Journal articles on the topic '1842-1903'

Philip Brookes Mason (1842–1903) of Burton-on-Trent, Staffordshire, was a medical doctor, a keen naturalist and collector. He first devoted himself to the study of botany, later Lepidoptera, then conchology and finally Coleoptera. His private collections, however, were of a wider nature accumulated both from his own gatherings and from purchases. He was an important figure in the Burton-on-Trent Natural History and Archaeological Society and in national societies including the Entomological Society of London and the Conchological Society of Great Britain and Ireland. He campaigned for a museum in Burton-on-Trent and his medical and altruistic achievements are also noteworthy. The current whereabouts of his collections are given in an appendix.

Se revisa el género Stenoscelidea Westwood, 1842 (Coreidae: Coreinae: Stenoscelideini) para Ecuador, describiendo dos nuevas especies y citando por primera vez a S. blotei Brailovsky y Barrera, 1996 y a S. hilaris Breddin, 1903. Se incluye una clave para separar a las especies, y una serie de fotografías que ilustran el hábito de las mismas, y la peculiar coloración de los segmentos dorsales del abdomen; los parámeros de la mayoría de las especies son incluidos. Se agregan notas biológicas para algunas de las especies.

The article describes the main historical milestones in the description and study of ulcerative colitis from the time of Hippocrates to the present day. The first description of the morphological picture of non-specific ulcerative colitis (NUC) was presented by the Viennese pathologist Karl Rokitansky in 1842. The term "ulcerative colitis" was coined by S. Wilks in 1859. A detailed description of the disease was presented in 1875 by S. Wilks and W. Maxon. In an independent nosological form, NUC was isolated in 1888 by the English doctor White. Boas in 1903. For the first time, he presented the differential diagnosis of NUC and chronic dysentery. The term "non-specific ulcerative colitis" in Russia was first introduced by A.S. Kazachenko in a report at the XIII Congress of Russian Surgeons in 1913.

The palace in Podhorce has been, and remains, the subject of many studies and articles, but not all aspects of the history of this residence have been studied. This paper presents the state of research on the history of the Podhorce palace in the years 1865-1939. Ownership of the palace by Princess Constance of Zamoyskich Sanguszko (1864-1946) and Stanislaw Eustachy Sanguszko (1842-1903) still awaits studying. For researchers of the mansion Podhorce history, the most difficult challenges are related to detailed examining of source documents presenting fortunes of the palace on a background of important historical events. In the years 1865-1939 breakthrough moments for the Podhorce mansion were: World War I, the war of 1920, the celebration of the 250th anniversary of the Battle of Vienna, the outbreak of World War II. However the administration and care of goods in Podhorce is the issue least studied.

Los monumentos megalíticos de Antequera (Málaga) han sido objeto de numerosas excavaciones arqueológicas, trabajos de restauración y proyectos de “urbanización” desde que entre 1842 y 1847 se iniciara la excavación de Menga y en 1903 y 1904 la exploración de Viera y El Romeral. El objetivo principal de estas intervenciones ha sido ampliar el conocimiento sobre las construcciones prehistóricas, mejorar su estado de conservación y facilitar su acceso al público. Sin embargo, muchas de ellas han tenido consecuencias negativas para la conservación y el conocimiento científico de los monumentos. Este artículo valora críticamente estas intervenciones a partir del análisis de la documentación disponible, consistente en proyectos previos, informes y memorias, planimetría, fotografías y publicaciones. Además, planteamos un conjunto de criterios que todas las actividades futuras realizadas en los megalitos antequeranos y sus alrededores deberían cumplir para evitar el deterioro y la pérdida de registro arqueológico.

The present study provides historical and new records of the introduced millipedes species in Brazil, Oxidus gracilis (C.L. Koch, 1847), Orthomorpha coarctata (Saussure, 1860) (Paradoxosomatidae), Prosopodesmus jacobsoni Silvestri, 1910 (Haplodesmidae), Trachyjulus calvus (Pocock, 1893a), Glyphiulus granulatus (Gervais, 1847) (Cambalopsidae), Trigoniulus corallinus (Gervais, 1842), Leptogoniulus sorornus (Butler, 1876), Epitrigoniulus cruentatus (Brölemann, 1903) (Pachybolidae), Paraspirobolus lucifugus (Gervais, 1837) (Spirobolellidae), Cylindroiulus britannicus (Verhoeff, 1891), Cylindroiulus truncorum (Silvestri, 1896) (Julidae), and Rhinotus purpureus (Pocock, 1894) (Siphonotidae). Among the 27 federative units in Brazil, 21 states present at least one record of a non-native species. Orthomorpha coarctata was the most widely distributed species, occurring in 15 states. Glyphiulus granulatus (state of Rio Grande do Sul), C. truncorum (São Paulo), and R. purpureus (Amazonas) were recorded from only one Brazilian state. The Southeast region concentrates most of the compiled records (42,6%) and richness by grid (5-7 species), mainly in urban areas of the states of Rio de Janeiro and São Paulo.

The fish fauna of urban streams is still poorly known, it difficult to assess the effects of urbanization expansion on fish species composition, for this reason the aim of this study was to provide a checklist of species that compose the ichthyofauna of six urban streams, tributaries to the Vermelho River, upper Paraguay River Basin, Rondonópolis, Mato Grosso State, Brazil. The samples were performed with seine nets on a spatial gradient of 75 m, and with sieves for a period of 15 minutes in each site. A total of 56 species belonging to five orders, Characiformes, Siluriformes, Gymnotiformes, Cyprinodontiformes, and Perciformes, 21 families and 44 genera were sampled. The most common species were Astyanax asuncionensis Géry, 1972, Astyanax abramis (Jenyns, 1842), Odontostilbe pequira (Steindachner, 1882), Odontostilbe paraguayensis Eigenmann & Kennedy, 1903, Characidium zebra Eigenmann, 1909 and Hypostomus sp. This checklist brings additional knowledge on fish that inhabit tributaries to the major rivers of northern Pantanal.

The Australopacific Saprininae, containing twelve genera and forty species, are reviewed, illustrated and keyed to genera and species. Two new genera, Australopachylopusgen. n. (New Zealand, type species Saprinus lepidulus Broun, 1881) and Iridoprinusgen. n. (Australia, type species I. myrmecophilussp. n.) and four new species: Saprinus (Saprinus) rarussp. n. (Australia), Saprinus (Saprinus) chathamensissp. n. (Chatham Islands, New Zealand), Saprinus (Saprinus) pseudodetritussp. n. (Chatham Islands, New Zealand) and Saprinus (Saprinus) pacificussp. n. (Kiribati) are described. The Saprininae fauna of the Australopacific Region is a mixture of northern invaders that most likely arrived to the region in early Cenozoic by ‘island hopping’ from north (Hypocaccus, Hypocacculus, several Saprinus) and truly autochthonous taxa either with uncertain phylogenetic affinities (Iridoprinusgen. n., Saprinodes Lewis, 1891, Reichardtia Wenzel, 1944, Australopachylopusgen. n.), primitive Australopacific endemics (e.g. Tomogenius Marseul, 1862) or presumed relicts (several species of Saprinus Erichson, 1834). Several Saprininae taxa (Chalcionellus aeneovirens (Schmidt, 1890); (Gnathoncus rotundatus (Kugelann, 1792); G. communis (Marseul, 1862); Euspilotus (Neosaprinus) rubriculus (Marseul, 1855); Hypocaccus (Nessus) interpunctatus interpunctatus (Schmidt, 1885); Saprinus (S.) chalcites (Illiger, 1807) and Saprinus (S.) cupreus Erichson, 1834)) were introduced into the region with human activity. We report the first cases of myrmecophily (Iridoprinus myrmecophilusgen. et sp. n.) and termitophily (Saprinus rarussp. n.) in the Saprininae from the Australopacific Region. Lectotypes and paralectotypes of the following taxa are designated herein: Saprinus amethystinus Lewis, 1900, Saprinus apricarius Erichson, 1834, Saprinus artensis Marseul, 1862, Saprinus auricollis Marseul, 1855, Saprinus australasiae Blackburn, 1903, Saprinus bistrigifrons Marseul, 1855, Saprinus certus Lewis, 1888, Saprinus communis Marseul, 1862, Saprinus cupreus Erichson, 1834, Saprinus cyanellus Marseul, 1855, Hister cyaneus Fabricius, 1775, Saprinus dentipes Marseul, 1855, Saprinus desbordesi Auzat, 1916, Saprinus gayndahensis MacLeay, 1871, Saprinus hyla Marseul, 1864, Saprinus incisisternus Marseul, 1862, Saprinus incisus Erichson, 1842, Saprinus irinus Marseul, 1862, Saprinus laetus Erichson, 1834, Saprinus lepidulus Broun, 1881, Saprinus mastersii MacLeay, 1871, Saprinus nitiduloides Fairmaire, 1883, Saprinus pedator Sharp, 1876, Saprinus pseudocyaneus White, 1846, Saprinus rubriculus Marseul, 1855, Saprinus sinae Marseul, 1862, Saprinus tasmanicus Marseul, 1855, Saprinus tyrrhenus Blackburn, 1903, Saprinus varians Schmidt, 1890, Saprinus vernulus Blackburn, 1903, Saprinus viridanus Lewis, 1899, Saprinus viridipennis Lewis, 1901, and Saprinus westraliensis Blackburn, 1903. The synonymy of Saprinus tyrrhenus Blackburn, 1903 is revoked and the species is considered as valid (stat. n.). Seven new synonymies are proposed: Saprinus gayndahensis MacLeay, 1871 = Saprinus laetus Erichson, 1834 syn. n., Saprinus pseudocyaneus White, 1846 = Saprinus laetus Erichson, 1834 syn. n., Saprinus mastersii MacLeay, 1871 = Saprinus laetus Erichson, 1834 syn. n., Saprinus dentipes Marseul, 1855 = Hypocaccus (Baeckmanniolus) gaudens (J.L. LeConte, 1851) syn. n., Hypocaccus (Hypocaccus) vernulus (Blackburn, 1903) = Hypocaccus (Hypocaccus) sinae (Marseul, 1862) syn. n., Saprinus (Saprinus) lindrothi Dahlgren, 1968 = Saprinus (Saprinus) prasinus Erichson, 1834 syn. n., and Saprinus (Saprinus) certus Lewis, 1888 = Saprinus (Saprinus) frontistrius Marseul, 1855 syn. n. The following new records are: Euspilotus (Neosaprinus) rubriculus (Marseul, 1855) (= Saprinus gnathoncoides Bickhardt, 1909) (Australia), Saprinus (Saprinus) laetus Erichson, 1834 (Lord Howe Island) and Saprinus (Saprinus) cyaneus cyaneus (Fabricius, 1775) (Lord Howe Island and Fiji).

Though sea stars of the genus Henricia Gray, 1840 are widely used in biological studies, their species diversity in the Arctic is poorly understood. We conducted a taxonomic revision of the genus Henricia from the White Sea and examined 381 specimens of Henricia sea stars deposited in the collection of the Zoological Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences (St. Petersburg), the type collection founded by A.M. Djakonov, and our own collection. Following the 1987 study by F.J. Madsen and the 1950 study by A.M. Djakonov, we identified six species in the White Sea: Henricia eschrichti (J. Müller and Troschel, 1842), Henricia perforata (O.F. Müller, 1776), Henricia scabrior (Michailovskij, 1903), Henricia solida Djakonov, 1950, Henricia sanguinolenta (O.F. Müller, 1776), and Henricia pertusa (O.F. Müller, 1776). Updated descriptions, identification keys, and distribution data of these species are provided. Statistical analysis based on the set of individual characters confirmed the validity of the species H. scabrior. Synonymy of Henricia species according to the 1950 study by A.M. Djakonov and the 1987 study by F.J. Madsen is discussed.

Cedomilj Mijatovic (also spelled Chedomille Miyatovich/Mijatovich 1842-1932), the most prominent Serbian Anglophile in the nineteenth century influenced the mutual perception of the British and the Serbs through his six books published in English, numerous articles in leading British papers contributions to the Encyclopaedia Britannica, and a dozen translations from English into Serbian. In the 1870s and 1880s, he had an influential political career, serving as minister in several Serbian governments and playing a role in establishing some important state institutions. The image of Serbia in Britain is analyzed with a special emphasis on four pro-Serbian campaigns conducted between 1862 and 1918, the third of which (1892/3) was undertaken by Mijatovic and his wife Elodie Lawton Mijatovich (1825-1908). The campaign was intensified in 1906-16, when it was conducted by C. Mijatovic alone. A significant part of the paper is devoted to Mijatovic' role in the crisis in Anglo-Serbian relations following the May Coup (1903), to his contributions to the Encyclopaedia Britannica, and his efforts to present British culture to the Serbs.

The genera Psalmopoeus Pocock, 1895, Tapinauchenius Ausserer, 1871 and Pseudoclamoris Hüsser, 2018 are revised and cladistics analyses carried out including most species of these genera. In order to test the monophyly of Aviculariinae and Psalmopoeinae, species of all genera in these two subfamilies were included, as well as of Harpactirinae, Selenocosmiinae, Theraphosinae, Stromatopelmatinae, Ischnocolinae, Schismatothelinae, Poecilotherinae, and a barychelid was used to root the cladogram. The matrix with 50 terminal taxa, 1 continuous and 85 discrete characters was analysed with TNT 1.5. The results show a monophyletic Psalmopoeinae as sister group of Aviculariinae. Psalmopoeus comprises 9 species: Psalmopoeus cambridgei Pocock, 1895 (type species), Psalmopoeus ecclesiasticus Pocock, 1903, Psalmopoeus emeraldus Pocock, 1903, Psalmopoeus irminia Saager, 1994, Psalmopoeus langenbucheri Schmidt, Bullmer & Thierer-Lutz, 2006, Psalmopoeus plantaris Pocock, 1903, Psalmopoeus pulcher Petrunkevitch, 1925, Psalmopoeus reduncus (Karsch, 1880), and Psalmopoeus victori Mendoza, 2014. Psalmopoeus intermedius Chamberlin, 1940 is considered a junior synonym of P. reduncus. Psalmopoeus copanensis Gabriel & Sherwood, 2020, P. sandersoni Gabriel & Sherwood, 2020 and P. petenensis Gabriel & Sherwood, 2020 are considered junior synonyms of P. victori. Psalmopoeus maya Witt, 1996 is considered nomen nudum. Tapinauchenius comprises 8 species: Tapinauchenius plumipes (C. L. Koch, 1842) (type species), Tapinauchenius sanctivincenti (Walckenaer, 1837), Tapinauchenius latipes L. Koch, 1875, Tapinauchenius brunneus Schmidt, 1995, Tapinauchenius cupreus Schmidt & Bauer, 1996, Tapinauchenius polybotes Hüsser, 2018, Tapinauchenius rasti Hüsser, 2018, and T. gretae n. sp. The female of T. brunneus is described for first time. Tapinauchenius violaceus (Mello-Leitão, 1930), T. purpureus Schmidt, 1995, T. concolor (Caporiaccco, 1947), and T. gigas Caporiacco, 1954 are considered junior synonyms of T. plumipes. With the synonymy of T. gigas (type species of Pseudoclamoris Hüsser, 2018), it was necessary to describe a new genus for the two species formerly included in it. Thus, the new genus Amazonius n. gen. is erected to include A. elenae (Schmidt, 1994) n. comb., A. burgessi (Hüsser, 2018) n. comb. as well as two new species A. giovaninii n. gen. n. sp. and A. germani n. gen. n. sp. A discussion on the relationship of Psalmopoeinae and Aviculariinae and maps with the distributions of all species are provided.

The paper explains the development of local government under the rule of the constitution defenders 1842-1858. The author describes the historical facts that led to the abdication of Prince Milos and the establishment of an oligarchic government of chieftains assembled in a council (Toma Vucic Perisic, Avram Petronijevic, Hadji Milutin Garasanin and his son Ilija Stojan and Aleksa Simic), as well as the process of building a modern state administration and cultural identity, an integral part of which was a narrower process of constituting local government. A distinct role in the latter process was played by the Austrian-born Serbs, the only intelligentsia in the Principality of Serbia which was still under Turkish suzerainty. Special attention is given to the analysis of two local government acts instituting centralized local authorities with an enhanced law enforcement role in the districts, counties and communes. Those are District Prefectural System and of County Prefect Office Act of 12 May 1839 and Communal System Act of 13 July the same year. Of great importance was the former law, one of the longest-lived in the history of nineteenth-century Serbian constitutionalism. It was in force in 1839-88 and 1894-1903. Every autocratic regime in Serbia was to rely on it. Its distinctive feature is that it subordinated district and county prefects to the central authority and to the minister of internal affairs. They were reduced to mere police agents deprived of any freedom of action. Thus the local officials assumed the character of rigid administrators looking down on the common people. A natural continuation of this law was the other law of communal organization which turned the lowest local units into mere executive agencies of counties. Thus local government took on the form of a mere transmission of the central government, functioning according to a principle similar to the medieval lord-vassal system: my vassal's vassal is not my vassal.

The purpose of the article is to consider, on the example of Berdyansk and Melitopol districts, Tavricheskaya guberniya, one of the little-studied aspects of the cultural life of the Orthodox population in the 19th – early 20th centuries, associated with church construction in their settlements. The authors set themselves the task, on specific examples, to trace the main features and features of this process. Church building occupied a prominent place in the inner life of local communities, as evidenced by the relevant archival materials collected in the funds of the state archive of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. We will dwell only on some of them, relating to fund 118 of the Tavricheskaya Spiritual Consistory, concerning the territory of the then Berdyansk and Melitopol districts, the Tavricheskaya gubernia. A number of general scientific and disciplinary methods were used. Thus, the purpose and objectives of the study defined the theoretical and methodological approach to knowledge of historical reality, which is based on dialectical methods of knowledge. Results. According to the 1897 census, there were about ten Orthodox churches in the city, two Jewish and one Karaite synagogue. Chief among them was the Ascension Cathedral Church. Its construction began in 1842 and ended in 1848 (consecrated on May 18, 1848). The stone building of the church had a fence and a wooden bell tower on 2 pillars. Somewhat later, in 1854, a stone bell tower was added to it, and in 1903–1904 the church building was expanded with new additions. Among other Orthodox churches in the city, archival documents mention the Epiphany Church (built in 1863), the Peter and Paul Church (built in 1892), the Intercession Cemetery Church (built in 1865), and the Alexander Gymnasium Church, built in 1876 in the courtyard city gymnasium. Concluding a general review of this issue, we can conclude that the local population and Bulgarian settlers played a rather active role in church construction in the settlements of the Azov region of the Tavricheskaya gubernia in the post-reform period. This equally applied to both the Bulgarian proper and the neighboring villages of the North-Western Azov region. Such construction was carried out mainly at the expense of local communities, and local churches were not only religious centers, but often served as primary schools.

A review of genus-group names for darkling beetles in the family Tenebrionidae (Insecta: Coleoptera) is presented. A catalogue of 4122 nomenclaturally available genus-group names, representing 2307 valid genera (33 of which are extinct) and 761 valid subgenera, is given. For each name the author, date, page number, gender, type species, type fixation, current status, and first synonymy (when the name is a synonym) are provided. Genus-group names in this family are also recorded in a classification framework, along with data on the distribution of valid genera and subgenera within major biogeographical realms. A list of 535 unavailable genus-group names (e.g., incorrect subsequent spellings) is included. Notes on the date of publication of references cited herein are given, when known. The following genera and subgenera are made available for the first time: Anemiadena Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Cheirodes Gené, 1839), Armigena Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Nesogena Mäklin, 1863), Debeauxiella Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Hyperops Eschscholtz, 1831), Hyperopsis Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Hyperops Eschscholtz, 1831), Linio Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Nilio Latreille, 1802), Matthewsotys Bouchard & Bousquet, gen. nov., Neosolenopistoma Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Eurynotus W. Kirby, 1819), Paragena Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Nesogena Mäklin, 1863), Paulianaria Bouchard & Bousquet, gen. nov., Phyllechus Bouchard & Bousquet, gen. nov., Prorhytinota Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Rhytinota Eschscholtz, 1831), Pseudorozonia Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Rozonia Fairmaire, 1888), Pseudothinobatis Bouchard & Bousquet, gen. nov., Rhytinopsis Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Thalpophilodes Strand, 1942), Rhytistena Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Rhytinota Eschscholtz, 1831), Spinosdara Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Osdara Walker, 1858), Spongesmia Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Adesmia Fischer, 1822), and Zambesmia Bouchard & Bousquet, subgen. nov. (in Adesmia Fischer, 1822). The names Adeps Gistel, 1857 and Adepsion Strand, 1917 syn. nov. [= Tetraphyllus Laporte & Brullé, 1831], Asyrmatus Canzoneri, 1959 syn. nov. [= Pystelops Gozis, 1910], Euzadenos Koch, 1956 syn. nov. [= Selenepistoma Dejean, 1834], Gondwanodilamus Kaszab, 1969 syn. nov. [= Conibius J.L. LeConte, 1851], Gyrinodes Fauvel, 1897 syn. nov. [= Nesotes Allard, 1876], Helopondrus Reitter, 1922 syn. nov. [= Horistelops Gozis, 1910], Hybonotus Dejean, 1834 syn. nov. [= Damatris Laporte, 1840], Iphthimera Reitter, 1916 syn. nov. [= Metriopus Solier, 1835], Lagriomima Pic, 1950 syn. nov. [= Neogria Borchmann, 1911], Orphelops Gozis, 1910 syn. nov. [= Nalassus Mulsant, 1854], Phymatium Billberg, 1820 syn. nov. [= Cryptochile Latreille, 1828], Prosoblapsia Skopin & Kaszab, 1978 syn. nov. [= Genoblaps Bauer, 1921], and Pseudopimelia Gebler, 1859 syn. nov. [= Lasiostola Dejean, 1834] are established as new synonyms (valid names in square brackets). Anachayus Bouchard & Bousquet, nom. nov. is proposed as a replacement name for Chatanayus Ardoin, 1957, Genateropa Bouchard & Bousquet, nom. nov. as a replacement name for Apterogena Ardoin, 1962, Hemipristula Bouchard & Bousquet, nom. nov. as a replacement name for Hemipristis Kolbe, 1903, Kochotella Bouchard & Bousquet, nom. nov. as a replacement name for Millotella Koch, 1962, Medvedevoblaps Bouchard & Bousquet, nom. nov. as a replacement name for Protoblaps G.S. Medvedev, 1998, and Subpterocoma Bouchard & Bousquet, nom. nov. is proposed as a replacement name for Pseudopimelia Motschulsky, 1860. Neoeutrapela Bousquet & Bouchard, 2013 is downgraded to a subgenus (stat. nov.) of Impressosora Pic, 1952. Anchomma J.L. LeConte, 1858 is placed in Stenosini: Dichillina (previously in Pimeliinae: Anepsiini); Entypodera Gerstaecker, 1871, Impressosora Pic, 1952 and Xanthalia Fairmaire, 1894 are placed in Lagriinae: Lagriini: Statirina (previously in Lagriinae: Lagriini: Lagriina); Loxostethus Triplehorn, 1962 is placed in Diaperinae: Diaperini: Diaperina (previously in Diaperinae: Diaperini: Adelinina); Periphanodes Gebien, 1943 is placed in Stenochiinae: Cnodalonini (previously in Tenebrioninae: Helopini); Zadenos Laporte, 1840 is downgraded to a subgenus (stat. nov.) of the older name Selenepistoma Dejean, 1834. The type species [placed in square brackets] of the following available genus-group names are designated for the first time: Allostrongylium Kolbe, 1896 [Allostrongylium silvestre Kolbe, 1896], Auristira Borchmann, 1916 [Auristira octocostata Borchmann, 1916], Blapidocampsia Pic, 1919 [Campsia pallidipes Pic, 1918], Cerostena Solier, 1836 [Cerostena deplanata Solier, 1836], Coracostira Fairmaire, 1899 [Coracostira armipes Fairmaire, 1899], Dischidus Kolbe, 1886 [Helops sinuatus Fabricius, 1801], Eccoptostoma Gebien, 1913 [Taraxides ruficrus Fairmaire, 1894], Ellaemus Pascoe, 1866 [Emcephalus submaculatus Brême, 1842], Epeurycaulus Kolbe, 1902 [Epeurycaulus aldabricus Kolbe, 1902], Euschatia Solier, 1851 [Euschatia proxima Solier, 1851], Heliocaes Bedel, 1906 [Blaps emarginata Fabricius, 1792], Hemipristis Kolbe, 1903 [Hemipristis ukamia Kolbe, 1903], Iphthimera Reitter, 1916 [Stenocara ruficornis Solier, 1835], Isopedus Stein, 1877 [Helops tenebrioides Germar, 1813], Malacova Fairmaire, 1898 [Malacova bicolor Fairmaire, 1898], Modicodisema Pic, 1917 [Disema subopaca Pic, 1912], Peltadesmia Kuntzen, 1916 [Metriopus platynotus Gerstaecker, 1854], Phymatium Billberg, 1820 [Pimelia maculata Fabricius, 1781], Podoces Péringuey, 1886 [Podoces granosula Péringuey, 1886], Pseuduroplatopsis Pic, 1913 [Borchmannia javana Pic, 1913], Pteraulus Solier, 1848 [Pteraulus sulcatipennis Solier, 1848], Sciaca Solier, 1835 [Hylithus disctinctus Solier, 1835], Sterces Champion, 1891 [Sterces violaceipennis Champion, 1891] and Teremenes Carter, 1914 [Tenebrio longipennis Hope, 1843]. Evidence suggests that some type species were misidentified. In these instances, information on the misidentification is provided and, in the following cases, the taxonomic species actually involved is fixed as the type species [placed in square brackets] following requirements in Article 70.3 of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature: Accanthopus Dejean, 1821 [Tenebrio velikensis Piller & Mitterpacher, 1783], Becvaramarygmus Masumoto, 1999 [Dietysus nodicornis Gravely, 1915], Heterophaga Dejean, 1834 [Opatrum laevigatum Fabricius, 1781], Laena Dejean, 1821, [Scaurus viennensis Sturm, 1807], Margus Dejean, 1834 [Colydium castaneum Herbst, 1797], Pachycera Eschscholtz, 1831 [Tenebrio buprestoides Fabricius, 1781], Saragus Erichson, 1842 [Celibe costata Solier, 1848], Stene Stephens, 1829 [Colydium castaneum Herbst, 1797], Stenosis Herbst, 1799 [Tagenia intermedia Solier, 1838] and Tentyriopsis Gebien, 1928 [Tentyriopsis pertyi Gebien, 1940]. The following First Reviser actions are proposed to fix the precedence of names or nomenclatural acts (rejected name or act in square brackets): Stenosis ciliaris Gebien, 1920 as the type species for Afronosis G.S. Medvedev, 1995 [Stenosis leontjevi G.S. Medvedev, 1995], Alienoplonyx Bremer, 2019 [Alienolonyx], Amblypteraca Mas-Peinado, Buckley, Ruiz & García-París, 2018 [Amplypteraca], Caenocrypticoides Kaszab, 1969 [Caenocripticoides], Deriles Motschulsky, 1872 [Derilis], Eccoptostira Borchmann, 1936 [Ecoptostira], †Eodromus Haupt, 1950 [†Edromus], Eutelus Solier, 1843 [Lutelus], Euthriptera Reitter, 1893 [Enthriptera], Meglyphus Motschulsky, 1872 [Megliphus], Microtelopsis Koch, 1940 [Extetranosis Koch, 1940, Hypermicrotelopsis Koch, 1940], Neandrosus Pic, 1921 [Neoandrosus], Nodosogylium Pic, 1951 [Nodosogilium], Notiolesthus Motschulsky, 1872 [Notiolosthus], Pseudeucyrtus Pic, 1916 [Pseudocyrtus], Pseudotrichoplatyscelis Kaszab, 1960 [Pseudotrichoplatynoscelis and Pseudotrichoplatycelis], Rhydimorpha Koch, 1943 [Rhytimorpha], Rhophobas Motschulsky, 1872 [Rophobas], Rhyssochiton Gray, 1831 [Ryssocheton and Ryssochiton], Sphaerotidius Kaszab, 1941 [Spaerotidius], Stira Agassiz, 1846 (Mollusca) [Stira Agassiz, 1846 (Coleoptera)], Sulpiusoma Ferrer, 2006 [Sulpiosoma] and Taenobates Motschulsky, 1872 [Taeniobates]. Supporting evidence is provided for the conservation of usage of Cyphaleus Westwood, 1841 nomen protectum over Chrysobalus Boisduval, 1835 nomen oblitum.

Kardynał Jan Duklan Maurycy Paweł Puzyna należy do tych postaci, zapisanych na kartach historii Polski, których działalność budzi do dziś wątpliwości i kontrowersje. Podejmowane przez niego niepopularne decyzje stały się główną przyczyną tego, że stał się on z czasem symbolem odchodzącego świata idei konserwatywnych, zmarginalizowanych na przełomie XIX i XX stulecia przez rozwój nowoczesnych ruchów politycznych i światopoglądowych. W strukturach Kościoła kardynał Puzyna kojarzony jest do dziś głównie z ostatnią oficjalną próbą bezpośredniej ingerencji władzy świeckiej w proces wyboru papieża, co miało miejsce w trakcie pamiętnego konklawe w 1903 r. Zasadniczym celem, który postawił sobie autor niniejszego artykułu, było skonfrontowanie stereotypowych opinii o Janie Puzynie z wyobrażeniem jego osoby, zbudowanym na podstawie analizy zachowanych źródeł.

Changes to the treatment of Coleoptera family-group names published by Bouchard et al. (2011) are given. These include necessary additions and corrections based on much-appreciated suggestions from our colleagues, as well as our own research. Our ultimate goal is to assemble a complete list of available Coleoptera family-group names published up to the end of 2010 (including information about their spelling, author, year of publication, and type genus). The following 59 available Coleoptera family-group names are based on type genera not included in Bouchard et al. (2011): Prothydrinae Guignot, 1954, Aulonogyrini Ochs, 1953 (Gyrinidae); Pogonostomini Mandl 1954, Merismoderini Wasmann, 1929, †Escheriidae Kolbe, 1880 (Carabidae); Timarchopsinae Wang, Ponomarenko & Zhang, 2010 (Coptoclavidae); Stictocraniini Jakobson, 1914 (Staphylinidae); Cylindrocaulini Zang, 1905, Kaupiolinae Zang, 1905 (Passalidae); Phaeochroinae Kolbe, 1912 (Hybosoridae); Anthypnidae Chalande, 1884 (Glaphyridae); Comophorini Britton, 1957, Comophini Britton, 1978, Chasmidae Streubel, 1846, Mimelidae Theobald, 1882, Rhepsimidae Streubel, 1846, Ometidae Streubel, 1846, Jumnidae Burmeister, 1842, Evambateidae Gistel, 1856 (Scarabaeidae); Protelmidae Jeannel, 1950 (Byrrhoidea); Pseudeucinetini Csiki, 1924 (Limnichidae); Xylotrogidae Schönfeldt, 1887 (Bostrichidae); †Mesernobiinae Engel, 2010, Fabrasiinae Lawrence & Reichardt, 1966 (Ptinidae); Arhinopini Kirejtshuk & Bouchard, 2018 (Nitidulidae); Hypodacninae Dajoz, 1976, Ceuthocera Mannerheim, 1852 (Cerylonidae); Symbiotinae Joy, 1932 (Endomychidae); Cheilomenini Schilder & Schilder, 1928, Veraniini Schilder & Schilder, 1928 (Coccinellidae); Ennearthroninae Chûjô, 1939 (Ciidae); Curtimordini Odnosum, 2010, Mordellochroini Odnosum, 2010 (Mordellidae); Chanopterinae Borchmann, 1915 (Promecheilidae); Heptaphyllini Prudhomme de Borre, 1886, Olocratarii Baudi di Selve, 1875, Opatrinaires Mulsant & Rey, 1853, Telacianae Poey, 1854, Ancylopominae Pascoe, 1871 (Tenebrionidae); Oxycopiini Arnett, 1984 (Oedemeridae); Eutrypteidae Gistel, 1856 (Mycteridae); Pogonocerinae Iablokoff-Khnzorian, 1985 (Pyrochroidae); Amblyderini Desbrochers des Loges, 1899 (Anthicidae); Trotommideini Pic, 1903 (Scraptiidae); Acmaeopsini Della Beffa, 1915, Trigonarthrini Villiers, 1984, Eunidiini Téocchi, Sudre & Jiroux, 2010 (Cerambycidae); Macropleini Lopatin, 1977, Stenopodiides Horn, 1883, Microrhopalides Horn, 1883, Colaphidae Siegel, 1866, Lexiphanini Wilcox, 1954 (Chrysomelidae); †Medmetrioxenoidesini Legalov, 2010, †Megametrioxenoidesini Legalov, 2010 (Nemonychidae); Myrmecinae Tanner, 1966, Tapinotinae Joy, 1932, Acallinae Joy, 1932, Cycloderini Hoffmann, 1950, Sthereini Hatch, 1971 (Curculionidae). The following 21 family-group names, listed as unavailable in Bouchard et al. (2011), are determined to be available: Eohomopterinae Wasmann, 1929 (Carabidae); Prosopocoilini Benesh, 1960, Pseudodorcini Benesh, 1960, Rhyssonotini Benesh, 1960 (Lucanidae); Galbini Beaulieu, 1919 (Eucnemidae); Troglopates Mulsant & Rey, 1867 (Melyridae); Hippodamiini Weise, 1885 (Coccinellidae); Micrositates Mulsant & Rey, 1854, Héliopathaires Mulsant & Rey, 1854 (Tenebrionidae); Hypasclerini Arnett, 1984; Oxaciini Arnett, 1984 (Oedemeridae); Stilpnonotinae Borchmann, 1936 (Mycteridae); Trogocryptinae Lawrence, 1991 (Salpingidae); Grammopterini Della Beffa, 1915, Aedilinae Perrier, 1893, Anaesthetinae Perrier, 1893 (Cerambycidae); Physonotitae Spaeth, 1942, Octotomides Horn, 1883 (Chrysomelidae); Sympiezopinorum Faust, 1886, Sueinae Murayama, 1959, Eccoptopterini Kalshoven, 1959 (Curculionidae). The following names were proposed as new without reference to family-group names based on the same type genus which had been made available at an earlier date: Dineutini Ochs, 1926 (Gyrinidae); Odonteini Shokhin, 2007 (Geotrupidae); Fornaxini Cobos, 1965 (Eucnemidae); Auletobiina Legalov, 2001 (Attelabidae). The priority of several family-group names, listed as valid in Bouchard et al. (2011), is affected by recent bibliographic discoveries or new nomenclatural interpretations. †Necronectinae Ponomarenko, 1977 is treated as permanently invalid and replaced with †Timarchopsinae Wang, Ponomarenko & Zhang, 2010 (Coptoclavidae); Agathidiini Westwood, 1838 is replaced by the older name Anisotomini Horaninow, 1834 (Staphylinidae); Cyrtoscydmini Schaufuss, 1889 is replaced by the older name Stenichnini Fauvel, 1885 (Staphylinidae); Eremazinae Iablokoff-Khnzorian, 1977 is treated as unavailable and replaced with Eremazinae Stebnicka, 1977 (Scarabaeidae); Coryphocerina Burmeister, 1842 is replaced by the older name Rhomborhinina Westwood, 1842 (Scarabaeidae); Eudysantina Bouchard, Lawrence, Davies & Newton, 2005 is replaced by the older name Dysantina Gebien, 1922 which is not permanently invalid (Tenebrionidae). The names Macraulacinae/-ini Fleutiaux, 1923 (Eucnemidae), Anamorphinae Strohecker, 1953 (Endomychidae), Pachycnemina Laporte, 1840 (Scarabaeidae), Thaumastodinae Champion, 1924 (Limnichidae), Eudicronychinae Girard, 1971 (Elateridae), Trogoxylini Lesne, 1921 (Bostrichidae), Laemophloeidae Ganglbauer, 1899 (Laemophloeidae); Ancitini Aurivillius, 1917 (Cerambycidae) and Tropiphorini Marseul, 1863 (Curculionidae) are threatened by the discovery of older names; Reversal of Precedence (ICZN 1999: Art. 23.9) or an application to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature will be necessary to retain usage of the younger synonyms. Reversal of Precedence is used herein to qualify the following family-group names as nomina protecta: Murmidiinae Jacquelin du Val, 1858 (Cerylonidae) and Chalepini Weise, 1910 (Chrysomelidae). The following 17 Coleoptera family-group names (some of which are used as valid) are homonyms of other family-group names in zoology, these cases must be referred to the Commission for a ruling to remove the homonymy: Catiniidae Ponomarenko, 1968 (Catiniidae); Homopterinae Wasmann, 1920, Glyptini Horn, 1881 (Carabidae); Tychini Raffray, 1904, Ocypodina Hatch, 1957 (Staphylinidae); Gonatinae Kuwert, 1891 (Passalidae); Aplonychidae Burmeister, 1855 (Scarabaeidae); Microchaetini Paulus, 1973 (Byrrhidae); Epiphanini Muona, 1993 (Eucnemidae); Limoniina Jakobson, 1913 (Elateridae); Ichthyurini Champion, 1915 (Cantharidae); Decamerinae Crowson, 1964 (Trogossitidae); Trichodidae Streubel, 1839 (Cleridae); Monocorynini Miyatake, 1988 (Coccinellidae); Gastrophysina Kippenberg, 2010, Chorinini Weise, 1923 (Chrysomelidae); Meconemini Pierce, 1930 (Anthribidae). The following new substitute names are proposed: Phoroschizus (to replace Schizophorus Ponomarenko, 1968) and Phoroschizidae (to replace Schizophoridae Ponomarenko, 1968); Mesostyloides (to replace Mesostylus Faust, 1894) and Mesostyloidini (to replace Mesostylini Reitter, 1913). The following new genus-group name synonyms are proposed [valid names in square brackets]: Plocastes Gistel, 1856 [Aesalus Fabricius, 1801] (Lucanidae); Evambates Gistel, 1856 [Trichius Fabricius, 1775] (Scarabaeidae); Homoeoplastus Gistel, 1856 [Byturus Latreille, 1797] (Byturidae). Two type genera previously treated as preoccupied and invalid, Heteroscelis Latreille, 1828 and Dysantes Pascoe, 1869 (Tenebrionidae), are determined to be senior homonyms based on bibliographical research. While Dysantes is treated as valid here, Reversal of Precedence (ICZN 1999: Art. 23.9) is used to conserve usage of Anomalipus Guérin-Méneville, 1831 over Heteroscelis.

The taxonomy of the New Zealand weevil genus Irenimus Pascoe, 1876 is revised, resulting in a narrower concept of the genus than has been considered in recent decades. In total, the genus now contains only seven species. In addition to the type species, I. parilis Pascoe, 1876, the genus contains I. duplex (Broun, 1904) and five newly described species: I. aniptus new species (type locality, Oamaru, DN), I. crinitus new species (type locality, Hakataramea Valley, SC), I. minimus new species (type locality, Alexandra, CO), I. stichus new species (type locality, Tekapo, MK) and I. thoracicus new species (type locality, Oamaru, DN). The genus Chalepistes new genus is established to contain the majority of species previously described in the genus Catoptes Schönherr, 1842, but also including species described in Brachyolus White, 1846; Irenimus Pascoe, 1876; Inophloeus Pascoe, 1875; and Nicaeana Pascoe, 1877. A total of 27 valid described species are new combinations with Chalepistes: C. aequalis (Broun, 1895) (from Irenimus), C. albosparsus (Broun, 1917) (from Irenimus), C. apicalis (Broun, 1923) (from Catoptes), C. asperatus (Broun, 1914) (from Brachyolus), C. compressus (Broun, 1880) (from Irenimus), C. costifer (Broun, 1886) (from Inophloeus), C. curvus (Barratt & Kuschel, 1996) (from Irenimus), C. dehiscens (Broun, 1917) (from Catoptes), C. dugdalei (Barratt & Kuschel, 1996) (from Irenimus), C. egens (Broun, 1904) (from Irenimus), C. inaequalis (Sharp, 1886) (from Brachyolus), C. instabilis (Marshall, 1931) (from Catoptes), C. latipennis (Broun, 1893) (from Catoptes), C. limbatus (Broun, 1909) (from Catoptes), C. lobatus (Broun, 1921) (from Catoptes), C. patricki (Barratt & Kuschel, 1996) (from Irenimus), C. pensus (Broun, 1914) (from Inophloeus), C. placidus (Broun, 1914) (from Nicaeana), C. posticalis (Broun, 1893) (from Irenimus), C. rhesus (Pascoe, 1875) (from Inophloeus), C. rubidus (Broun, 1881) (from Inophloeus), C. similis (Barratt & Kuschel, 1996) (from Irenimus), C. spectabilis (Broun, 1914) (from Catoptes), C. spermophilus (Broun, 1895), revised status (from Irenimus), C. stolidus (Broun, 1886) (from Irenimus), C. tenebricus (Broun, 1893) (from Catoptes), C. vastator (Broun, 1893) (from Irenimus). Numerous new synonyms with species of Chalepistes are also proposed: Brachyolus fuscipictus Broun, 1914 and Brachyolus terricola Broun, 1917 are junior subjective synonyms of Chalepistes asperatus (Broun); Brachyolus cervalis Broun, 1903 and Brachyolus sylvaticus Broun, 1910 are junior subjective synonyms of Chalepistes costifer (Broun); Inophloeus tricostatus Broun, 1915 is a junior subjective synonym of Chalepistes pensus (Broun); Catoptes pallidipes Broun, 1917, Catoptes flaviventris Broun, 1917 and Catoptes nigricans Broun, 1917 are junior subjective synonyms of Chalepistes placidus (Broun); Inophloeus longicornis Broun, 1904, Inophloeus medius Broun, 1893, Inophloeus sulcicollis Broun, 1914 and Inophloeus suturalis Broun, 1893 are junior subjective synonyms of Chalepistes rhesus (Pascoe); Inophloeus albonotata Broun, 1893, Catoptes asperellus Broun, 1893, Irenimus bicostatus Broun, 1886, Catoptes caliginosus Broun, 1893, Catoptes chalmeri Broun, 1893, Catoptes decorus Broun, 1893, Inophloeus discrepans Broun, 1904, Catoptes fumosus Broun, 1914, Catoptes furvus Broun, 1893, Catoptes humeralis Broun, 1893, Catoptes longulus Sharp, 1886, Inophloeus nigellus Broun, 1881, Irenimus pilosellus Broun, 1886 and Catoptes scutellaris Sharp, 1886 are junior subjective synonyms of Chalepistes rubidus (Broun); Catoptes subnitidus Broun, 1914 and Catoptes curvatus Broun, 1914 are junior subjective synonyms of Chalepistes spermophilus (Broun); Catoptes brevicornis Sharp, 1886 and Catoptes vexator Broun, 1904 are junior subjective synonyms of Chalepistes stolidus (Broun); and Catoptes aemulator Broun, 1893 and Catoptes argentalis Broun, 1914 are junior subjective synonyms of Chalepistes tenebricus (Broun). Additional new combinations include Inophloeus robustus (Broun, 1917) (from Catoptes) and Nicaeana fraudator (Marshall, 1931) (from Catoptes), while Catoptes postrectus Marshall, 1931 is a new synonym of Protolobus obscurus Sharp, 1886.

<p><strong>Abstract.</strong> In East Asia, the modern hydrographical survey was promoted during the Opium War (1840&amp;ndash;1842) and the Arrow War (1856&amp;ndash;1860) by Western countries, which demanded the establishment of modern trade relations with this area. However, the application of modern mapping such as triangulation to its inlands was limited even at the end of the nineteenth century, because it required stable and innovative governments for implementation. Keeping this uneven extension of modern cartography in East Asia in mind, we should pay attentions also to various map makings, which had been carried out in most of the inlands, in order to unravel the process of transition from early modern to modern cartography. In this presentation, I would like to follow up Japanese mappings in Taiwan and Korea to scrutinize their role for the preparation of modern survey.</p><p>Japan had little geographical information of neighbouring countries except China at the start of the Meiji Government, because of the long national seclusion during the Tokugawa Era, Accordingly, it depended heavily on foreign source in this period. Concerning Korea, Japanese army printed a large map titled “A complete map of Korea” (Fig. 1), compiling Western charts, native maps of Korea, and maps of China, which were affiliated with the Qing Imperial Atlas of the 18th century. As for Taiwan, various materials including Western charts, maps prepared by an American former consul at Amoy and a Chinese administrative map copied secretly at the residence of a high official of Taiwan were gathered and translated into Japanese for the use of military expedition in 1874.</p><p>However, a stark contrast is found concerning subsequent map making in these two areas. After the treaty of Kanghwa (1876), Japanese navy promoted hydrographical survey of coasts of Korea, which had not been surveyed yet by Western ships under the pretext of the search of new treaty port. In addition, army officers were dispatched to Japanese diplomatic offices in Korea for land survey after the Imo Military Rebellion (1882). Traversing with compass and pacing was commonly conducted by them. Up to the start of the Sino-Japanese War (1894), Japanese army prepared 64 sheets of 1&amp;thinsp;:&amp;thinsp;200,000 maps to cover most of the territory of Korea compiling geographical information accumulated mainly during 1880s. In contrast, only one sheet of 1&amp;thinsp;:&amp;thinsp;200,000 and one sheet of 1&amp;thinsp;:&amp;thinsp;500,000 maps were printed till the end of 1894 for Taiwan, which had been unexpected to be battlefield (Fig.2).</p><p>However, Japanese army concentrated surveyors to Taiwan for plane table surveying after the conclusion of the peace treaty of Shimonoseki (1895), in which the cession of Taiwan was specified. Until 1903, 147 sheets of 1&amp;thinsp;:&amp;thinsp;50,000 and 1&amp;thinsp;:&amp;thinsp;20,000 maps, which covered coastal areas, were completed. Although the same kind of military survey was started in Korea, it took longer time to cover the whole area than that in Taiwan, mainly because of the native people’s resistance movements against it.</p><p>Subsequent cadastral and topographical surveys including triangulation in colonial Taiwan and Korea were carried out on the basis of these preceding mappings. In addition to geographical knowledge summarized in these transitional maps, surveyors who had mastered specialized skills during the wartime mapping played important roles in these colonial projects. It should be also noted native youth were trained and hired for these surveys.</p>

Introduction. In 1842 Russian Finance Ministry was leaded by S. Y. Vitte. On his initiative serious economic reforms were carried out: the implementation of monetary reform, the construction of Siberian railway line and the adoption of the new statutes of the State Bank. However, the fiscal and monetary policy of S. Y. Vitte had its supporters as well as its opponents. Among those who were against the measures taken by S. Y. Vitte a well known (in those days) economist and publicist S. F. Sharapov, who especially defended the rights of the peasantry and argued that the development of Russian economy was different from the way of Eastern Europe. Materias and Methods. Despite many publications on this topic there has not been yet full research on the reorganizations undertaken by S. Y. Vitte and the alternative models put forward by his opponents and which specific direction of the fiscal and monetary policy were criticized. The aim of the given article is the analysis of the major reforms made by S. Y. Vitte, the critique on the part of his adversaries and familiarizing with the alternative suggestions. One can best understand it on the economic activity of S. F. Sharapov, who was the main opponent of most of the reorganizations. Results and Discussion. Among the main directions of the policy carried out by Finance Ministry in 1892–1903 one can single out the following: the preparation and implementation of monetary reform, which became the cornerstone of Vitte economic policy and the construction of railroads. Monetary reform was conducted gradually during 1895–1897. At the moment of its preparation S. F. Sharapov severely criticized the fiscal policy carried out by S. Y. Vitte. Unlike the supporters of the metal money circulation, he considered that the basis of the monetary system of Russia must be a paper rouble, which was pegged neither to gold nor to silver. S. F. Sharapov also came out against the wide range of the construction of railroads. In spite of the popularity of his ideas in the Russian society S. F. Sharapov did not get the support of the representatives of the main socio-political tendencies. There turned out to be more supporters of monetary reform and economic reorganizations. Conclusion. As for the monetary reform – the most important event in the activity of S. Y. Vitte – there is still a difference of opinion who was right: the supporters of introducing gold standard in Russia or its opponents “the nominalists” remains an open question. In 1898 summing up the results of the economic reform S. Y. Vitte ascertained that “money supply in Russia has been put to order and has been performing as soundly as in those states, where this branch of economy has long been in perfect order”. Subsequent events confirmed that “the nominalists” might have been right. Nowadays world monetary systems do not foresee the exchange of monetary units for gold and currencies are not pegged at the exchange rate of gold. The era of gold standard has come to an end and at present exchange rates and the stability of a monetary unit of this or that country depend on the state of the economy of this country. As far as railroad construction is concerned it should justly be noted, that a great deal of railroads as well as the construction of factories and plants in the whole world has caused damage to the environment as was foretold by S. F. Sharapov. Yet, when the territory of Russia was covered by rail network it resulted in a transfer of economic and cultural centres – cities through which railroads were laid began to develop rapidly and the cities without railroad connection started falling into decay. Thus Russia changed greatly.

The genus Olios Walckenaer, 1837 is revised, a generic diagnosis is given and an identification key to eight species groups is provided. Olios in its revised sense includes 87 species and is distributed in Africa, southern Europe and Asia. Three species groups are revised in this first part, an identification key to species for each group is provided, five new species are described and all included species are illustrated. The Olios argelasius-group includes O. argelasius Walckenaer, 1806, O. canariensis (Lucas, 1838), O. pictus (Simon, 1885), O. fasciculatus Simon, 1880 and O. kunzi spec. nov. (male, female; Namibia, Zambia, South Africa); it is distributed in the Mediterranean region, northern Africa including Canary Islands, in the Middle East, South Sudan, East Africa, and southern Africa. The Olios coenobitus-group includes O. angolensis spec. nov. (male; Angola), O. coenobitus Fage, 1926, O. denticulus spec. nov. (male; Java), O. erraticus Fage, 1926, O. gambiensis spec. nov. (male, female; Gambia), O. milleti (Pocock, 1901b), O. mordax (O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1899) and O. pusillus Simon, 1880; it is distributed in Africa (Gambia, Angola, Tanzania, Madagascar) and Asia (India, Sri Lanka, Indonesia: Java). The Olios auricomis-group includes only O. auricomis (Simon, 1880), distributed in Africa south of 10°N. Other species groups are introduced briefly and will be revised in forthcoming revisions. The Olios correvoni-group includes currently O. claviger (Pocock, 1901a), O. correvoni Lessert, 1921, O. correvoni choupangensis Lessert, 1936, O. darlingi (Pocock, 1901a), O. faesi Lessert, 1933, O. freyi Lessert, 1929, O. kassenjicola Strand, 1916b, O. kruegeri (Simon, 1897a), O. quadrispilotus (Simon, 1880) comb. nov., O. lucieni comb. nov. nom. nov., O. sjostedti Lessert, 1921 and O. triarmatus Lessert, 1936; it is distributed in Africa (Zimbabwe, Tanzania incl. Zanzibar, Angola, Congo, Central Africa, South Africa, Botswana; O. darlingi was recorded from Zimbabwe and Botswana and not from South Africa). The Olios rossettii-group includes: O. baulnyi (Simon, 1874), O. bhattacharjeei (Saha & Raychaudhuri, 2007), O. brachycephalus Lawrence, 1938, O. floweri Lessert, 1921, O. jaldaparaensis Saha & Raychaudhuri, 2007, O. japonicus Jäger & Ono, 2000, O. kolosvaryi (Caporiacco, 1947b) comb. nov., O. longipes (Simon, 1884b), O. lutescens (Thorell, 1894), O. mahabangkawitus Barrion & Litsinger, 1995, O. obesulus (Pocock, 1901b), O. rossettii (Leardi, 1901), O. rotundiceps (Pocock, 1901b), O. sericeus (Kroneberg, 1875), O. sherwoodi Lessert, 1929, O. suavis (O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1876), O. tarandus (Simon, 1897d), O. tener (Thorell, 1891) and O. tiantongensis (Zhang & Kim, 1996); it is distributed in the Mediterranean region, in Africa (especially eastern half) and Asia (Middle East and Central Asia to Japan, Philippines and Java). The Olios nentwigi-group includes O. diao Jäger, 2012, O. digitatus Sun, Li & Zhang, 2011, O. jaenicke Jäger, 2012, O. muang Jäger, 2012, O. nanningensis (Hu & Ru, 1988), O. nentwigi spec. nov. (male, female; Indonesia: Krakatau), O. perezi Barrion & Litsinger, 1995, O. scalptor Jäger & Ono, 2001 and O. suung Jäger, 2012; it is distributed in Asia (Thailand, Laos, Vietnam, Cambodia, China, Taiwan, Indonesia, Philippines), Papua New Guinea and Mariana Islands. Olios diao is newly recorded from Cambodia and Champasak Province in Laos. The Olios stimulator-group includes O. admiratus (Pocock, 1901b), O. hampsoni (Pocock, 1901b), O. lamarcki (Latreille, 1806) and O. stimulator Simon, 1897c; it is distributed in Africa (Madagascar, Seychelles), Middle East and South Asia (United Arab Emirates, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, India, Maldives, Sri Lanka). The Olios hirtus-group includes O. bungarensis Strand, 1913b, O. debalae (Biswas & Roy, 2005), O. ferox (Thorell, 1892), O. hirtus (Karsch, 1879a), O. igraya (Barrion & Litsinger, 1995) comb. nov., O. menghaiensis (Wang & Zhang, 1990), O. nigrifrons (Simon, 1897b), O. punctipes Simon, 1884a, O. punctipes sordidatus (Thorell, 1895), O. pyrozonis (Pocock, 1901b), O. sungaya (Barrion & Litsinger, 1995) comb. nov., O. taprobanicus Strand, 1913b and O. tikaderi Kundu et al., 1999; it is distributed in South, East and Southeast Asia (Sri Lanka, India, Nepal, Bangladesh, Myanmar, China, Laos, Thailand, Cambodia, Vietnam, Malaysia, Indonesia, Philippines). Nineteen synonyms are recognised: Nisueta Simon, 1880, Nonianus Simon, 1885, both = Olios syn. nov.; O. spenceri Pocock, 1896, O. werneri (Simon, 1906a), O. albertius Strand, 1913a, O. banananus Strand, 1916a, O. aristophanei Lessert, 1936, all = O. fasciculatus; O. subpusillus Strand, 1907c = O. pusillus; O. schonlandi (Pocock, 1900b), O. rufilatus Pocock, 1900c, O. chiracanthiformis Strand, 1906, O. ituricus Strand, 1913a, O. isongonis Strand, 1915, O. flavescens Caporiacco, 1941 comb. nov., O. pacifer Lessert, 1921, all = O. auricomis; Olios sanguinifrons (Simon, 1906b) = O. rossettii Leardi, 1901; O. phipsoni (Pocock, 1899), Sparassus iranii (Pocock, 1901b), both = O. stimulator; O. fuligineus (Pocock, 1901b) = O. hampsoni. Nine species are transferred to Olios: O. gaujoni (Simon, 1897b) comb. nov., O. pictus comb. nov., O. unilateralis (Strand, 1908b) comb. nov. (all three from Nonianus), O. affinis (Strand, 1906) comb. nov., O. flavescens Caporiacco, 1941 comb. nov., O. quadrispilotus comb. nov., O. similis (Berland, 1922) comb. nov. (all four from Nisueta), O. sungaya (Barrion & Litsinger, 1995) comb. nov., O. igraya (Barrion & Litsinger, 1995) comb. nov. (both from Isopeda L. Koch 1875). Olios lucieni nom. nov. comb. nov. is proposed for Nisueta similis Berland, 1922, which becomes a secondary homonym. The male of O. quadrispilotus comb. nov. is described for the first time. Sixteen species are currently without affiliation to one of the eight species groups: O. acolastus (Thorell, 1890), O. alluaudi Simon, 1887a, O. batesi (Pocock, 1900c), O. bhavnagarensis Sethi & Tikader, 1988, O. croseiceps (Pocock, 1898b), O. durlaviae Biswas & Raychaudhuri, 2005, O. gentilis (Karsch, 1879b), O. gravelyi Sethi & Tikader, 1988, O. greeni (Pocock, 1901b), O. inaequipes (Simon 1890), O. punjabensis Dyal, 1935, O. ruwenzoricus Strand, 1913a, O. senilis Simon, 1880, O. somalicus Caporiacco, 1940, O. wroughtoni (Simon, 1897c) and O. zulu Simon, 1880. Five of these species are illustrated in order to allow identification of the opposite (male) sex and to settle their systematic placement. Thirty-seven species are considered nomina dubia, mostly because they were described from immatures, three of them are illustrated: O. abnormis (Blackwall, 1866), O. affinis (Strand, 1906) comb. nov., O. africanus (Karsch, 1878), O. amanensis Strand, 1907a, O. annandalei (Simon, 1901), O. bivittatus Roewer, 1951, O. ceylonicus (Leardi, 1902), O. conspersipes (Thorell, 1899), Palystes derasus (C.L. Koch, 1845) comb. nov., O. detritus (C.L. Koch, 1845), O. digitalis Eydoux & Souleyet, 1842, O. exterritorialis Strand, 1907b, O. flavovittatus (Caporiacco, 1935), O. fugax (O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1885), O. guineibius Strand, 1911c, O. guttipes (Simon, 1897a), O. kiranae Sethi & Tikader, 1988, O. longespinus Caporiacco, 1947b, O. maculinotatus Strand, 1909, O. morbillosus (MacLeay, 1827), O. occidentalis (Karsch, 1879b), O. ornatus (Thorell, 1877), O. pagurus Walckenaer, 1837, O. patagiatus (Simon, 1897b), O. praecinctus (L. Koch, 1865), O. provocator Walckenaer, 1837, O. quesitio Moradmand, 2013, O. quinquelineatus Taczanowski, 1872, O. sexpunctatus Caporiacco, 1947a, Heteropoda similaris (Rainbow, 1898) comb. rev., O. socotranus (Pocock, 1903), O. striatus (Blackwall, 1867), O. timidus (O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1885), Remmius variatus (Thorell, 1899) comb. nov., O. vittifemur Strand, 1916b, O. wolfi Strand, 1911a and O. zebra (Thorell, 1881). Eighty-nine species are misplaced in Olios but cannot be affiliated to any of the known genera. They belong to the subfamilies Deleninae Hogg, 1903, Sparassinae Bertkau, 1872 and Palystinae Simon, 1897a, nineteen of them are illustrated: O. acostae Schenkel, 1953, O. actaeon (Pocock, 1898c), O. artemis Hogg, 1915, O. atomarius Simon, 1880, O. attractus Petrunkevitch, 1911, O. auranticus Mello-Leitão, 1918, O. benitensis (Pocock, 1900c), O. berlandi Roewer, 1951, O. biarmatus Lessert, 1925, O. canalae Berland, 1924, O. caprinus Mello-Leitão, 1918, O. chelifer Lawrence, 1937, O. chubbi Lessert, 1923, O. clarus (Keyserling, 1880), O. coccineiventris (Simon, 1880), O. corallinus Schmidt, 1971, O. crassus Banks, 1909, O. debilipes Mello-Leitão, 1945, O. discolorichelis Caporiacco, 1947a, O. erroneus O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1890, O. extensus Berland, 1924, O. fasciiventris Simon, 1880 , O. feldmanni Strand, 1915, O. fimbriatus Chrysanthus, 1965, O. flavens Nicolet, 1849, O. fonticola (Pocock, 1902), O. formosus Banks, 1929, O. francoisi (Simon, 1898a), O. fulvithorax Berland, 1924, O. galapagoensis Banks, 1902, O. gaujoni (Simon, 1897b) comb. nov., O. giganteus Keyserling, 1884, O. hoplites Caporiacco, 1941, O. humboldtianus Berland, 1924, O. insignifer Chrysanthus, 1965, O. insulanus (Thorell, 1881), O. keyserlingi (Simon, 1880), O. lacticolor Lawrence, 1952, O. lepidus Vellard, 1924, O. longipedatus Roewer, 1951, O. machadoi Lawrence, 1952, O. macroepigynus Soares, 1944, O. maculatus Blackwall, 1862, O. marshalli (Pocock, 1898a), O. mathani (Simon, 1880), O. minensis Mello-Leitão, 1917, O. monticola Berland, 1924, O. mutabilis Mello-Leitão, 1917, O. mygalinus Doleschall, 1857, O. mygalinus cinctipes Merian, 1911, O. mygalinus nirgripalpis Merian, 1911, O. neocaledonicus Berland, 1924, O. nigristernis (Simon, 1880), O. nigriventris Taczanowski, 1872, O. oberzelleri Kritscher, 1966, O. obscurus (Keyserling, 1880), O. obtusus F.O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1900, O. orchiticus Mello-Leitão, 1930, O. oubatchensis Berland, 1924, O. paraensis (Keyserling, 1880), O. pellucidus (Keyserling, 1880), O. peruvianus Roewer, 1951, O. pictitarsis Simon, 1880, O. plumipes Mello-Leitão, 1937, O. princeps Hogg, 1914, O. pulchripes (Thorell, 1899), O. puniceus (Simon, 1880), O. roeweri Caporiacco, 1955a, O. rubripes Taczanowski, 1872, O. rubriventris (Thorell, 1881), O. rufus Keyserling, 1880, O. sanctivincenti (Simon, 1898b), O. similis (O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1890), O. simoni (O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1890), O. skwarrae Roewer, 1933, O. spinipalpis (Pocock, 1901a), O. stictopus (Pocock, 1898a), O. strandi Kolosváry, 1934, O. subadultus Mello-Leitão, 1930, O. sulphuratus (Thorell, 1899), O. sylvaticus (Blackwall, 1862), O. tamerlani Roewer, 1951, O. tigrinus (Keyserling, 1880), O. trifurcatus (Pocock, 1900c), O. trinitatis Strand, 1916a, O. velox (Simon, 1880), O. ventrosus Nicolet, 1849, O. vitiosus Vellard, 1924 and O. yucatanus Chamberlin, 1925. Seventeen taxa are transferred from Olios to other genera within Sparassidae, eight of them are illustrated: Adcatomus luteus (Keyserling, 1880) comb. nov., Eusparassus flavidus (O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1885) comb. nov., Palystes derasus (C.L. Koch, 1845) comb. nov., Heteropoda similaris (Rainbow, 1898) comb. rev., Remmius variatus (Thorell, 1899) comb. nov., Nolavia audax (Banks, 1909) comb. nov., Nolavia antiguensis (Keyserling, 1880) comb. nov., Nolavia antiguensis columbiensis (Schmidt, 1971) comb. nov., Nolavia fuhrmanni (Strand, 1914) comb. nov., Nolavia helva (Keyserling, 1880) comb. nov., Nolavia stylifer (F.O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1900) comb. nov., Nolavia valenciae (Strand, 1916a) comb. nov., Nungara cayana (Taczanowski, 1872) comb. nov., Polybetes bombilius (F.O. Pickard-Cambridge, 1899) comb. nov., Polybetes fasciatus (Keyserling, 1880) comb. nov., Polybetes hyeroglyphicus (Mello-Leitão, 1918) comb. nov. and Prychia paalonga (Barrion & Litsinger, 1995) comb. nov. One species is transferred from Olios to the family Clubionidae Wagner, 1887: Clubiona paenuliformis (Strand, 1916a) comb. nov.

El presente trabajo tiene como objetivo evaluar la comunidad de parásitos en la “Cachema” Cynoscion analis (Jenyns, 1842) en el Pacífico Oriental durante el 2014. Se realizó un estudio en 40 especímenes de C. analis adquiridos en el Terminal Pesquero de Villa María del Triunfo, Lima, Perú. Se realizó una búsqueda de parásitos metazoos siguiendo los protocolos parasitológicos estándares. Se encontraron seis parásitos: tres especies de Monogeneos Cynoscionicola cynoscioni Tantaleán, Martínez & Escalante, 1987; Neoheterobothrium cynoscioni (MacCallum, 1917) Llewellyn, 1941 y Diplectanum sp. Monticelli, 1903; Procamallanus sp. Baylis, 1923 (Nematoda); Corynosoma obtuscens Lincicome, 1943 (Acanthocephala) and Lernanthropus paralonchuri Luque, Bruno & Covarrubia, 1989 (Copepoda). El parásito con mayor importancia específica y con la mayor frecuencia de dominancia fue Diplectanum sp. La longitud total de C. analis se relacionó linealmente y positivamente con la prevalencia y abundancia de infección de C. cynoscioni. En Diplectanum sp. se vio que la longitud total se relacionó negativamente solo con la prevalencia de infección. El factor de condición relativo (Kn) de C. analis no se encontró correlacionado con los índices de parasitismo. Los índices parasitarios de diversidad de riqueza y Equitabilidad fueron ligeramente más altos para las hembras que para los machos. En cambio, los índices de diversidad de dominancia fueron más altos en los peces machos que en las hembras de C. analis. La comparación de la fauna parasitaria de C. analis entre 2000 y 2014 (presente estudio), nos muestra diferencias en la prevalencia y abundancia de infección para C. cynoscioni y Diplectanum sp. Procamallanus sp y C. obtuscens son nuevos registros de parásitos para C. analis.