Note the genus name has been changed from Adamas
; there was some controversy surrounding this, perhaps best explained by the species author himself, Jean Huber, in:
"Non-availability of a name electronically
published: the case of Adamas Huber, 1979
(Pisces, Cyprinodontiformes, Nothobranchiidae),
invalidly replaced on the Internet" (PDF
In a nutshell, Huber's argument amount to two points:
- One, the name Adamas was replaced in an internet-only paper, which was not allowed by the ICZN code at that time
- And Two, the ICZN code states "3. A zoologist should not publish a new replacement
name (a nomen novum) or other substitute name for a
junior homonym when the author of the latter is alive;
that author should be informed of the homonymy and
be allowed a reasonable time (at least a year) in which
to establish a substitute name" and this was not done.
A rebuttal from the Author seeking to replace Adamas
- Addressed point 1) by asserting the relevant journal was not internet-only but also distributed as a paper copy
but did not address the second point, which was that since Huber was alive he should have been contacted and allowed to change the name.
as for the first point, the timing is suspect here. Huber's article, while dated "2007" says at the bottom "Submitted on 11 December 2006" while the first issue of "Munis" was also in 2006. It appears "Munis" did not exist in print at the time Huber wrote his article. No proof is offered that it was.
Since the timing seems a little suspect and no proof is offered the "Munis" journal was distributed on paper from the first issue (even more suspect is the editor seems to have written all the articles in that first issue most of which are similar name changes based on finding conflicting zoological names) and Huber was not given a chance to correct the name, we regard the proper replacement for Adamas
to be Adamans