Nomenclature ‘ICZN’ (Anonymus 2007a), the aim of stability of

nomenclature is accepted as the basic principle in the present

paper; as far as possible, names of prevailing usage are retained.

Changes of authorship of taxa originally described in ni e b u h r

(1775a) are quoted here for nomenclatural discussion only and

do not imply nomenclatural changes; such cases will be directed

to ICZN for decision.

Authors of nominal taxa based on Fo r S S k å l ’s descriptions

are listed in Tab. 1.

For the discussion of Turkish fish species and their local

names, Fr i C k e et al. (2007) is used as a standard reference. Some

Arabic vernacular names as used by Fo r S S k å l are given in mod-

ern Arabic characters by ba h e y e l d i n (2002). Arabic characters

of the quotations are not used in the present paper, but are re-

placed by ‘[…, Arabic name]’. Maltese fish names follow Anony-

mus (2007b).

Documents by C. ni e b u h r were examined in the Univer-

sitätsbibliothek der Christian-Albrechts-Universität Kiel (Signa-

ture ‘Cod. MS. KB 314 – ni e b u h r Nachlass’).

Geographical coordinates of frequently mentioned localities

are listed in Tab. 2.

Acronyms of museum collections

BPBM Bernice P. Bishop Museum, Honolulu, Hawai’i, USA

HUJ Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Israel

NRM Naturhistoriska Riksmuseet, Stockholm, Sweden

SMNS Staatliches Museum für Naturkunde Stuttgart, Ger-

many

USNM National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian In-

stitution, Washington D.C., USA

ZMUC Zoologisk Museum, Copenhagen, Denmark

3 Authorship and availability of Fo r s s k å l ’s fish

species

A total of 324 taxa in 114 families were treated by ni e -

b u h r (1775a). Among these, a total of 153 new species (90

valid), and 5 new genera (all valid), are described. 26 ad-

ditional nomina nuda were listed. A total of 126 names

described in ni e b u h r (1775a) are available, while 49 names

are not available; 22 of these were subsequently made

available.

A major problem is that ni e b u h r (1775a) is not consis-

tently binominal, due to errors included by Fa b r i C i u S (see

below). Applying the Code strictly (ICZN, Art. 11.4), it

would have to be rejected. However, parallel to the case of

the botanical volume (Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r 1775b; see

Fr i i S et al. 1984, Gr e u t e r 1984), this would be disastrous

for the stability of nomenclature, as numerous species

would have to change their names. The primary aim of the

Code is stability of nomenclature (see ICZN, preamble);

Art. 11.4 is not meant to weaken this stability. Therefore, I

do not advise to follow Art. 11.4 strictly in the case of

Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r ’s work, but to consider the work as

mainly binominal, and to ignore the few non-binominal

cases as errors which were not intended to be published as

such, at least by Fo r S S k å l .

Fo r S S k å l ’s manuscript was far from ready for publica-

tion (ha n S e n 1965: 314–315). He only had individual,

small pieces of paper with field notes in minuscule writing

intended for his own use (ha n S e n 1965: 314–315; P. Pr o -

v e n ç a l , Århus, personal communication, Jan. 2007). ni e -

b u h r (1792: 310–311) wrote: “After my return to Europe, I

was intrusted with the task of publishing my friend’s

[Fo r S S k å l ’s] posthumous papers. I then discovered a new

loss which natural history had suffered by his death. He

had been accustomed to write down his observations on

small detached pieces of paper, which could not easily be

preserved together. It is true, I found 1800 of these billets,

which I endeavoured to reduce into order. But I could not

help inferring from the chasms here and there, that many

of them were lost. Whether it be or be not so, I have, how-

ever, presented to the public all that I could recover, in two

Latin works, intitled, Descriptiones Animalium, 4to Haf-

niæ, 1775 [ni e b u h r 1775a]; and Flora Arabica, 4to, ib.

1775 [ni e b u h r 1775b]. These two works, written in Latin,

Tab. 2. Geographical coordinates of frequently mentioned lo-

calities.

Country Locality Coordinates

Egypt Alexandria,

Al-Iskandarīyah

31°12'N 29°54'E

Egypt As-Suways 29°58'N 32°33'E

Egypt Dumyāt 31°25'N 31°48'E

France Marseille 43°18'N 5°22'E

Malta La Valletta 35°54'N 14°31'E

Saudi Arabia Jeddah, Juddah 21°30'N 39°12'E

Turke y İzmir 38°25'N 27°09'E

Turke y İstanbul 41°01'N 28°58'E

Yemen Al-Luhayya 15°42'N 42°42'E

Yemen Al-Mukhā 13°19'N 43°15'E

6 S t u t t G a r t e r b e i t r ä G e z u r n a t u r k u n d e a Neue Serie 1

and in the manner and arrangement of Linnæus, are in-

tended particularly for the use of the learned naturalist. To

gratify readers of all classes, I shall here insert the most

curious particular of the information contained in those

works, and such as will serve to give the best ideas of the

productions, common or peculiar, of the countries which

we traversed. Although natural history was not my prov-

ince, I had occasion to observe transiently many things

respecting it. I shall, therefore, intermingle my own re-

marks, without distinguishing them as such; for the great-

er part of the whole is Mr Forskal’s.”. ni e b u h r , who as an

engineer was not familiar with zoological systematics, and

knew only German and Danish, but very little Latin and

no Swedish, paid an enormous salary to an adviser on

natural history, who had the difficult task of interpreting

the meaning of Fo r S S k å l ’s notes, with many Arabic names

in both Arabic and Latin letters (Pr o v e n ç a l 2002), some

scientific names, other local names, diagnoses and de-

scriptions. He apparently confused or misinterpreted some

of them; or wanted to describe new species where

Fo r S S k å l ’s descriptions were not yet ready, and deliber-

ately used the Arabic names as species names, which were

only intended by Fo r S S k å l as a proxy to be later replaced

by a Latin equivalent (as described for the example of

Abu-defduf by Jo r d a n & ev e r m a n n 1917: 33). However,

there are obviously numerous misinterpretations and

switching of names into the wrong column. The adviser

was a strange man, and ni e b u h r was not really happy with

his work (ni e b u h r 1817: 50–51); he was, however, able to

translate Fo r S S k å l ’s notes in Swedish into Latin language,

and sort and copy the Latin parts of the diagnoses and

descriptions. ni e b u h r was never able to check if the work

of the adviser was correct.

Though ni e b u h r never published or mentioned the

name of the adviser, a letter indicating his identity was

found by the author of the present paper in ni e b u h r ’s

documents in the archive of the library of the Christian-

Albrechts-Universität Kiel. Fo r S S k å l ’s travel itinerary was

translated into German by Jo h a n n Ch r i S t i a n Fa b r i C i u S

(Fa b r i C i u S 1776a), according to a letter by Fa b r i C i u S dated

16 Jan. 1776 (Fa b r i C i u S 1776b). This letter is a humble

writing where Fa b r i C i u S repeatedly expressed his hopes

that this work would please ni e b u h r , in spite of the fact

that the previous work did not. This is a strong evidence

for Fa b r i C i u S ’s earlier work on Fo r S S k å l ’s manuscript

notes and compilation of the ‘Descriptiones Animalium’

(ni e b u h r 1775a), a work which did not please ni e b u h r the

year before. Fa b r i C i u S , however, had been a logical choice,

as he was the only German speaking li n n a e u S scholar

who, living in Copenhagen during the winters of

1772–1775, was f luent in Danish and Swedish; this was

easiest for ni e b u h r , who was only able to talk and corre-

spond in German and Danish on his own account, and

needed a translator for letters in any other language. Fa-

b r i C i u S had previously (in 1764) worked with insect mate-

rial in the Fo r S S k å l collection (la t r e i l l e 1808: 401; ho P e

1845: III), which made him seem fit for the task of revising

Fo r S S k å l ’s natural history manuscripts. later, ni e b u h r

found out that Fa b r i C i u S was a ‘strange fellow’ (ni e b u h r

1817: 50–51), who apparently did not take much time in the

task in spite of his high salary, and was probably more in-

terested in his own scientific work on insects rather than

the translation and compilation of Fo r S S k å l ’s manuscript

notes on fishes and other animals. The German translation

of Fo r S S k å l ’s travel itinerary (Fa b r i C i u S 1776a) was nei-

ther well done, with a barely readable handwriting and

many crossing-outs, and Fa b r i C i u S doesn’t seem to have

wasted too much time on it either.

Jo h a n n Ch r i S t i a n Fa b r i C i u S (Fig. 3) was born in

Tønder/Denmark on 7 January 1745; he went to school in

Altona (Hamburg) (ho P e 1845: I). Fa b r i C i u S studied natu-

ral history in Copenhagen and Uppsala; as a scholar of

li n n a e u S . From 1769–1775, Fabricius was extraordinary

professor at the University of Copenhagen, spending the

winters in Copenhagen and the summers in London (ho P e

1845: VIII). In 1775, he was appointed as professor of

natural history, economics and finance at Kiel University,

and moved to Kiel. Again, he spent winters in Kiel and

summers in Paris and London. Fa b r i C i u S was one of the

founders of entomological systematics, and published sev-

eral important works on the subject, including a general

classification (Fa b r i C i u S 1792–1794). He died in Kiel on

3 March 1808.

Fo r S S k å l ’s natural history notes were not intended to

be published in this provisional state, but merely to form

the basis of future research and editing. Unfortunately,

they were published in a crude and unedited way, and nu-

Fig. 3. Jo h a n n Ch r i S t i a n Fa b r i C i u S , portrait (from ho P e 1845).

F r i C k e , F o r S S k å l F i S h n a m e S i n n i e b u h r 7

merous errors and misinterpretations were included; even

the arrangement of the material does not follow a common

logic, but is heterogeneous and can easily be misinter-

preted (ha n S e n 1965: 314–315). While the botanical de-

scriptions and identifications were pretty accurate (Fr i i S

1984), and Fo r S S k å l already distinguished numerous new

families, genera and species, the fish names and descrip-

tions were rather crude, needing further study, and

Fo r S S k å l frequently misidentified Linnaean species judg-

ing from the identifications for Turkish common names,

and from the descriptions of specimens from Marseille.

The authorship of the names is a complicated question.

A key to this is the usage of Latin or Arabic names as spe-

cies names. ni e b u h r (1775a: 16) wrote in his introduction

that Fo r S S k å l intended to give Arabic names transcribed

(types in italics) and in their original version. In the index,

species names were given inconsistently, like the example

of ‘Perca ROGAA; subnigra’. This means, that the genus

is Perca; ‘rogaa’ is the Arabic name; and ‘subnigra’ was

originally meant as the species name. Though authors

have used Perca rogaa as the species name, it might in

fact have been Perca subnigra (with ‘rogaa’ as the Arabic

name). As a rule, Fo r S S k å l always used a Latin or Greek,

or at least Latinised name when he intended to give a sci-

entific name for a species, following li n n a e u S ’s (1758)

example; the Arabic names are only an additional infor-

mation on local names. If there is no Latin/Greek name

available, then Fo r S S k å l was not sure about the identity of

the species and only identified the genus, given the local

Arabic name in addition, to work on the problem at home

and later eventually select a Latin or Greek scientific

name. It is therefore concluded that Latin or Greek species

names described in ni e b u h r (1775a) were selected by

Fo r S S k å l himself, while the use of Arabic or other local

names is due to Fa b r i C i u S ’s erroneous usage of these sub-

stitutes as species names.

Neither Fo r S S k å l nor Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r usually

gave reference to previous authors. If they used Linnaean

names, we can be certain that they knew them, because a

copy of li n n a e u S (1758) was the standard equipment of a

natural history expedition in the late 18th century, and

Fo r S S k å l (a scholar of li n n a e u S ) and Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r

had it available as well (see ni e b u h r 1775a: 18). Linnaean

names used by Fo r S S k å l cannot be considered as indepen-

dent descriptions even if dealing with different species; in

the latter case, they are misidentifications. Numerous such

misidentifications were found in Turkish species where

local names are given, which are species-specific even in

closely related commercial species and can now be used to

identify the species.

Authorship is defined by ICZN, Art. 50. Unfortunate-

ly, Art. 50.1 is not unambiguous. From the sentence ‘If a

work is by more than one person but it is clear from the

contents that only one of these is responsible for the name

or act, then that person is the author; otherwise the author

of the work is deemed to be the author of the name or act’

would follow that ni e b u h r should be the author. Art. 50.1

strongly emphasises the ‘Contents’ of the work. The prob-

lem here is that the person ‘who first published the work’

is here not identical with the author of the names, and nei-

ther with the person who provided the field data basis for

the description; these are often three different persons, or

groups of persons. The ‘person who first publishes the

work’ is clearly ni e b u h r ; the authorship cannot be solved

from the ‘Contents’, as not only Fa b r i C i u S was not men-

tioned, but ni e b u h r also states an authorship (which here

means field data source) mixed between himself and

Fo r S S k å l (Fo r S S k å l ’s contribution is estimated at

50–60 %); also included were names of Maltese fishes

provided by an anonymous Maltese scientist. The third

sentence of Art. 50.1 ‘If the author, or the person who pub-

lishes the work, cannot be determined from the contents,

then the name or act is deemed to be anonymous’, there-

fore implies an anonymous authorship. As we meanwhile

know the authors from other sources, I do not consider this

advisable.

The descriptions provided by Fo r S S k å l and ni e b u h r

were far from ready for publication; they were merely raw

field data, on tiny pieces of paper in minuscule, barely

readable handwriting. The mentioning of Arabic names in

Arabic letters and in Roman transliteration was not a de-

cision of naming species as such, but was part of the royal

order for the expedition. Many such names were indicated

as ‘Arab.’ (meaning Arabic), and often several names were

given for one item. Fa b r i C i u S was much more than a paid

secretary to write the manuscript down; it was up to him

to make decisions which items to describe as new species.

In some cases, Fo r S S k å l gave the scientific names and

thus decided a taxon should be described as a new spe-

cies; then I agree with Fo r S S k å l as the author of the taxon.

In many other cases, he left the scientific name open, and

it was up to Fa b r i C i u S to decide a description as new spe-

cies, and to add the Arabic or other local name as scien-

tific name. Most of the descriptions as we see them in the

manuscript are the work of Fa b r i C i u S , who did extensive

research, though probably not seeing the specimens him-

self (however, we cannot be certain about this either, as

Fa b r i C i u S had access to Fo r S S k å l insect material from the

same collection at that time, provided by aS C a n i u S ); it

took him about three years to work on these. In some

cases, we know that Fa b r i C i u S did additional literature

research on papers which were not yet available to

Fo r S S k å l .

As a decision to change authorship on a broad scale

would be premature in the present paper, I here leave the

authorship generally in the status quo, as “Forsskål in Nie-

buhr, 1775”, and discuss the nomenclatural situation after-

wards; no nomenclatural changes should arise from this

8 S t u t t G a r t e r b e i t r ä G e z u r n a t u r k u n d e a Neue Serie 1

paper in such cases, unless the case has been subsequently

decided by the International Commission on Zoological

Nomenclature.

It was assumed that br ü n n i C h (1768) might have used

Fo r S S k å l material from Marseille for his Ichthyologia

Massiliensis; however, as Fo r S S k å l ’s fish parcels and man-

uscript were unavailable at that time, and were only re-

opened in 1772, as br ü n n i C h wrote his ‘Ichthyologia

Massiliensis’ while on visit to Vienna (br ü n n i C h 1768:

XVI), and as no reference is given to either Fo r S S k å l or

his material or the Copenhagen collection at all, it can be

concluded that br ü n n i C h ’s work is independent of

Fo r S S k å l ’s studies on fishes from Marseille.

Several later authors, however, used the work of ni e -

b u h r (1775a) to interpret, redescribe or rename fish spe-

cies. These include br o u S S o n e t (1782), bo n n a t e r r e (1788),

Gm e l i n (1789), Wa l b a u m (1792), laC e P è d e (1798–1803),

bl o C h & SC h n e i d e r (1801), Ge o F F r o y Sa i n t -hi l a i r e (1809,

1827), Cu v i e r (1819), rü P P e l l (1828–1830, 1835–1838),

Cu v i e r & va l e n C i e n n e S (1835), bl e e k e r (1862), and kl u n -

z i n G e r (1871). Fo r S S k å l ’s work is of especial interest to

science, as it not only includes the first known Red Sea

fish fauna, but also the first fish faunal list from Malta,

and the first list of marine fishes of western Turkey.

Though previously all taxa were attributed to the au-

thorship of Fo r S S k å l , he is only the author of 68 available

new taxa, while Fa b r i C i u S authored 67 (opinion of the

present paper); 22 taxa were subsequently made available

by ba t h , bl e e k e r , bl o C h & SC h n e i d e r , bo n n a t e r r e , Cu-

v i e r , Fo u r m a n o i r & Gu é z é , Gm e l i n , la C e P è d e , rü P P e l l

and Wa l b a u m . Three species require obligatory changes

of their names, 47 additional species require changes of

authorship. Such cases cannot be decided in the present

paper, but will be refered to the International Commis-

sion on Zoological Nomenclature for decision (see above).

In 13 cases, where commonly used species names are

threatened by unused names published in ni e b u h r (1775a),

applications to the International Commission on Zoologi-

cal Nomenclature are required to stabilise the current us-

age.

4 Fish taxa described by Fo r s s k å l and Fa b r i c i u s in

Ni e b u h r (1775a)

P e t r o m y z o n t i d a e – Northern lampreys

Petromyzontidae, indet.

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XVIII): “Pe t r o -

m y z o n lampetra.”.

Locality: “Melita” (La Valletta/Malta).

Remarks: This record, a name only, is based on either of the two

Mediterranean species of the family, Petromyzon marinus

Linnaeus, 1758 or Lampetra f luviatilis (Linnaeus, 1758); as

no diagnosis or local name was given, it cannot be assigned

to generic or species level.

S c y l i o r h i n i d a e – Cat sharks

Scyliorhinus canicula (Linnaeus, 1758)

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XVIII): “[Sq u a l u S ]

catulus”.

Locality: “Melita” (La Valletta/Malta). Maltese name: “Il rufet-

ta”.

Remarks: This record is based on Squalus catulus Linnaeus,

1758, a junior synonym of Squalus canicula Linnaeus, 1758,

now named Scyliorhinus canicula (Linnaeus, 1758).

G i n g l y m o s t o m a t i d a e – Nurse sharks

?Nebrius ferrugineus (Lesson, 1831)

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: X): “19. [SQUALUS]

c) k u m a l . Dentibus nullis; pinnis pect. brevibus; cirrhis oris

quatuor.”.

Type locality: – (Red Sea).

Genus name: Squalus.

Species name (Fo r S S k å l ): –; (Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): kumal.

Arabic name (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l ): Kumal.

Remarks: In his draft, Fo r S S k å l listed this species as an uniden-

tified Squalus with the local name ‘kumal’, but did not de-

cide if this was an undescribed species at all. We cannot be

certain if the data source for this description was by Fo r S S k å l

or ni e b u h r or both; the description was compiled by Fa-

b r i C i u S . Fa b r i C i u S used the Arabic name as a species name

and added a diagnosis. The name would therefore be avail-

able as Squalus kumal Fabricius [ex Forsskål] in Niebuhr,

1775; it was considered as valid by bo n n a t e r r e (1788: 13).

Unfortunately, Squalus kumal is most probably a senior syn-

onym of the commonly used name Nebrius ferrugineus

(Lesson, 1831). The species was considered as valid by Wa l -

b a u m (1792: 523). As the name Squalus kumal has not been

used otherwise, it is rejected in accordance with Art. 23.2

and the preamble of ICZN; an application to the Interna-

tional Commission on Zoological Nomenclature will be

needed to retain the name Scyllium ferrugineum Lesson,

1831 for this species, which is considered to be valid, with

the currently used name Nebrius ferrugineus (Lesson, 1831).

The species was subsequently named Squalus kamul by

bl o C h & SC h n e i d e r (1801: 138, under ‘species non determi-

nandae’), which is not an independent species description,

but a spelling error for Squalus kumal.

L a m n i d a e – Mackerel sharks

Carcharodon carcharias (Linnaeus, 1758)

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XVIII): “[Sq u a l u S ]

lamia.”.

Locality: “Melita” (La Valletta/Malta). Maltese name: “Il gab-

dol”.

Remarks: This is a name only (nomen nudum), listed as Squalus

lamia Forsskål in Niebuhr, 1775; this name is not available,

as it was neither accompanied by a diagnosis nor a descrip-

tion. From the name ‘lamia’, which is the local Italian name

for Carcharodon carcharias, it can be concluded that this

record may have been based on Carcharodon carcharias

(Linnaeus, 1758). The species was subsequently described as

Carcharias lamia Rafinesque-Schmaltz, 1810 (ra F i n e S q u e -

SC h m a l t z 1810: 44), which is a junior synonym of Carcharo-

don carcharias as well. This species, however, may have

been confused with the basking shark Cetorhinus maximus

(Gunnerus, 1765), which has the actual Maltese vernacular

name ‘Gabdoll’ (Anonymus 2007b).

F r i C k e , F o r S S k å l F i S h n a m e S i n n i e b u h r 9

T r i a k i d a e – Hound sharks

?Mustelus sp.

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: X): “20. [SQUA-

LUS] d) k e l b e l b a h r : i. e. canis marinus.”.

Type locality: – (Alexandria, Al-Iskandarīyah/Egypt, Mediter-

ranean Sea).

Genus name: Squalus.

Species name (Fo r S S k å l ): –; (Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): kelb el

bahr.

Arabic name (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l ): Kelb el bahr.

Remarks: In his draft, Fo r S S k å l treated this as a species of Squa-

lus which was called ‘Kelb el Bahr’, but was considered

identical with Canis marinus (or Squalus canis marinus?).

He did not decide if this was an undescribed species at all.

We cannot be certain if the data source for this description

was by Fo r S S k å l or ni e b u h r or both; the description was

compiled by Fa b r i C i u S . Fa b r i C i u S used ‘kelb el bahr’ as spe-

cies name, but Squalus kelb el bahr Fabricius [ex Forsskål]

in Niebuhr, 1775 is not available because the species name is

not binominal (ICZN, Art. 5), because the name is not ac-

companied by a diagnosis or by distinguishing characters,

and because it is described in synonymy.

Mustelus sp.

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XVIII): “[Pe t r o -

m y z o n ] mustela.”.

Locality: “Melita” (La Valletta/Malta). Local name: “Il Mustil-

la”.

Remarks: The species name ‘mustela’ was erroneously listed

under Petromyzon lampetra. This was obviously an error by

Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r (1775a), who confused the two species

and switched lines. As the name ‘mustela’ is just a listing of

the name, the record cannot be confirmed and assigned to

species level; it could have been based on either Mustelus

asterias Cloquet, 1821, Mustelus mustelus (Linnaeus, 1758),

or Mustelus punctulatus Risso, 1827.

C a r c h a r h i n i d a e – Requiem sharks

Carcharhinidae, indet.

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: X): “17. SQUALUS

a) m a S S a S a , Djiddæ; m a F r e k a , Lohajæ. Dentibus nullis; pin-

nis pect. longis. A Charcharia diversus.”.

Type localities: “Djiddæ” (Jeddah, Juddah/Saudi Arabia); “Lo-

hajæ” (Al-Luhayya/Yemen).

Genus name: Squalus.

Species name (Fo r S S k å l ): –; (Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): massasa or

mafreka.

Arabic names (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l ): Massasa, Mafreka; (Fa-

b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): Masâsa (wrongly placed, on p. 20 under

Squalus carcharias major).

Remarks: In his draft, Fo r S S k å l clearly treated this as an uniden-

tified species of Squalus which was called ‘Massasa’ at Jed-

dah and ‘Mafreka’ at Lohaja. He did not decide if this was an

undescribed species at all. We cannot be certain if the data

source for this description was by Fo r S S k å l or ni e b u h r or

both; the description was compiled by Fa b r i C i u S . eS C h m e y e r

(2007) also mentions a quotation by Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r

(1775: 20); the name ‘Massasa’ stated there in a description

of Squalus carcharias, however, does not refer to this taxon.

Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r used both Arabic names as species

names, but it is clear from the context that he meant local

names as well. Though accompanied by a diagnosis, two al-

ternative species names are given by Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ]

in ni e b u h r (1775a), Squalus massasa or mafreka, which

means that the name(s) is/are not available. It was, however,

subsequently made available as Squalus messasa Bonna-

terre [ex Forsskål], 1788 (bo n n a t e r r e 1788: 13). The species

was considered as valid by Wa l b a u m (1792: 522). This name

should be suppressed by the International Commission on

Zoological Nomenclature.

Carcharhinidae, indet.

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XIV): “Squali [Squa-

lus] carebar.” (in listing of Echeneis neucrates, see Echenei-

da e).

Type locality: “Djiddæ” (Jeddah, Juddah/Saudi Arabia).

Genus name: Squalus.

Species name (Fo r S S k å l ): –; (Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): carebar.

Arabic name (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l ): Carebar.

Remarks: This species name is found in the listing of Echeneis

neucrates (naucrates) as its host; no diagnosis is given, so

the name is a numen nudum and not available. The author is

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r ; the correct name would

be Squalus carebar Fabricius [ex Forsskål] in Niebuhr, 1775.

It was not included in eS C h m e y e r (2007). The species is un-

identifiable within the family Carcharhinidae.

Carcharhinus melanopterus (Quoy & Gaimard, 1824)

Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: VIII): “19. SQUALUS C a r C h a r i a S .

Gersch. […, Arabic name]. α.) m i n o r . Alka vel Æas. […, Ara-

bic name]”.

Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: 20): “19. SQUALUS C a r C h a r i a S .

(Arab. Gersch vel Kersch […, Arabic name]. ob S . Djiddæ

duæ Species simillimæ; his tantum notis invicem distingu-

endæ). Minor: dentibus microscopio inspectis, …” [see also

below under Negaprion acutidens].

Type locality: “Djiddæ” (Jeddah, Juddah/Saudi Arabia).

Genus name: Squalus.

Species/subspecies name (Fo r S S k å l , Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): car-

charias minor.

Arabic names (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l , Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): Al-

ka, Aeas.

Remarks: Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: 20) stated under the

heading of Squalus carcharias, that at Jeddah two similar

species occur, namely minor and major. The procedure of

describing a new species under the heading of another is

unusual; on p. VIII, he treats the two as varieties, but on p. 20

explicitly as separate species. Both of them are accompanied

by diagnoses and valid available taxa of the species group; I

here regard the two as subspecies. In the case of minor, the

available name is Squalus carcharias minor Forsskål in Nie-

buhr, 1775. The species was considered as valid as Squalus

(Carcharias) minor by Wa l b a u m (1792: 514). This is an un-

used senior synonym of Carcharias melanopterus Quoy &

Gaimard, 1824, with the frequently used common name

Carcharhinus melanopterus. According to ICZN, the un-

used older name can be disregarded. In order to stabilise the

current usage of the species name, a petition to the Interna-

tional Commission on Zoological Nomenclature is needed to

suppress the name Squalus carcharias minor.

Negaprion acutidens (Rüppell, 1837)

Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: VIII): “19. SQUALUS C a r C h a r i a S .

Gersch. […, Arabic name]. β) m a J o r . Zyfa. […, Arabic

na me]”.

Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: 20): “19. SQUALUS C a r C h a r i a S .

Arab. Gersch vel Kersch […, Arabic name]. ob S . Djiddæ

duæ Species simillimæ; his tantum notis invicem distingu-

endæ. Major: pinnis dors. immaculatis, …”.

Type localities: “Djiddæ” (Jeddah, Juddah/Saudi Arabia); “Lo-

hajæ” (Al-Luhayya/Yemen).

10 S t u t t G a r t e r b e i t r ä G e z u r n a t u r k u n d e a Neue Serie 1

Genus name: Squalus.

Species/subspecies name (Fo r S S k å l , Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): car-

charias major.

Arabic names (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l ): Zyfa, Aeas (Lohaja),

Jecore, Sife; (Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): Aka, Aeas.

Remarks: Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: 20) stated under the

heading of Squalus carcharias, that at Jeddah two similar

species occur, namely minor and major. The procedure of

describing a new species under the heading of another is

unusual; on p. VIII, he treats the two as varieties, but on p. 20

explicitly as separate species. Both of them are accompanied

by diagnoses and are available taxa; I here regard the two as

subspecies. In the case of major, the available name is Squa-

lus carcharias major Forsskål in Niebuhr, 1775. It was sub-

sequently mentioned as Squalus (Carcharias) major by

Wa l b a u m (1792: 514); this is not an independent subspecies/

variety description as assumed by eS C h m e y e r (2007). Squa-

lus carcharias major Forsskål in Niebuhr, 1775 is apparently

an unused senior synonym of Carcharias acutidens Rüp-

pell, 1837 (rü P P e l l 1837: 65, pl. 18, fig. 3), with the fre-

quently used name Negaprion acutidens (Rüppell, 1837). To

retain the latter name, and suppress its unused senior syno-

nym, will require a petition to the International Commission

on Zoological Nomenclature.

S p h y r n i d a e – Hammerhead sharks

Sphyrna sp.

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XVIII): “[Sq u a l u S ]

zygaena.”.

Locality: “Melita” (La Valletta/Malta). Local name: “Il Mar-

sel”.

Remarks: This is a name only in a list, and not assignable to spe-

cies; the record could have been based on either Sphyrna

tudes (Valenciennes, 1822) or Sphyrna zygaena (Linnaeus,

1758).

Sphyrna mokarran (Rüppell, 1837)

Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: X): “21. [SQUALUS] e) z y G a e n a ,

Kornae […, Arabic name] vel Mokarran. Mascatensibus

vocatur Abu kott. …”.

Locality: – (Red Sea); “Mascat” (Muscat/Oman, 23°37'N

58°35'E). “Rarum ad littora Arabiae.”.

Arabic names (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l , Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): Kor-

nae, Mokarran, Abu kott.

Remarks: This is a misidentification of Sphyrna zygaena (non

Linnaeus, 1758). The locality ‘Mascat’ and Muscatese local

name was evidently added by ni e b u h r , as Fo r S S k å l never

visited that city. This species was later described as Zygaena

mokarran by rü P P e l l (1837: 66–67, pl. 17, fig. 3).

O x y n o t i d a e – Rough sharks

Oxynotus centrina (Linnaeus, 1758)

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XVIII): “[Sq u a l u S ]

centrina.”.

Locality: “Melita” (La Valletta/Malta).

D a l a t i i d a e – Kitefin sharks

Etmopterus spinax (Linnaeus, 1758)

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XVIII): “[Sq u a l u S ]

spinax.”.

Locality: “Melita” (La Valletta/Malta). Local Maltese names:

“Il Chelp”, “Il Babar”.

Remarks: A note by Fa b r i C i u S [ex Anonymus, Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e -

b u h r (1775a: XVIII) states that this species is identical with

the species named by the Arabs ‘Kelb el Bahr’. However,

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: X) states that

‘Kelb el Bahr’ is identical with Squalus canis marinus,

which is Galeorhinus galeus (Linnaeus, 1758). Apparently,

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XVIII) missed a

species name here, and added the comment on ‘Kelb el Bahr’

to the wrong species name.

S q u a t i n i d a e – Angel sharks

Squatina sp.

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XVIII): “[Sq u a l u S ]

squatina.”.

Locality: “Melita” (La Valletta/Malta).

Remarks: This is a record of the Linnaean species Squalus squa-

tina; it cannot be assigned to species level, as it could have

been based on either Squatina aculeata Cuvier [ex Duméril],

1829, Squatina oculata Bonaparte, 1840, or Squatina squa-

tina (Linnaeus, 1758).

T o r p e d i n i d a e – Torpedo electric rays

Torpedo torpedo (Linnaeus, 1758)

Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: IX): “11. RAJA: a) t o r P e d o ?

Μεδιάςρα. In. Archipelago.”.

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XVIII): “[ra J a ]

torpedo.”.

Localities: “In archipelago” (Greek or Turkish islands in the

Aegean Sea); “Melita” (La Valletta/Malta).

Remarks: This record is based on Torpedo torpedo (Linnaeus,

1758); the other references by Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775:

VIII, 15–16) are based on a misidentification of Malapteru-

rus electricus. The name Torp edo of Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r

(1775a) cannot be considered as a new genus description, but

is linked as a species name to the genus Raja. The first avail-

able description of the generic name To rped o is by du m é r i l

(1806).

P r i s t i d a e – Sawfishes

Pristis sp.

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: X): “18. [SQUALUS]

b) P r i S t i S . ab u m i n S C h a r , […, Arabic name]. Djiddæ.

SC h æ k r a , Lohajæ.”.

Localities: “Djiddæ” (Jeddah, Juddah/Saudi Arabia); “Lohajæ”

(Al-Luhayya/Yemen).

Genus name: Squalus.

Species/subspecies names (Fo r S S k å l ): pristis; (Fa b r i C i u S in ni e -

b u h r ): pristis abu minschar or pristis schaekra.

Arabic names (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l ): Abu Minschar, Schaekra.

Remarks: In his draft, Fo r S S k å l listed this species as Squalus

pristis Linnaeus, 1758, together with two local Arabic names.

He did not decide if this was an undescribed species at all.

We cannot be certain if the data source for this description

was by Fo r S S k å l or ni e b u h r or both; the description was

compiled by Fa b r i C i u S . Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r used the Arabic

name like subspecies names; however, as abu minschar is

consisting of two words, it cannot be considered as an avail-

able subspecies name. Also, both species/subspecies names

Squalus pristis abu minschar Fabricius [ex Forsskål] in Nie-

F r i C k e , F o r S S k å l F i S h n a m e S i n n i e b u h r 11

buhr, 1775 and Squalus pristis schaekra Fabricius [ex

Forsskål] in Niebuhr, 1775 are given without a diagnosis and

are therefore invalid. Both are referable to either Pristis pec-

tinata Latham, 1794 or Pristis zijsron Bleeker, 1851.

Pristis pristis (Linnaeus, 1758)

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XVIII): “Sq u a l u S

pristis.”.

Locality: “Melita” (La Valletta/Malta). Local Maltese name: “Il

Sia”.

Remarks: The actual vernacular Maltese name is “Sija” (Anony-

mus 2007b).

R h i n o b a t i d a e – Guitarfishes

“Glaucostegus halavi (Forsskål in Niebuhr, 1775)”

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: VIII): “18. [RAJA] e)

h a l a v i : […, Arabic name] rhinobates.”.

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: 19–20): “18. RAJA

h a l a v i . Arab. […, Arabic name]”.

Type locality: “Djiddæ” (Jeddah, Juddah/Saudi Arabia).

Genus name: Raja.

Species name (Fo r S S k å l ): –; (Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): halavi.

Arabic name (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l ): Halavi.

Remarks: In his draft, Fo r S S k å l treated this species as Raja sp.

with the Arabic name ‘halavi’. He did not decide if this was

an undescribed species at all. We cannot be certain if the

data source for this description was by Fo r S S k å l or ni e b u h r

or both; the description was compiled by Fa b r i C i u S . Fa-

b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r confused species name and Arabic name

and used the latter as species name. The name is not binomi-

nal in Fo r S S k å l ’s version, but binominal in Fa b r i C i u S in

ni e b u h r ’s version. Therefore, the authorship would be at-

tributed to Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r . The name is

accompanied by a diagnosis and description, and would be

available as Raja halavi Fabricius [ex Forsskål] in Niebuhr,

1775. The species was treated as valid since bo n n a t e r r e

(1788: 5) and Wa l b a u m (1792: 535); the actual name would

be Glaucostegus halavi (Fabricius [ex Forsskål] in Niebuhr,

1775) (see also eS C h m e y e r 2007), with the authorship pend-

ing a decision of ICZN.

Rhynchobatus djiddensis (Forsskål in Niebuhr, 1775)

Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: VIII): “17. [RAJA] d) d J i d d e n S i S :

maxima. Rgèt. […, Arabic name]”.

Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: 18–19): “17. RAJA d J i d d e n S i S ;

caudæ pinna biloba; oculeorum ordine initio dorsi triplici,

dein simplici; pinna dorsi prima supra pinnas ventrales.”.

Type localities: “Djiddæ in Mari rubro” (Jeddah, Juddah/Saudi

Arabia); “Perhibetur, illam alia non frequentare littora quam

Arabiae Hedsjâs; haud vero ad Sués” (Suez, As-Suways/

Egypt) “vel Móchham” (Al-Mukhā/Yemen) “videri; quod

vix crediderim, quum mihi Lohajæ” (Al-Luhayya/Yemen)

“obveniebat.”.

Genus name: Raja.

Species name (Fo r S S k å l , Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): djiddensis.

Arabic names (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l ): Rgèt; (Fa b r i C i u S in ni e -

b u h r ): Rget, Bokhát (Lohaja), Aerâb.

Remarks: This species was described binominally with a valid

scientific species name by Fo r S S k å l , with no change by Fa-

b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r , so the author is Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r , and

the name is available. It is available as Raja djiddensis Forss-

kål in Niebuhr, 1775 (treated as a valid species since bo n -

n a t e r r e 1788: 5 and Wa l b a u m 1792: 534–535). bl o C h &

SC h n e i d e r (1801: 356) misspelled the name as Rhinobatus

djidensis, and rü P P e l l (1829: 54–55) as Rhinobatus djed-

densis.

R a j i d a e – Skates

Rajidae, indet.

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XVIII): “[ra J a ]

mus marinus. (piscis novus).”.

Locality: “Melita” (La Valletta/Malta).

Remarks: This new species name is not binominal (ICZN, Art.

5), and a nomen nudum, as it is neither accompanied by a

diagnosis, nor a description or an indication; the name can-

not be assigned to a species, and is not available.

Dipturus batis (Linnaeus, 1758)

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XVIII): “[ra J a ]

batis.”.

Locality: “Melita” (La Valletta/Malta).

D a s y a t i d a e – Whiptail stingrays

Dasyatidae, indet.

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: IX): “15. [RAJA] e)

S C h o u k i e Djiddæ. Aculeis remotiusculis. E pelle hujus Rajae

conficiuntur in urbe Suaken Vaginæ gladiorum.”.

Type localities: “Djiddæ” (Jeddah, Juddah/Saudi Arabia);

“Suaken” (Sawākin/Sudan, 19°07'N 37°20'E).

Genus name: Raja.

Species name (Fo r S S k å l ): –; (Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): schoukie.

Arabic name (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l ): Schoukie.

Remarks: Fo r S S k å l treated this species as an unidentified spe-

cies of Raja with the Arabic name ‘Schoukie’; ni e b u h r ,

however, used the Arabic name as a species name. The name

is binominal, accompanied by a diagnosis, and therefore

would be available as Raja schoukie Fabricius [ex Forsskål]

in Niebuhr, 1775, with the authorship pending a decision of

ICZN. It was considered as valid by Wa l b a u m (1792: 536),

and misspelled as Raja schoukia by bo n n a t e r r e (1788: 6).

The record from Suaken (Sawakin/Sudan) is not based on a

specimen, but on an information either Fo r S S k å l or ni e b u h r

probably received in Jeddah. This species is listed as Raja

schoukie by bl o C h & SC h n e i d e r (1801: 368–369) under ‘spe-

cies non determinandae’ (undetermined species).

Dasyatis sp.

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: IX): “13. [RAJA] c)

a r n a k Lohajæ. Dentibus granulatis; corpore orbiculato, ar-

genteo; cauda tereti; apterygia, spinis duabus.”.

Type locality: “Lohajæ” (Al-Luhayya/Yemen).

Genus name: Raja.

Species name (Fo r S S k å l ): –; (Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): arnak.

Arabic name (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l ): Arnak.

Remarks: This is not a misspelling for ‘uarnak’, but a separate

species, as noted by Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r (1775a: IX) in the

diagnosis of Raja omm es scherit. In his draft, Fo r S S k å l

treated this species as an unidentified species of Raja with

the Arabic name ‘Arnak’. He did not decide if this was an

undescribed species at all. We cannot be certain if the data

source for this description was by Fo r S S k å l or ni e b u h r or

both; the description was compiled by Fa b r i C i u S . Fa b r i C i u S ,

however, used the Arabic name as a species name. The name

is binominal, accompanied by a diagnosis and would there-

fore be available as Raja arnak Fabricius [ex Forsskål] in

Niebuhr, 1775, with the authorship pending a decision of

12 S t u t t G a r t e r b e i t r ä G e z u r n a t u r k u n d e a Neue Serie 1

ICZN. The species was treated as valid by Wa l b a u m (1792:

536) and bl o C h & SC h n e i d e r (1801: 364–365). It is not iden-

tifiable within the genus Dasyatis.

Dasyatis pastinaca (Linnaeus, 1758)

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XVIII): “[ra J a ]

pastinaca.”.

Locality: “Melita” (La Valletta/Malta).

Himantura uarnak (Gmelin [ex Forsskål], 1789)

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: VIII): “16. [RAJA] c)

S e P h e n : […, Arabic name] β Uarnak; […, Arabic name] cau-

da apterygia.”.

Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: 18): “16. b.) RAJA. Arab. Uárnak,

[…, Arabic name] similis descriptæ [Raja sephen], sed tota

maculata, spina una vel duplici in cauda, quæ apterygia.”.

Gm e l i n [ex Fo r S S k å l ] (1789: 1509–1510): “(RAJA) Uárnak. γ)

Raja tota maculata. Forsk. Fn. arab. p. 18. …”.

Type locality: – (Red Sea).

Genus name: Raja.

Species/subspecies name (Fo r S S k å l , Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): –.

Arabic name (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l , Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): Uár-

nak.

Remarks: In his draft, Fo r S S k å l treated this species as a variety

of the Raja sp. with the Arabic name ‘sephen’, but with a dif-

ferent local name ‘uárnak’. Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r did the

same and noted ‘Uárnak’ as the local Arabic name; the name

arnak he used in one version is a separate species (see

above). The name is neither available from Fo r S S k å l ’s nor

from Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ’s versions (indicated by italics

and is clearly intended to be a local Arabic name rather than

a species name, in the version on p. 18 even indicated with

‘Arab.’ as Arabic name). Therefore, the authorship of the

name rests with Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (no change in interpre-

tation from Fo r S S k å l to Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ), but the name

is not available as no scientific species name was given ex-

cept Raja sephen and a local Arabic name. The first author

using the name Raja uarnak in a correct binominal way was

Gm e l i n [ex Fo r S S k å l ] (1789: 1509–1510), who is therefore

the valid author of the species name. A previous author, bo n -

n a t e r r e (1788: 4) only named this species as “L’Uarnak”,

without proposing a scientific name. The currently used

name of the species is Himantura uarnak (Gmelin [ex Forss-

kål], 1789). The species was subsequently mentioned as Raja

Uàrnak (sp elle d Raja uarnata in the index on p. 713) by

Wa l b a u m (1792: 534, 713); the latter is not an independent

species description, but a spelling error.

Himantura uarnak (Gmelin [ex Forsskål], 1789)

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: IX): “12. [RAJA] b)

o m m e S S C h e r i t : […, Arabic name] Cauda tereti, maculata:

Piscis simillimus Rajis Uarnak & Arnak.”.

Type locality: – (Red Sea).

Genus name: Raja.

Species name (Fo r S S k å l ): –; (Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): omm es

scherit.

Arabic name (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l ): Omm es scherit.

Remarks: In his draft, Fo r S S k å l treated this species as an un-

identified species of Raja with the Arabic name ‘omm es

scherit’. He did not decide if this was an undescribed species

at all. We cannot be certain if the data source for this de-

scription was by Fo r S S k å l or ni e b u h r or both; the descrip-

tion was compiled by Fa b r i C i u S . Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r , how-

ever, used the Arabic name as species name. As the species

name is made up of three words, the name is not binominal

and thus not available (ICZN, Art. 5). eS C h m e y e r (2007)

treated this species as available and used the combined name

Raja ommescherit, within the family Dasyatidae. This spe-

cies was subsequently described as Raja Scherit by bo n n a -

t e r r e [ex Fo r S S k å l ] (1788: 6), which is available; as this

name is a junior synonym of and would threaten the fre-

quently used name Himantura uarnak (Gmelin [ex Forsskål],

1789), a petition to the International Commission on Zoo-

logical Nomenclature will be necessary to suppress the un-

used name Raja scherit Bonnaterre [ex Forsskål], 1788. –

This species was mentioned with the new name Raja omm-

escherit by bl o C h & SC h n e i d e r (1801: 368); this, however,

cannot be considered as a species description, as bl o C h &

SC h n e i d e r listed it under ‘species non determinandae’.

“Pastinachus sephen (Forsskål in Niebuhr, 1775)”

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: VIII): “16. [RAJA] c)

S e P h e n : […, Arabic name] α) pterouros, aculeis caudæ ser-

ra tis.”.

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: 17–18): “16. RAJA

S e P h e n ; corpore suborbiculato; cauda duplo longiore subtus

alata, supra aculeis duobus longis, utrinque serratis.”.

Type locality: “Djiddæ in Mari rubro” (Jeddah, Juddah/Saudi

Ar abia).

Genus name: Raja.

Species name (Fo r S S k å l ): –; (Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): sephen.

Arabic names (Latinised, Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): Saefaen, Syfen,

Sif.

Remarks: In his draft, Fo r S S k å l treated this species as Raja sp.

with the Arabic name ‘sephen’. He did not decide if this was

an undescribed species at all. We cannot be certain if the

data source for this description was by Fo r S S k å l or ni e b u h r

or both; the description was compiled by Fa b r i C i u S . Fa b r i C i -

u S in ni e b u h r confused scientific and Arabic names and

used the latter as species name. The name is not binominal

in Fo r S S k å l ’s version, but binominal in Fa b r i C i u S in ni e -

b u h r ’s version (who changed the Arabic name from

‘Saephaen’ or ‘Syfen’ to sephen). Therefore, the authorship

would be attributed to Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r .

The name would be available as Raja sephen Fabricius [ex

Forsskål] in Niebuhr, 1775, with the authorship pending a

decision of ICZN. The species was treated as valid since

Wa l b a u m (1792: 533–534). This species was re-named Tri-

gon forskalii Rüppell, 1829 (rü P P e l l 1829: 53, pl. 13, fig. 2),

which is a junior synonym of Raja sephen.

“Taeniura lymma (Forsskål in Niebuhr, 1775)”

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: VIII): “15. [RAJA] b)

l y m m a . […, Arabic name] caeruleo-maculata.”.

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: 17): “15. RAJA

l y m m a . Arab. […, Arabic name] Corpore ovali, testaceo,

maculis cæruleis; cauda pinnata aculeo uno.”.

Type locality: “Ad urbem Lohajam in Mari rubro” (Al-Luhayya/

Yemen).

Genus name: Raja.

Species name (Fo r S S k å l ): –; (Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): lymma.

Arabic name (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l ): Lymma.

Remarks: In his draft, Fo r S S k å l treated this species as Raja sp.

with the Arabic name ‘lymma’. He did not decide if this was

an undescribed species at all. We cannot be certain if the

data source for this description was by Fo r S S k å l or ni e b u h r

or both; the description was compiled by Fa b r i C i u S . Fa b r i C i -

u S in ni e b u h r confused scientific and Arabic names and

used the latter as species name. The name is not binominal

in Fo r S S k å l ’s version, but binominal in Fa b r i C i u S in ni e -

b u h r ’s version. Therefore, the authorship would be attributed

to Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r . The name would be

available as Raja lymma Fabricius [ex Forsskål] in Niebuhr,

F r i C k e , F o r S S k å l F i S h n a m e S i n n i e b u h r 13

1775, with the authorship pending a decision of ICZN. It was

treated as valid since Wa l b a u m (1792: 533), but misspelled

Raja lymnia by bo n n a t e r r e (1788: 5), and Raja lymna by

bl o C h & SC h n e i d e r (1801: 365).

G y m n u r i d a e – Butterfly rays

Gymnura altavela (Linnaeus, 1758)

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XVIII): “ra J a al-

tavela.”.

Locality: “Melita” (La Valletta/Malta).

M y l i o b a t i d a e – Eagle rays

Aetobatis narinari (Euphrasen, 1790)

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: IX): “16. [RAJA] f)

m u l a […, Arabic name] pelagica. Djiddæ, rarior. Cauda tere-

ti, variegata: ventre niveo: aculeo caudæ admodum nocivo.

Nocturno tempore propius ad littora venit.”.

Type locality: “Djiddæ” (Jeddah, Juddah/Saudi Arabia).

Genus name: Raja.

Species name (Fo r S S k å l ): –; (Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): mula.

Arabic name (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l ): Mula.

Remarks: In his draft, Fo r S S k å l treated this species as an un-

identified species of Raja with the Arabic name ‘Mula’, and

did not decide if this was an undescribed species at all. We

cannot be certain if the data source for this description was

by Fo r S S k å l or ni e b u h r or both; the description was com-

piled by Fa b r i C i u S . Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r , however, used the

Arabic name as a species name. The name is binominal, ac-

companied by a diagnosis and therefore would be available

as Raja mula Fabricius [ex Forsskål] in Niebuhr, 1775, with

the authorship pending a decision of ICZN; the species was

treated as valid by bo n n a t e r r e (1788: 6) and Wa l b a u m

(1792: 536). Raja mula is an unused senior synonym of Raja

narinari Euphrasen, 1790. The name Raja mula is rejected,

in accordance with Art. 23.2 and the preamble of ICZN; an

application to the International Commission on Zoological

Nomenclature will be necessary to retain the name Raja

narinari, which is considered as a valid species, with the

currently used name Aetobatis narinari (Euphrasen, 1790).

Aetobatis narinari (Euphrasen, 1790)

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: IX): “14. [RAJA] d)

t a J a r a . […, Arabic name] Djiddæ. hö r r æ k a : Lohajæ. Cauda

tereti; ventre niveo. Capta, vehementer pinnis verberat.”.

Type localities: “Djiddæ” (Jeddah, Juddah/Saudi Arabia); “Lo-

hajæ” (Al-Luhayya/Yemen).

Genus name: Raja.

Species names (Fo r S S k å l ): –; (Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): tajara or

hoerraeka.

Arabic names (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l ): Tajara, Hörraeka.

Remarks: In his draft, Fo r S S k å l treated this species as an un-

identified species of Raja with two different Arabic names,

‘Tajara’ at Jeddah and ‘Hörraeka’ at Al-Luhayya. He did not

decide if this was an undescribed species at all. We cannot

be certain if the data source for this description was by

Fo r S S k å l or ni e b u h r or both; the description was compiled

by Fa b r i C i u S . Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r , however, used the Ara-

bic names as two alternative species names, but had only a

single diagnosis for them; he did not decide which of the two

names to choose as species name. Therefore, we are left with

a species name Raja tajara hoerraeka, which is not binomi-

nal and therefore not available (ICZN, Art. 5). The species

was subsequently described as Raja Tajara Bonnaterre [ex

Forsskål], 1788 (bo n n a t e r r e 1788: 6; treated as valid by

Wa l b a u m 1792: 536), which is available, and a senior syn-

onym of Raja narinari Euphrasen, 1790. The species is

named Aetobatis narinari (Euphrasen, 1790) under current

usage. To preserve the stability of nomenclature, it will be

necessary to petition the International Commission on Zoo-

logical Nomenclature to suppress the name Raja tajara Bon-

naterre [ex Forsskål], 1788.

Myliobatis aquila (Linnaeus, 1758)

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XVIII): “[ra J a ]

aquila.”.

Locality: “Melita” (La Valletta/Malta).

A c i p e n s e r i d a e – Sturgeons

Acipenser sturio Linnaeus, 1758

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XVIII): “aC i P e n S e r

sturio.”.

Locality: “Melita” (La Valletta/Malta).

Huso huso (Linnaeus, 1758)

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XVIII): “[aC i P e n -

S e r ] huso.”.

Locality: “Melita” (La Valletta/Malta).

Remarks: This is a very interesting record of the species from

Malta. From records in the early 20th century, the species

was known to be endemic to the Caspian Sea, Black Sea and

Aegean Sea and adjacent watersheds. Though the species

spawns in fresh water habitats which are not available in

Malta, adults of the Aegean Sea population would have been

capable of dispersing through the Mediterranean Sea to-

wards Malta. The species may have been more widespread

around the eastern Mediterranean in the past. Today, it is

critically endangered in Turkish Black Sea (Fr i C k e et al.

2007: 22), and extinct in the Aegean Sea (and the Mediter-

ranean).

A c t i n o p t e r y g i i – Ray-finned fishes

Actinopterygii, incertae sedis

Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: XIII): “105. [CYPRINUS] c) l e u -

C i S C u S : Abu grymbi.”.

Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: 71): “105. CYPRINUS l e u C i S C u S ;

(li n n .) cauda subæquali, P. D. & A. ovatis. …”.

Material: ZMUC P.261686 (1 dry skin).

Localities: “dJ i d d æ ” (Jeddah, Juddah/Saudi Arabia); “lo h a J æ ”

(Al-Luhayya/Yemen).

Remarks: This is a misidentification of Cyprinus leuciscus (non

Linnaeus, 1758) [currently used name Leuciscus leuciscus

(Linnaeus, 1758)], a species restricted to temperate freshwa-

ter habitats of Europe and western Asia; the record is un-

placeable within the Actinopterygii. – Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r

(1775a: 71) described two varieties of this species; they were,

however, not named, except for ‘unus’ (the one) and ‘alter’

(the other). Cyprinus leuciscus unus and Cyprinus leuciscus

alter (as listed by eS C h m e y e r 2007) cannot be regarded as

species names.

Actinopterygii, incertae sedis

Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: XVII): “56. da r e d J e t t i n […, Ara-

bic name] (obscurus) Est Hebræorum ץחת”.

Locality: – (Red Sea).

Remarks: This is an Arabic and a Hebrew name without a genus,

14 S t u t t G a r t e r b e i t r ä G e z u r n a t u r k u n d e a Neue Serie 1

a diagnosis or description. The name is therefore not avail-

able as scientific name; it cannot be placed within the Acti-

nopterygii.

Actinopterygii, incertae sedis

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XIX): “eS o x lu-

cius.”.

Locality: “Melita” (La Valletta/Malta).

Remarks: This is a misidentification of Esox lucius (non Lin-

naeus, 1758), a species restricted to temperate freshwater

habitats of the northern hemisphere; the record is unplace-

able within the Actinopterygii.

Actinopterygii, incertae sedis

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XIX): “oS m e r u S

eperlanus.”.

Locality: “Melita” (La Valletta/Malta).

Remarks: This is a misidentification of Salmo eperlanus (non

Linnaeus, 1758), now named Osmerus eperlanus, a species

restricted to the northeastern Atlantic, not occurring south

of the Gironde estuary, western France; the record is un-

placeable within the Actinopterygii.

M o r m y r i d a e – Elephantfishes

“Mormyrus kannume Forsskål in Niebuhr, 1775”

Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: XIII): “111. MORMYRUS k a n -

n u m e ; […, Arabic name] rostro prominente.”.

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: 74–75): “111.

MORMYRUS k a n n u m e ; rostro decurvo, prominente: pinna

D. lineari, longitudine corporis dimidii.”.

Type locality: “da m i a t a e ” (Dumyāt/Egypt).

Genus name: Mormyrus.

Species name (Fo r S S k å l ): –; (Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): kannume.

Arabic name (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l , Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): Kan-

nûme.

Remarks: In his draft, Fo r S S k å l used the Arabic name ‘kan-

nume’ as a substitute for a Latin name possibly to be select-

ed. He did not decide if this was an undescribed species at

all. We cannot be certain if the data source for this descrip-

tion was by Fo r S S k å l or ni e b u h r or both; the description

was compiled by Fa b r i C i u S . Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r (1775a)

described Mormyrus kannume as a new species. The name is

binominal, accompanied by a diagnosis and description, and

would be available and valid as Mormyrus kannume Fabri-

cius [ex Forsskål] in Niebuhr, 1775, with the authorship

pending a decision of ICZN.

E l o p i d a e – Tenpounders

“Elops machnata (Forsskål in Niebuhr, 1775)”

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XIII): “100. [AR-

GENTINA] b) m a C h n a t a ; ossiculo maxillæ infer.

Machnat.”.

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: 68–69): “100. AR-

GENTINA m a C h n a t a ; lineari-lanceolata, membr. br. ultra

30 radios.”.

Type locality: “dJ i d d æ ” (Jeddah, Juddah/Saudi Arabia).

Type material: Holotype: ZMUC P.17153 (dry skin) (see kl a u S e -

W i t z & ni e l S e n 1965: 25, pl. 36; mø l l e r 2006).

Genus name: Argentina.

Species name (Fo r S S k å l ): –; (Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): machnata.

Arabic name (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l , Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ):

Machnat.

Remarks: In his draft, Fo r S S k å l used the Arabic name ‘machnat’

as a substitute for a Latin name possibly to be selected. He

did not decide if this was an undescribed species at all. We

cannot be certain if the data source for this description was

by Fo r S S k å l or ni e b u h r or both; the description was com-

piled by Fa b r i C i u S . Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r (1775a) described

Argentina machnata as a new species. The name is binomi-

nal, accompanied by a diagnosis and description, and would

be available as Argentina machnata Fabricius [ex Forsskål]

in Niebuhr, 1775, with the actual name Elops machnata

(Fabricius [ex Forsskål] in Niebuhr, 1775), the authorship

pending a decision of ICZN. The species was treated as valid

since bo n n a t e r r e (1788: 178) and Wa l b a u m (1792: 46–47).

A l b u l i d a e – Bonefishes

Albula glossodonta (Forsskål in Niebuhr, 1775)

Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: XIII): “99. ARGENTINA a) G l o S -

S o d o n t a ; lingua tuberculis osseis. Bönuk […, Arabic

na me]”.

Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: 68): “99. ARGENTINA G l o S S o -

d o n t a ; lingua basi tuberculis osseis dentata.”.

Type localities: “dJ i d d æ ” (Jeddah, Juddah/Saudi Arabia); “lo-

h a J æ ” (Al-Luhayya/Yemen).

Type material: Syntype: ZMUC P.17152 (dry skin) (listed as

holotype by kl a u S e W i t z & ni e l S e n 1965: 25, pl. 36; mø l l e r

2006; eS C h m e y e r 2007).

Genus name: Argentina.

Species name (Fo r S S k å l , Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): glossodonta.

Arabic name (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l , Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ):

Bönuk.

Remarks: This species was listed by both Fo r S S k å l and Fa b r i -

C i u S in ni e b u h r in both the index and text as Argentina glos-

sodonta. The name is binominal in both versions, accompa-

nied by a diagnosis a description, and is therefore available

as Argentina glossodonta Forsskål in Niebuhr, 1775. The

species is considered as valid since Wa l b a u m (1792: 45–46,

Argentina glossodonta). Argentina bonuk Lacepède [ex

Forss kål], 1803 (la C e P è de 1803: 365–366, 368–369) was de-

scribed as an unneeded replacement name for Argentina

glossodonta Forsskål in Niebuhr, 1775; it is a junior syno-

nym, though it was erroneously assigned to Albula vulpes

(Linnaeus, 1758) by authors.

A n g u i l l i d a e – Freshwater eels

Anguilla anguilla (Linnaeus, 1758)

Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: XIV): “1. MURÆNA a) anguilla.

Αχέλι. Ar. Tæjeban […, Arabic name]. vel Hannæsch.”.

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XIX): “mu r æ n a

anguilla.”.

Localities: – [“Smirna et Constantinopoli”] (İzmir/Turkey;

İstanbul/Turkey); Alexandria? (Egypt); “Melita” (La Vallet-

ta/Malta).

Arabic names (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l , Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): Tae-

jeban, Hannaesch. Maltese name: “Il Sallura”.

Remarks: This is a Linnaean species listed by Fo r S S k å l in ni e -

b u h r (1775a), based on Muraena anguilla Linnaeus, 1758.

The actual vernacular Maltese name is “Sallura” (Anony-

mus 2007b).

F r i C k e , F o r S S k å l F i S h n a m e S i n n i e b u h r 15

M u r a e n i d a e – Moray eels

Echidna zebra (Ahl, 1789)

Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: XIV, in part): “2. [MURÆNA] b)

ophis. Lohajæ Far, Djiddæ Uuz.”.

Localities: “Lohajæ” (Al-Luhayya/Yemen); “Djiddæ” (Jeddah,

Juddah/Saudi Arabia).

Genus name: Muraena.

Species name (Fo r S S k å l , Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): ophis.

Arabic names (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l , Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): Far

(Al-Luhayya), Uuz (Jeddah).

Remarks: This is a composite species, misidentified in part as

Muraena ophis (non Linnaeus, 1758).

Muraena helena Linnaeus, 1758

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XIX): “[mu r æ n a ]

serpens maculatus.”.

Locality: “Melita” (La Valletta/Malta). Maltese name: “Il muri-

na”.

Remarks: This is a name only (nomen nudum), and therefore not

available; according to the Maltese name, the record has

been based on Muraena helena Linnaeus, 1758 (actual Mal-

tese vernacular name “Morina”).

O p h i c h t h i d a e – Snake eels

Echelus myrus (Linnaeus, 1758)

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XIX): “[mu r æ n a ]

myrus.”.

Locality: “Melita” (La Valletta/Malta).

Ophichthus ophis (Linnaeus, 1758)

Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: XIV, in part): “2. [MURÆNA] b)

ophis. Χέλι.”.

Localities: – [“Smirna et Constantinopoli”] (İzmir/Turkey;

İstanbul/Turkey).

Remarks: This is a composite species, based in part on Muraena

ophis Linnaeus, 1758.

Ophisurus serpens (Linnaeus, 1758)

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XIX): “[mu r æ n a ]

serpens marinus.”.

Locality: “Melita” (La Valletta/Malta). Local Maltese name: “Il

serpt al báhar”.

Remarks: Muraena serpens marinus Forsskål [ex Anonymus] in

Niebuhr, 1775 was described as a name only (nomen nudum),

without a diagnosis, description or indication. It is therefore

not an available name. The name was erroneously spelled

Muraena serpens marinis by eS C h m e y e r (2007). It is consid-

ered to be identical with Ophisurus serpens (Linnaeus,

1758). The actual vernacular Maltese name is “Serpt il-báhar

halqu twil” (Anonymus 2007b).

M u r a e n e s o c i d a e – Pike congers

Muraenesox cinereus (Forsskål in Niebuhr, 1775)

Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: X): “2. [MURÆNA] b) C i n e r e a ;

suspecta. Sjæga. […, Arabic name].”.

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: 22): “2. MURÆNA

t o t a C i n e r e a . Arab. Sjæga vel Schæga […, Arabic name].

nomen cummune toti huic generi.”.

Type locality: “Djiddæ” (Jeddah, Juddah/Saudi Arabia).

Type material: Holotype: ZMUC P.31250 (see kl a u S e W i t z &

ni e l S e n 1965: 13, pl. 1; mø l l e r 2006).

Genus name: Muraena.

Species names (Fo r S S k å l , Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): cinerea or tota

cinerea.

Arabic names (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l , Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): Sjae-

ga, Schaega.

Remarks: This species was listed by Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a:

X) as Muraena cinerea, and then later (p. 22) described as

Muraena tota cinerea, which is not binominal, but tied by

the species code ‘2’ to p. X which is considered as the correct

version and therefore available as Muraena cinerea Forsskål

in Niebuhr, 1775. This species was subsequently described

as Muraena arabica Bloch & Schneider [ex Forsskål], 1801

(bl o C h & SC h n e i d e r 1801: 488) as an unneeded new name

for Muraena cinerea Forsskål in Niebuhr, 1775; Muraena

arabica is a junior synonym. The currently used name for

the species is Muraenesox cinereus (Forsskål in Niebuhr,

1775) in the family Muraenesocidae. – This species was

transferred to the genus Conger under the name Conger

cinereus by rü P P e l l (1830: 115–116, pl. 29, fig. 1), which was

not intended as an independent species description, but was

a misidentification of Muraena tota cinerea of Fo r S S k å l , as

explicitly noted in the synonymy (rü P P e l l 1830: 115). The

name Conger cinereus Rüppell, 1830 is therefore not avail-

able. Gü n t h e r (1870: 38) treated the congrid species under

the name Conger marginatus Valenciennes in Eydoux &

Souleyet, 1850, with both Fo r S S k å l ’s Muraena tota cinerea

and rü P P e l l ’s Conger cinereus as questionable synonyms.

The first available version of the name is Conger cinereus

Klunzinger [ex Rüppell], 1871 described by kl u n z i n G e r

(1871: 607–608), where rü P P e l l’s misidentification was

treated as valid, with rü P P e l l as the author. This, however,

causes serious problems, as Conger flavipinnatus Bennett,

1832, Conger marginatus Valenciennes in Eydoux & Sou-

leyet, 1850, Conger altipinnis Kaup, 1856, and Conger

noordziekii Bleeker, 1857 would all be senior synonyms. As

the name Conger cinereus is of prevailing usage, I continue

to use this name here, but an application to the International

Commission on Zoological Nomenclature will be necessary

to conserve this name and suppress the synonyms listed

above. The currently used name is Conger cinereus Klun-

zinger [ex Rüppell], 1871, in the family Congridae. – Fo r S S -

k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: 22) named three varieties from Djid-

dae, Muraena tota cinerea alba, M. tota cinerea f lava, and

M. tota cinerea rubra. These are nomina nuda, as neither is

accompanied by a diagnosis or indication; the names are not

available.

C o n g r i d a e – Conger eels

Conger conger (Linnaeus, 1758)

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XIX): “[mu r æ n a ]

conger.”.

Locality: “Melita” (La Valletta/Malta).

E n g r a u l i d a e – Anchovies

Engraulis encrasicolus (Linnaeus, 1758)

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XIX): “[Cl u P e a ]

encrasicolus.”.

Locality: “Melita” (La Valletta/Malta). Local name: “Il Sardel-

la”.

Stolephorus indicus (Hasselt, 1823)

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XVII): “45. [CLU-

PEA] e) Schàleb […, Arabic name] quod nomen parum dif-

fert a voce Slavon. Saláka. Parva, digiti longitudine; ar-

16 S t u t t G a r t e r b e i t r ä G e z u r n a t u r k u n d e a Neue Serie 1

gentea; utrinque vitta laterali fulva; dorso cæruleo. Vivam

non vidi; sed deglutitam a Scombro reperi.”.

Locality: – (Red Sea).

Material: No Fo r S S k å l material extant.

Genus name: Clupea.

Species names (Fo r S S k å l , Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): encrasicolus

or baelama?

Arabic names (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l , Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): Láaf,

Bælama, Sardin.

Remarks: In his draft, Fo r S S k å l used the Arabic name ‘schàleb’

as a substitute for a Latin name possibly to be selected. He

did not decide if this was an undescribed species at all. We

cannot be certain if the data source for this description was

by Fo r S S k å l or ni e b u h r or both; the description was com-

piled by Fa b r i C i u S . Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r (1775a) described

Clupea schaleb as a new species. eS C h m e y e r (2007) listed

the name erroneously as Clupea schaleh and gave the local-

ity, also erroneously, as ‘Izmir and/or Istanbul, Turkey’. The

Arabic name and the diagnosis, however, indicate that the

species originated from the Red Sea. The name is binominal,

accompanied by a diagnosis, and would be available as Clu-

pea schaleb Fabricius [ex Forsskål] in Niebuhr, 1775, with

the authorship pending a decision of ICZN. The name is a

senior synonym of Engraulis indicus Hasselt, 1823, which is

named Stolephorus indicus (Hasselt, 1823) under current

usage. In order to stabilise this frequently used name, a peti-

tion to the International Commission on Zoological Nomen-

clature to suppress the name Clupea schaleb will be need-

ed.

Thryssa baelama (Bloch & Schneider [ex Forsskål], 1801)

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XIII): “107. [CLU-

PEA] b) e n C r a S i C o l u S . Bælama.”.

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: 72): “107. CLUPEA

b æ l a m a , e n C r a S i C o l u S ? de S C r . Corpus lanceolatum, digito

longius: dig latum altum: compressum, argenteum: dorso

fusco: …”.

Locality: – (Red Sea).

Material: No Fo r S S k å l material extant.

Genus name: Clupea.

Species names (Fo r S S k å l , Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): encrasicolus

or baelama?

Arabic names (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l , Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): Láaf,

Bælama, Sardin.

Remarks: Fo r S S k å l misidentified this species as Clupea encra-

sicolus (non Linnaeus, 1758) in his index, and was undecided

in the text whether this was a new species for which he used

the substitute name ‘bælama’, or if it was C. encrasicolus.

Though Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r (1775a) used the name Clupea

bælama, encrasicolus? in the text, he did not clearly decide

if this was a new species or not. Therefore, the name Clupea

baelama Fabricius in Niebuhr, 1775 is not available (ICZN,

Art. 11.5). Gm e l i n (1789: 1407) referred to Clupea Baelama

in the synonymy of Clupea setirostris; the name is not avail-

able from this description either. Wa l b a u m (1792: 42) copied

Fo r S S k å l ’s description and named the species ‘Clupea bæla-

ma an Encrasicolus?’, which is not available for the same

reason as Fo r S S k å l ’s description. The first available version

of the name is Clupea baelama Bloch & Schneider [ex Forss-

kål], 1801 (bl o C h & SC h n e i d e r 1801: 429). The species is

valid within the family Engraulidae, with the currently used

name Thryssa baelama (Bloch & Schneider [ex Forsskål],

1801). The species name was misspelled Engraulis boelama

by kl u n z i n G e r (1871: 507). br o u S S o n e t ’s (1782: 39–41) de-

scription of Clupea setirostris was based in part on the de-

scription of Clupea encrasicolus, baelama by Fa b r i C i u S [ex

Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a). With the lectotype designa-

tion by Fr i C k e (1999: 78), that species was restricted to the

currently named Thryssa setirostris (Broussonet, 1782),

with Tanna/Vanuatu as the type locality.

C h i r o c e n t r i d a e – Wolf herrings

“Chirocentrus dorab (Forsskål in Niebuhr, 1775)”

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XIII): “108. [CLU-

PEA] c) d o r a b ; dentex. Lysan Dorab.”.

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: 72–73): “108. CLU-

PEA d o r a b ; pinnis ventralibus minutis, labio superiori den-

tibus porrectis bicorni; inferiori longiori, dentibus vali-

dioribus, erectis.”.

Type localities: “dJ i d d a e ” (Jeddah, Juddah/Saudi Arabia);

“mo C h h a e ” (Al-Mukhā/Yemen).

Genus name: Clupea.

Species name (Fo r S S k å l ): –; (Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): dorab.

Arabic names (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l , Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ):

Lysan (Jeddah), Machnat or Dorab (Al-Mukhā).

Remarks: In his draft, Fo r S S k å l used the Arabic name ‘dorab’ as

a substitute for a Latin name possibly to be selected. He did

not decide if this was an undescribed species at all. We can-

not be certain if the data source for this description was by

Fo r S S k å l or ni e b u h r or both; the description was compiled

by Fa b r i C i u S . Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r (1775a) described Clupea

dorab as a new species. The name is binominal, accompa-

nied by a diagnosis and description, and would be available

as Clupea dorab Fabricius [ex Forsskål] in Niebuhr, 1775,

with the actual name Chirocentrus dorab (Fabricius [ex

Forsskål] in Niebuhr, 1775), the authorship pending a deci-

sion of ICZN. The species was treated as valid by bo n n a -

t e r r e (1788: 187). Clupea dentex Bloch & Schneider [ex

Forsskål], 1801 (bl o C h & SC h n e i d e r 1801: 428–429) is a ju-

nior synonym of Clupea dorab.

C l u p e i d a e – Herrings

Clupeidae, indet.

Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: XVII): “41. CluPea a) harengus.

Αρ εγγα .”.

Locality: Western Turkey or Greek Aegean islands.

Remarks: This record is based on a misdentification of Clupea

harengus (non Linnaeus, 1758), a species which is restricted

to the northwestern and northeastern Atlantic. Fo r S S k å l ’s

material was based on an unidentified clupeid fish species.

Clupeidae, indet.

Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: XVII): “43. [Clu Pea] c) Γώνος.”.

Locality: Western Turkey or Greek Aegean islands.

Remarks: This is not a valid species group name, as it was given

only in Greek characters. The name is neither accompanied

by a indication, diagnosis or description, and is not available.

It cannot be placed within the family Clupeidae.

Alosa agone (Scopoli, 1786)

Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: XVII, part): “42. [CLUPEA] b)

alosa. Σαρδέλλα vel Σαυριδηπόλαμΰ. Turc. Sardella-balük.

Arab. Sıgbboga. Macula nigra pone branchias; pinnæ D. &

C. albidæ, apice nigræ.”.

Fo r S S k å l [ex Anonymus] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XIX): “Cl u P e a

alosa.”.

Locality: “Melita” (La Valletta/Malta).

Remarks: These records are based in part on a name only, in part

on a short diagnosis, misidentified as Clupea alosa (non Lin-

naeus, 1758). The diagnosis clearly refers to Alosa agone.

F r i C k e , F o r S S k å l F i S h n a m e S i n n i e b u h r 17

Judging from the Turkish name, however, other species were

included under the name Clupea alosa as well; the name

‘Sardalya’ refers to species of sardines (Fr i C k e et al. 2007),

i. e. Sardina pilchardus (Walbaum, 1792), Sardinella aurita

(Valenciennes in Cuvier & Valenciennes, 1847) and Sar-

dinella maderensis (Lowe, 1838).

Amblygaster sirm (Walbaum [ex Forsskål], 1792)

Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r (1775a: XVII): “44. [CLUPEA] d) charact.

harengi; sed minor. Arab. Sirm. […, Arabic name] Maxilla

inferiore longiore; corpore tripollicari; macula aurea pone

oculos. Rad. B. 8. D. 19. P. 16. V. 8. A. 17. C. 18.”.

Locality: – (Red Sea).

Material: No Fo r S S k å l material extant.

Remarks: Fo r S S k å l in ni e b u h r ’s (1775a: XVII) note on Clupea

sp. d is the basis for the description of Clupea Sirm by Wa l -

b a u m [ex Fo r S S k å l ] (1792: 38) as a variety of Clupea haren-

gus, i. e. Clupea harengus sirm, which is now named Am-

blygaster sirm (Walbaum [ex Forsskål], 1792). It is uncertain

if the basis of this note was really A. sirm, as judging from

the colour description it may well have been Herklotsichthys

quadrimaculatus (Rüppell, 1837). No type material of Clu-

pea harengus sirm Walbaum [ex Forsskål], 1792 is known. It

would therefore be advisable to describe a neotype for the

species.

C h a n i d a e – Milkfishes

“Chanos chanos (Forsskål in Niebuhr, 1775)”

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: XIV): “110. [MUGIL]

b) C h a n o S ; pinna D. unica. Anged. […, Arabic name]”.

Fa b r i C i u S [ex Fo r S S k å l ] in ni e b u h r (1775a: 74): “110. MUGIL

C h a n o S ; pinna dorsi unica; p. caudæ utrinque bi-alata.”.

Type locality: “dJ i d d æ ” (Jeddah, Juddah/Saudi Arabia).

Type material: Holotype: ZMUC P.17154 (1 dry skin) (see

kl a u S e W i t z & ni e l S e n 1965: 26, pl. 37; mø l l e r 2006).

Genus name: Mugil.

Species name (Fo r S S k å l ): –; (Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ): chanos.

Arabic name (Latinised, Fo r S S k å l , Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r ):

Anged; Turkish name of variety ‘b’: Chani.

Remarks: In his draft, Fo r S S k å l used the Turkish name ‘chani’

as a substitute for a Latin name possibly to be selected for his

variety ‘b’. He did not decide if this was an undescribed spe-

cies at all. We cannot be certain if the data source for this

description was by Fo r S S k å l or ni e b u h r or both; the de-

scription was compiled by Fa b r i C i u S . Fa b r i C i u S in ni e b u h r

(1775a) confused the two varieties, and described Mugil

chanos as a new species for the variety ‘a’