The purpose of this application, under Article 23.9.3 of the Code, is to conserve the specific name Aiptasia pallida (Agassiz in Verrill, 1864) for a species of sea anemone (Cnidaria, Actiniaria) widely used as a model system for dinoflagellate-cnidarian symbiosis and coral bleaching studies. The name A. diaphana (Rapp, 1829) is a senior subjective synonym of A. pallida, while Aiptasia inula (Duchassaing de Fombressin & Michelotti, 1864), Aiptasia mimosa (Duchassaing de Fombressin & Michelotti, 1864) and Aiptasia tagetes (Duchassaing de Fombressin & Michelotti, 1864) are also synonyms, but published in the same year. The use of the name A. pallida meets the requirements for reversal of precedence of a junior synonym (Article 23.9.1) in the case of A. inula and A. mimosa, which were not used in the 20th century and are declared nomina oblita under Article 23.9.2 in this paper. The names A. diaphana and A. tagetes were used after 1899; hence the conditions of Article 23.9.1.1 are not met. However, in the interest of nomenclatural stability, we request a ruling to maintain the use of the junior synonym under the plenary power, thereby making A. pallida a nomen protectum, and A. diaphana and A. tagetes nomina oblita.

The purpose of this application, under Article 81.2.3, is to conserve the generic name Phoronis Wright, 1856 and the specific name Phoronis muelleri Selys Longchamps, 1903 in their accustomed use. Both names are well known and included in all major textbooks on zoology and in hundreds of papers. However, a parallel set of older names, Actinotrocha Müller, 1846 and A. branchiata Müller, 1846 (and other ‘species of Actinotrocha’) are very often used in papers on phoronid larvae, so the conditions for reversal of precedence using Article 23.9.1.1 are not met. The name Phoronis is the base for the names phoronidae, Phoronidea and Phoronida in various uses for the family, order, class, and phylum dating from Hatschek (1888). A strict application of the Principle of Priority would create confusion, and the Commission is therefore asked to use its plenary power to suppress the generic name Actinotrocha Müller, 1846 and the specific epithet branchiata Müller, 1846 (as published in the binomen Actinotrocha branchiata) for the purposes of the Principle of Priority.

The purpose of this application, under Article 23.9.3 of the Code, is to conserve the specific name Helix (Helicogena) aspersa insolida Monterosato, 1892 (currently Erctella insolida; Gastropoda, Pulmonata, Helicidae; endemic to NW Sicily), threatened by the senior primary homonyms Helix (Campylaea) insolida Brusina, 1876 and Helix (Campylaea) insolida Pfeiffer & Clessin, 1881, two unjustified emendations, no longer in use, for Helix insolita Rossmässler, 1838 (currently Chilostoma insolita, Gastropoda, Pulmonata, Helicidae, endemic to Croatia, Bosnia, Montenegro and Herzegovina). In order to conserve the current usage of Monterosato's name it is proposed that Helix (Campylaea) insolida Brusina, 1876 and Helix (Campylaea) insolida Pfeiffer & Clessin, 1881 be suppressed.

The purpose of this application, under Articles 29 and 55.3 of the Code, is to remove the homonymy between the family-group names omalidae Handlirsch, 1904 (Insecta, Archaeorthoptera) and omalidae MacLeay, 1825 (Insecta, Coleoptera), which are homonyms due to the similarity of the names of their respective type genera Omalia Beneden & Coemans, 1867 and Omalium Gravenhorst, 1802, and between the family-group names xenopteridae Pinto, 1986 (Insecta, Megasecoptera) and xenopteridae Riek, 1955 (Insecta, Orthoptera), which are homonyms due to the similarity of the names of their respective type-genera Xenoptera Pinto, 1986 and Xenopterum Riek, 1955. It is proposed that the stem of the generic name Omalia be emended to Omalia- to give omaliaidae, while leaving the beetle family name unaltered, and that the stem of the generic name Xenoptera be emended to Xenoptera- to give xenopteraidae, while leaving the orthopteran family name unaltered.

The purpose of this application, under Articles 11.8, 11.8.1, 78.2.3 and 81 of the Code, is to confirm the unavailability of 23 names published by Marseul in 1879, one name published by Pic in 1892, one name attributed to Pic in 1911 and one name used by Krekich-Strassoldo, 1919. These names have been incorrectly put in use by Chandler, Nardi & Telnov in 2004, in place of the correct use of names proposed by Pic and Sahlberg. The original names were French vernacular plurals for species-group names in a French text and cannot be converted into singular by application of Article 11.8.1. The incorrectly proposed names have destabilized a nomenclature settled for more than one century. Twelve other names proposed by Pic and Sahlberg that are junior objective synonyms should also be rejected. Anthicus pumilus Baudi, 1877 is designated as type species of Tenuicomus Pic, 1894, A. rufivestis Marseul, 1879 is designated as type species of Trapezicomus Pic, 1894 and Notoxus bimaculatus Illiger, 1801 is designated as type species of Laticomus Pic, 1894.

The purpose of this application, under Article 81.1 of the Code, is to preserve the name of the widely cited fossil brachiopod Anathyris monstrum Khalfin, 1933 by ruling that the two unused ‘varietal’ names, which together ambiguously comprised the species, are unavailable from their original descriptions in Khalfin (1933a).

The purpose of this application, under Article 78.2.3 of the Code, is to alleviate confusion caused by the premature publication of the name Kinosternon chimalhuaca Berry, Seidel, & Iverson by Rogner (1996), while the full description was published by the same authors in 1997, which is widely but erroneously accepted as the valid publication date of the taxon. We request that the Commission use its specific powers to rule that the specific name chimalhuaca Berry, Seidel, & Iverson in Rogner, 1996, as published in the binomen Kinosternon chimalhuaca, is the one to be used for the Jalisco mud turtle.

The purpose of this application, under Article 75.5 of the Code, is to conserve the current usage of the name Terrapene putnami Hay, 1906. We propose replacement of the nondiagnostic holotype (a fragment of a left hypoplastron) that was collected from a temporally mixed locality, with a more complete specimen comprised of the carapace, plastron, and associated non-shell postcrania from a nearby locality of late Pleistocene age. The specific name T. putnami is widely accepted by both palaeontologists and herpetologists as either a valid specific or subspecific name and has been established in the literature for over fifty years. However, the taxonomy of large fossil Terrapene specimens is ambiguous due in part to the lack of a more diagnostic and well-dated holotype for T. putnami. Recent molecular analyses of extant Terrapene species coupled with recent palaeontological studies have made the true diagnosis of the taxon imperative. It is proposed that all type species fixations for Terrapene putnami be set aside and a firmly dated late Pleistocene neotype be designated.

The Commission has ruled that the application to conserve the name Pseudocoenia d'Orbigny, 1850 by designating a new lectotype for its type species, Pseudocoenia bernardina d'Orbigny, 1850, is not approved.

The Commission has conserved two specific gastropod names, Bulimus lineatus Bruguière, 1789 (currently Macroceramus lineatus; Pulmonata, urocoptidae) from Haiti and Bulimus lineatus Draparnaud, 1801 (currently Acicula lineata; Gastropoda, Caenogastropoda, aciculidae) from central Europe by ruling to disregard their primary homonymy.

The Commission has conserved the specific names ofAnguis jamaicensis Shaw, 1802 and Anguis lumbricalis Linnaeus, 1758 for two species of blind snake from the Caribbean in their accustomed usage, by ruling that Anguis jamaicensis Shaw, 1802 is not to be treated as a replacement name for A. lumbricalis Linnaeus, 1758 (currently Typhlops lumbricalis). A neotype is designated for A. jamaicensis.