Boros István (szerk.): A Magyar Természettudományi Múzeum évkönyve 50. (Budapest 1958)

Kretzoi, M.: New names for arvicolid homonyms

4. Microtus insularis Bailey 1898 (not Lemmus insular is Nilsson 1844 — referable to Microtus), replaced by Microtus nesophilus Bailey 1898. 5. Microtus terrestris rufescens Satunin 1908 (not Arvicola rufescens DeKay 1842) is a species of Arvicola —• replaced by Microtus terrestris karatschaicus Heptner 1948. 6. Microtus roberti occidentalis Turov 1928 (not Arvicola occidentalis Peale 1848 — a true Microtus), replaced bv Microtus roberti circassicus Heptner 1948 (= Microtus roberti turovi Hoffmeister 1949). 7. Microtus middendorffi uralensis Skalon 1935 (not Arvicola ouralensis Poliakov 1881 — a .species of Microtus), replaced by Microtus middendorfii ryphaeus Heptner 1948. 8. Clethrionomys glareolus Sibiriens Egorin 1939 (not Arvicola rufocanus sibiricus Poliakov 1881), replaced by Clethrionomys glareolus tomensis Heptner 1948. 9. Clethrionomys gapperi rufescens Smith 1940 (not Arvicola rufescens de Sélys Longchamps 1836 — a species of Clethrionomys)

, replaced by Clethrionomys gapperi pallescens Hall et Cockrum 1952. Four names are taxonomic homonyms •— if groups as Pitymys or Phaiomys are only subgenera of Microtus (a very extended opinion among recent mammalogists) — and must be replaced by new ones. The names falling in this category are : 1. Pitymys depressus Miller 1908 (nec Arvicola arvalis forma depressa Rörig et Börner 1905 — belonging to Microtus), replaced by Microtus (Pitymys) savii gerritmilleri n. nom. 2. Pitymys arvaloides Hinton 1923 (not Arvicola arvaloides Pomel — a species of Microtus), replaced by Microtius (Pitymys) arvalidens n. nom. 3. Pitymys multiplex brauneri Martino 1926 (not Microtus arvalis brauneri Martino 1926), replaced by Microtus (Pitymys) subterraneus serbicus n. nom. 4. Microtus agrestis wettsteini Éhik 1928 (not Pitymys subterraneus ivettsteini Ëhik 1926), replaced by Microtus agrestis carinthiacus n. nom. At least 11 names are not only taxonomical homonyms, but at the same time synonyms of earlier — valid — names ; therefore they can be rejected without substitutes. These are as follows : 1. Hypudaeus terrestris aquaticus Billberg 1827 (not Lemmus aquaticus Cuvier 1817 — to be placed in Arvicola). 2. Arvicola ater Macgillivray 1832 (not Hypudaeus terrestris ater Billberg 1827 — placed in Arvicola). 3. Arvicola alliaria Eversmann 1840 (not Mus alliarius Pallas 1779) — if both belong to Alticola, as supposed by recent authors. 4. Hypudaeus spelaeus Giebel 1847 (not Arvicola spelaea Münster 1833) —- both placed in Arvicola. 5. Myodes torquatus fossilis Roger 1879 (not Lemmus fossilis Pomel 1853 — a fossil form of Dicrostonyx)

. 6. Myodes torquatus major Woldrich 1880 (not Arvicola spelaeus major Münster 1833) — both being based on fossil remains of Dicrostonyx. 7. Microtus oeconomus fossilis Trouessart 1899 (not Arvicola riparia fossilis Roger 1879, etc. — all forms of Microtus). 8. Arvicola agrestis fusca Fatio 1900 (not Microtus strauchi fuscus Büchner 1889), if Phaiomys is a subgenus of Microtus. 9. Arvicola arvalis forma principalis Rörig et Börner 1905 (not Microtus principalis Rhoads 1895) — both being members of Microtus. 10. Pitymys ibericus fuscus Miller 1908 (not Microtus strauchi fuscus Büchner 1889, not Arvicola agrestis fusca Fatio 1900). 11. Microtus agrestis neglectus, Ognev 1913 (not Arvicola neglectus Jenyns 1841 — a Microtus ). Finally we must mention the use of some recent authors who include Arvicola in Microtus as at least a subgenus of the later. This practice would invole that not less than 8 names (four of which are apperently valid names