The specific epithet has caused considerable confusion. The name as it originally appeared [demidoff] is accompanied by a description and thus fulfills the criteria of availability. Subsequent workers cast doubt on the validity of the name, preferring to accept G. demidovii Fischer, 1808, or emending the spelling of the 1806 name. Schwartz (1931b) maintained that the name was not latinized, however, according to Article 31 of the ICZN, it must be treated as a noun in apposition to the generic name, and is therefore acceptable (Jenkins, 1987:98). Rylands (pers. comm. 26 June 2014) considered the matter and agreed to follow Jenkins (1987) and Groves (2001) in using the epithet as originally published, and treating the emendation as unjustified
Verified Standards Met
Verified Min Standards Met
Percent Standards Met
ITIS taxonomy is based on the latest scientific consensus available,
and is provided as a general reference source for interested parties.
However, it is not a legal authority for statutory or regulatory purposes.
While every effort has been made to provide the most reliable and up-to-date
information available, ultimate legal requirements with respect to species
are contained in provisions of treaties to which the United States is a
party, wildlife statutes, regulations, and any applicable notices that have
been published in the Federal Register. For further information on U.S.
legal requirements with respect to protected taxa, please contact the
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.