Voir la source de Ajustements de la World Odonata List

{{Site}}

= Ajustements de la [[World Odonata List]] =
{{Deliry2026hn71}}
----
Je me propose de mettre ici les principaux courriers échangés dans de le cadre des ajustements de la [[WOL]]. [!?]
{{Work}}

== @ du 20 décembre 2025 ==
A reading of the taxonomic elements of the recent article by Dow et al. (2025) reveals some inaccuracies, some of which are unexpected to resolve for the [[WOL]].
{{DowAl2025sumatra}}

An article by Kirby gives two dates, 1893 and 1894, but the correct date, duly verified, is 1894. There are in fact two articles by Kirby that year with descriptions.
[a] {{Kirby1894ceylan}}
[b] {{Kirby1894}}

I am providing the list of new taxa formed by Kirby (1894a, 1894b) for review. I have highlighted in bold the date corrections that I have identified. Please note that three binomials are orphaned... I will investigate whether they can be attributed to a particular species or not.

* ''[[Bradinopyga]]'' Kirby, '''1894''' [a]
* ''Brachydiplax australis'' Kirby, 1894 [b] {{FL}} ''[[Brachydiplax denticauda]]''
* ''[[Elattoneura oculata]]'' Kirby, 1894 [a]
* ''[[Lestes decipiens]]'' Kirby, '''1894''' [a]
* ''[[Orthetrum nigrifrons]]'' Kirby, 1894 [b] {{FL}} [[Non applicables]]
* ''[[Orthetrum tricolor]]'' Kirby, 1894 [a] {{FL}} [[Non applicables]]
* ''[[Platysticta apicalis]]'' Kirby, '''1894''' [a]
* ''Disparoneura sita'' Kirby, '''1894''' : ''[[Prodasineura sita]]'' (Kirby, '''1894''') [a]
* ''Pseudophaea carissima'' Kirby, '''1894''' [a] {{FL}} ''[[Euphaea splendens]]''
* ''Pseudophaea carissima var. viridissima'' Kirby, '''1894''' [a] ({{FL}} ''[[Euphaea splendens]]'')
* ''[[Rhyothemis chloe]]'' Kirby, 1894 [b]
* ''[[Rhyothemis lankana]]'' Kirby, 1894 [a] {{FL}} [[Non applicables]]
* ''[[Rhyothemis princeps]]'' Kirby, 1894 [b]
* ''Rhyothemis turneri'' Kirby, 1894 [b] {{FL}} ''[[Rhyothemis resplendens]]''
* ''[[Tetrathemis yerburii]]'' Kirby, 1894 [a]
* ''Urothemis vittata'' Kirby, '''1894''' [a] {{FL}} ''[[Macrodiplax cora]]''

The following synonym should be added to ''[[Brachygonia oculata]]'' : ''Microdiplax delicatula'' by Selys Longchamps, 1889. Revealed by Dow et al. (2025), it is present, for example, in Steinmann (1997)... I think this is an oversight.

== @ du 10 décembre 2025 : Synonymy in ''[[Rhyothemis]]'' ==
{{Work}}
<small>The situation is probably less straightforward, and there are two schools of thought regarding the management of taxa associated with phyllis: one follows Davies & Tobin (1985) and Bridges (1994) and is used in the World Odonata List, which consists of a system of synonyms. The second is in line with Kirby (1890), taken up by Steinmann (1997) and different XX{{eme}} s. authors, which gives only a few synonyms and the main ones as subspecies of ''[[Rhyothemis phyllis]]''. The study of biogeography, type localities, and cross-references probably gives a mixed picture, and in my opinion, most of the synonyms given to ''phyllis ''so far <u>should be reserved without attribution</u> or taken up again using Steinmann's (1997) method... the first method makes all names doubtful (cf. ''nomen dubium'') insofar as the question needs to be investigated further as proposed by Kosterin & al. (2025).</small>

That being said, I will get to the point with a few « necessary » adjustments:

* [[Fichier:Johansson.jpg|right|200px]]PJ (ci-contre) : ''Libellula variegata'' was not describe by Linnaeus, but by Johansson in 1763 (printed date, or, maybe 1764 publication possible, but all catalogs from that period remain at 1763). The story of this binom is interesting. Burmeister (1839) or Rambur (1842) deals with ''Systema Naturae'' ed. 1767 and give in fact ''Libellula variegata'' Linnaeus, 1767. But in this edition Linnaeus, which give the good source forget in the wake of the structure of his presentation, to write Johansson as descriptor. The real description is done in a serie of miscellaneous works directed (dir. publisher) by Carl von Linné in seven volumes, ''Amoenitates Academicae'' : in the sixth one, we have on the CXXXI dissertation a work of Boas Johansson which give to dragonflies species : ''Libellula variegata'' Johansson, 1763 (= ''[[Rhyothemis variegata]]'' (Johanssson, 1763)) and ''Libellula carolina'' Johansson, 1763 (= ''[[Tramea carolina]]'' (Johansson, 1763)) two corrections to do for the WOL because the first revisors are false too. Kirby (1890) give the quite good version : ''Libellula variegata'' Johansson, 1764 and Steinmann (1997) give the same one ! Davies & Tobin (1985) and Bridges (1994) give the correct date, but had not make the verification probably influenced by Burmeister (1839) and Rambur (1842) these one working in fact on ''Systema Naturae'' ed. 1767 were Linnaeus himself forget the good descriptor ! The solution is quite correct : ''Libellula variegata'' Linnaeus, 1763 ! The is for me no doubt about the descriptor : the latin presentation is : "as president D.D.Car. von Linné, proposed by Boas Johansson of Kalmar, Uppsala 1763, June 23". Kalmar is a city in southwestern Sweden, and Uppsala is the city where the journal is published. The conclusion is ''Libellula variegata'' Johansson, 1763 : ''[[Rhyothemis variegata]]'' (Johansson, 1763) and ''Libellula carolina'' Johansson, 1763 : ''[[Tramea carolina]]'' (Johansson, 1763)… it needs to read Garrison to see what he says on that option. I will do (nothing : ''Libellula carolina'' Linnaeus, 1763).
* You can add ''Libellula indica'' Fabricius, 1781 which is a Coromandel taxonyme (New Zealand) in Museum Banks, Fabricius making the association with ''Libellula arria'' Drury, 1773. The synonymy with ''variegata'' is confirmed by Davies & Tobin (1985) and Bridges (1994) for example.
* ''Libellula histrio'' Fabricius, 1787 is correct, no need to add anything. But, the version ''Libellula histrio'' Burmeister, 1839 (''nec'' Fabricius, 1787) is correct. I would remind you that this last binom, is a synonym for ''[[Erythrodiplax berenice]]''. {{NOCORR}}
* We have ''Rhyothemis obscura'' Brauer, 1868 (''nomen nudum''), it is a binom (Brauer 1868b). The description was done later : ''Rhyothemis phyllis obscura'' Ris, 1913. The two versions or, only the second one may be done. {{NOCORR}}
* You can add, if desired, ''Libellula euphrosine'' de Hann ''in'' Burmeister, 1839 (''nomen nudum)'' which is probably a collection label name, reported by Burmeister (1839) himself under ''Libellula phyllis'', known as de Hann in litt.. {{V}}Corrigé en omettant le ''nomen nudum''.{{eV}}
----
{{Vc}}'''@ du 21 décembre 2025''' : ajustements{{eV}}<br>
I have checked the adjustments made to the WOL and I see that almost everything has been taken into account. It seems that the “omissions” are oversights, so I will point them out.
* We have '''''Libellula histrio'' Fabricius, 1787''' simply because Burmeister (1839) is later. This is justified for ''Libellula histrio'' Burmeister, 1839 (''nec'' Fabricius, 1787) (synonym of ''[[Erythrodiplax berenice]]''), but not for ''Libellula histrio'' Fabricius, 1787, here, otherwise we would have dozens of cases to adjust in this way!
* We have '''''Rhyothemis obscura'' Brauer, 1868 (''nomen nudum'')''', it is a binom (Brauer 1868b). The description was done later : '''''Rhyothemis phyllis obscura'' Ris, 1913.''' The two versions or, only the second one may be done : I understand that ''nomina nuda'' is an accepted choice then the two names be useful.
* The correct version is : ''Libellula euphrosine'' de Hann ''in'' Burmeister, 1839 ('''''nomen nudum''''').
----
[b] {{Brauer1868linne}}
{{Burmeister1839}}
{{Fabricius1781}}
{{Fabricius1787}}
{{Johansson1763}}
{{Kirby1890}}
{{Linnaeus1767}}
{{Rambur1842}}
{{Ris19131919}}
{{Steinmann1997}}