Taxonomy Profile: Genysa decorsei (Simon 1902)

Genysa decorsei: Taxonomy and Nomenclature
Kingdom:
Animalia
Taxonomic Rank:
Species
Synonym(s):
Diadocyrtus decorsei
Simon 1902
Common Name(s):
Taxonomic Status:
Current Standing:
valid
Data Quality Indicators:
Record Credibility Rating:
Minimum taxonomic/nomenclature review
Genysa decorsei: Taxonomic Hierarchy
Kingdom : Animalia
animals |
Animal |
animaux |
Subkingdom : Bilateria
Infrakingdom : Protostomia
Superdivision : Ecdysozoa
Phylum : Arthropoda
arthropods |
Artrópode |
arthropodes |
Subphylum : Chelicerata
cheliceriformes |
quelicerado |
queliceriforme |
Subclass : Arachnida
araignées |
aracnídeo |
arachnids |
arácnidos |
Order : Araneae
spiders |
aranhas |
araignées |
arañas |
Family : Idiopidae
armored trapdoor spiders |
Genus : Genysa
Species : Genysa decorsei
Genysa decorsei Direct Children(s):
Genysa decorsei: References
Expert(s):
Source(s):
Source:
World Spider Catalog, Version 11.0
Acquired:
2011-10-15
Notes:
Platnick, Norman I. 2011. The World Spider Catalog, v.11.0. American Museum of Natural History. Database built by Robert J. Raven from the files underlying the website at http://research.amnh.org/iz/spiders/catalog/ DOI: 10.5531/db.iz.0001
Reference for:
Genysa decorsei
Source:
World Spider Catalog, Version 12.5
Acquired:
2012-04-15
Notes:
Platnick, Norman I. 2012. The World Spider Catalog, v.12.5. American Museum of Natural History, online at http://research.amnh.org/iz/spiders/catalog/ DOI: 10.5531/db.iz.0001
Reference for:
Genysa decorsei
Publication(s):
Genysa decorsei: Geographic Information
Geographic Division:
Africa
Jurisdiction/Origin:
Genysa decorsei: Comments
Comment:
Unresolved secondary homonymy is shown by Platnick (2012, online World Spider Catalog v12.5): In the same work, Simon (1902) described Diadocyrtus decoursei (p.596) and Genysochoera decoursei (p.597). These are both currently placed in the genus Genysa (per Platnick, online World Spider Catalog v12.5), with a note on the latter saying 'if actually congeneric, and not conspecific, with the above species, a replacement name will be necessary.' These secondary homonyms have identical priority under the ICZN, and their status apparently remains unresolved