Corrections for grammatical agreement in Joeropsididae (Malacostraca: Isopoda)

Abstract

Joeropsididae Nordenstam, 1933 contains three genera: Joeropsis Koehler, 1885, Rugojoeropsis Just, 2001, and Scaphojoeropsis Just, 2001. Each of their generic names ends in the Latin transliteration of the feminine Greek word ὄψῐς (opsis). Combined species-group names must agree in gender with the genus-group name according to the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (1999) Article 31.2. An updated list of the species names in Joeropsididae is provided accordingly. Eight species names are corrected for gender: Joeropsis bifasciata Kensley, 1984a, Joeropsis denticulata Kim, Kim and Yoon, 2022, Joeropsis indica Müller, 1991, Joeropsis integra Kensley, 1984b, Joeropsis intermedia Nordenstam, 1933, Joeropsis limbata Kensley, 2003, Joeropsis minuta Müller, 1989, and Joeropsis personata Kensley, 1984.

Keywords:
The Code; gender agreement; ICZN; nomenclature; taxonomy

The grammatical gender of a species name must agree with the gender of its genus, according to the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature Article 31.2 and Article 34.2 (International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature, 1999), henceforth ‘the Code’. JoeropsisKoehler, 1885, RugojoeropsisJust, 2001, and ScaphojoeropsisJust, 2001 were initially described using the -opsis morpheme, which is Latin transliteration of the feminine Greek word ὄψῐς.

All species-group names ending in Latin adjectives must be corrected to agree in gender with the combined genus-group name. This does not include species names which could be considered as Latin nouns in apposition, as according to Article 31.2.2, “where the author of a species-group name did not indicate whether he or she regarded it as a noun or as an adjective, and where it may be regarded as either and the evidence of usage is not decisive, it is to be treated as a noun in apposition to the name of its genus (the original spelling is to be retained, with gender ending unchanged; see Article 34.2.1).” If a species-group name could be considered a noun, the spelling in the original description must be left unchanged. Latin is also defined as “both ancient and mediaeval Latin” in the Glossary of the Code, which is a valid part of the Code according to Article 89.1, which states that “in interpreting the Code, the meaning attributed in the Glossary to a word or expression is to be taken as its meaning for the purposes of the Code.” There is no stipulation in the Code about which dictionaries to use for species-group names.

All 79 species in Joeropsis with Latin or latinized endings currently within WoRMS (2024) were checked for their gender. Rugojoeropsis and Scaphojoeropsis are not speciose, with one and two species respectively. All three of these species names are well formed and require no changes.

The correct forms are: Joeropsis bifasciataKensley, 1984; Joeropsis denticulataKim, Kim and Yoon 2022; Joeropsis indicaMüller, 1991; Joeropsis intermediaNordenstam, 1933; Joeropsis limbataKensley, 2003; Joeropsis minutaMüller, 1989.

Joeropsis integraKensley, 1984 b : Integer was substantivized as a noun in mediaeval Latin (Ashdowne et al., 2018). However, Kensley (1984b) noted that “the specific name, meaning ‘entire’, refers to the lateral margins of the head and pleon.” This usage is considered as only adjectival, and so it must be changed according to Article 31.2.2. Also, while personatus was substantivized as a noun in mediaeval Latin (Ashdowne et al., 2018), the usage is clear that the intended meaning was the adjectival form for ‘masked’ (Kensley 1984a), and so this must be considered adjectival and the correct form is J. personataKensley, 1984.

Below, some brief notes are given only on species names that might appear to need change, but to which no change has been suggested.

Joeropsis acolorisKensley, 2003: acoloris, “from the Latin for having no color”, incorrectly uses the Greek a- prefix with a Latin noun. This is more commonly expressed using the adjective achroma, f., or through incolor, m./f., a third declension noun or adjective. There is no evidence that the word ought to be used as an adjective, and Kensley (2003) did not specify the part of speech of acoloris. Given that, it must be treated as if it were a noun in apposition.

Joeropsis monsmarinusKensley, 1980: monsmarinus is a compound of a noun and an adjective, with the masculine form for marinus ‘oceanic’. The feminine form of the adjective is marina. However, Kensley (1980) noted that this word was the Latin for ‘seamount’, which suggests that it ought to be treated as a noun in apposition.

Joeropsis meteorMüller, 1989: meteor is not a Latin word; the Latin is meteorum. As such, it must be treated as a noun in apposition.

Joeropsis pentagonaKensley and Schotte, 2002: Pentagona is not a Latin word in the nominative singular case and must be considered a noun in apposition.

Joeropsis pleurionKensley and Schotte, 2002: pleurion “from the Latin for ‘rib’, refers to the two rounded ridges on pereonite 4.” (Kensley and Schotte, 2002). However, pleurion comes from the Greek πλευρά, for ‘rib’. -ion can be used to derive nouns in Latin, leaving a likely third-declension neuter noun in the singular nominative form. A more commonly used word here is pleuralis. This must be considered a noun in apposition.

Joeropsis serrulusKensley, 1984b: serrulus is not a Latin word and must be treated as a noun in apposition as a result. It is likely derived from serrula, a feminine Latin word for ‘small saw’, but the change of ending means that it must be treated as indeclinable according to Article 31.2.3.

Joeropsis varanusBruce, 2015: varanus was derived from the Latin name for the sand monitor Varanus gouldii, which Lizard Island is named after (Bruce, 2015) and thus is treated as a noun in apposition.

Corrections necessary according to Articles 31 and 34 are normally done as part of wider taxonomic reviews, or incidentally by editors of taxonomies such as WoRMS (https://www.marinespecies.org). Nomenclatural notes are rarely the focus of wider reviews, and inconsistencies may be passed over. As well, taxonomic editors do not usually cite their reasoning for corrections for agreement, and a change log or errata is often not updated for these changes. These factors, among others such as poor transliterations or latinizations, inaccurate citations, and misspellings, can lead to the undesirable usage of variable spellings for available names by different taxonomic authorities and throughout the published literature. Further, decisions around gender agreement are complex and require familiarity with Latin, Greek, and the Code. A family-wide review is more likely to catch errors than incidental work, and a detailed description of changes relating to grammatical gender agreement minimizes work for future taxonomists and promotes stability by enabling convergence on the appropriate species-name endings.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I thank the two anonymous reviewers and Douglas Yanega for their detailed comments and suggestions for this work.

REFERENCES

• Ashdowne RK; Howlett DR and Latham RE (eds.) 2018. Dictionary of Medieval Latin from British Sources. British Academy, Oxford.
• Bruce NL 2015. Joeropsididae Nordenstam, 1933 (Crustacea, Isopoda, Asellota) from the Lizard Island region of the Great Barrier Reef, Queensland, Australia. ZooKeys, 491: 1-62. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.491.4932
  » https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.491.4932
• International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature 1999. International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature, London, 4th edition. Available at Available at https://www.iczn.org Accessed on 10 Sep 2024.
  » https://www.iczn.org
• Just J 2001. Bathyal Joeropsididae (Isopoda: Asellota) from south-eastern Australia, with description of two new genera. Memoirs of Museum Victoria, 58(2): 297-333. https://doi.org/10.24199/J.MMV.2001.58.16
  » https://doi.org/10.24199/J.MMV.2001.58.16
• Kensley B 1980. Decapod and isopod crustaceans from the west coast of southern Africa, including seamounts Vema and Tripp. Annals of the South African Museum, 83: 13-32. http://hdl.handle.net/10088/10268
  » http://hdl.handle.net/10088/10268
• Kensley B 1984a. The Atlantic barrier reef ecosystem at Carrie Bow Cay, Belize, III: New marine Isopoda. Smithsonian Contributions to Marine Sciences, 24: 1-81. http://dx.doi.org/10.5479/si.01960768.24.1
  » http://dx.doi.org/10.5479/si.01960768.24.1
• Kensley B 1984b. The South African Museum's Meiring Naude cruises. Part 15. Marine Isopoda of the cruises. Annals of the South African Museum, 93: 213-301. http://hdl.handle.net/10088/10259
  » http://hdl.handle.net/10088/10259
• Kensley B 2003. Marine isopod crustaceans from Easter Island. Pacific Science, 57(3): 287-317. https://doi.org/10.1353/psc.2003.0023
  » https://doi.org/10.1353/psc.2003.0023
• Kensley B and Schotte M 2002. New species and records of Asellota from the Indian Ocean (Crustacea: Peracarida: Isopoda). Journal of Natural History, 36(12): 1421-1461. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222930110050401
  » https://doi.org/10.1080/00222930110050401
• Kim SH, Kim JG and Yoon SM 2022. Two new species of the genus Joeropsis Koehler, 1885 (Isopoda, Asellota, Joeropsididae) from Korean waters. ZooKeys, 1090: 85-102. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.1090.80149
  » https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.1090.80149
• Koehler R 1885. Description d'un isopode nouveau le Joeropsis brevicornis Annales des Sciences Naturelles, Zoologie, 6e(19): 1-7, pl. 1. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/112110#page/33/mode/1up
  » https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/112110#page/33/mode/1up
• Müller HG 1989. Joeropsidae from Bora Bora and Moorea, Society Islands, with descriptions of four new species (Isopoda: Asellota). Bijdragen tot de Dierkunde, 59: 71-85. https://repository.naturalis.nl/pub/503883
  » https://repository.naturalis.nl/pub/503883
• Müller HG 1991. Two new species of Joeropsis Koehler from a sabellid reef at the south-west coast of Sri Lanka (Crustacea, Isopoda: Joeropsidae). Zoologische Abhandlungen, 46: 121-130.
• Nordenstam A 1933. Marine Isopoda of the families Serolidae, Idotheidae, Pseudidotheidae, Arcturidae, Parasellidae and Stenetriidae mainly from the South Atlantic. Further Zoological Results of the Swedish Antarctic Expedition 1901-1903 Under the Direction of Dr. Otto Nordenskjöld, 3: 1-284, 2 pls, errata. https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/317881#page/11/mode/1up
  » https://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/317881#page/11/mode/1up
• WoRMS Editorial Board 2024. World Register of Marine Species. Available at Available at https://www.marinespecies.org Accessed on 10 Sep 2024. Available at https://www.marinespecies.org Accessed on 10 Sep 2024. https://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=editors
  » https://www.marinespecies.org » https://www.marinespecies.org/aphia.php?p=editors

• Zoobank:
  http://zoobank.org/urn:lsid:zoobank.org:pub:53B92965-0081-4CF4-935B-10A9F3940AC5
• Consent for publication
  The author declares that they have reviewed the content of the manuscript and given their consent to submit the document.
• Data availability
  All study data are included in the article and/or supplementary material.
• Funding and grant disclosures
  There were no external funding sources for this study.
• Study association
  This paper was not associated with any study
• Study permits
  No permits were necessary for this work.

Edited by

• Editor-in-chief:
  Christopher Tudge

• Associate Editor:
  Marcos Tavares

Data availability

All study data are included in the article and/or supplementary material.

Publication Dates

• Publication in this collection
  03 Nov 2025
• Date of issue
  2025

History

• Received
  01 Feb 2025
• Accepted
  22 May 2025