1 Orange Agricultural Institute, Forest Road, Orange, NSW 2800, Australia
Current work updating the checklists of names of planthoppers for the Australian Faunal Directory (AFD) has required examination of all original publications and this has revealed numerous errors and anomalies between currently accepted nomenclature and what was originally published. In addition, erroneous Australian records of species have been published by early taxonomists studying material from major collecting expeditions to the Southern Hemisphere. Such errors are usually perpetuated by subsequent authors who clearly did not check the original publication, or misinterpreted what it contains. Returning to these original publications has removed some of these errors from being repeated in the AFD. In addition to nomenclatural issues, there are sometimes discrepancies between the sex, date of collection and even the locality of type material as originally published and the label data of specimens which can be identified as comprising the type series. It is normal practice to exclude specimens from the type series when their label data do not match the original published data. However, the Code (Art. 18.104.22.168) allows unpublished evidence to be used, in conjunction with published evidence, to determine what specimens constitute the type series. Otherwise, we are in danger of excluding valuable specimens which were clearly used in creating the original description. In this presentation, I will look at some of the issues revealed in the planthopper families Flatidae, Nogodinidae and Ricaniidae during the revision of the AFD.