From editor or global species database
Type species Verrill (1900: 654) replaced Clymene Lamarck (he used Savigny as author) with nomen novum Euclymene because of a possible junior homonymy, and Verrill stated the type was now Clymene oerstedii Claparède, 1863 [instead of Lamarck's species]. The Hartman Catalogue and Fauchald, 1977 repeat this. However, under the current code (article 67.8) this is clearly not possible. The type remains Clymene amphistoma Lamarck, by monotypy. For obvious reasons of maintaining stability a species described forty years later cannot possibly be the type, which must be a species originally included in the original genus so that the original author's concept is maintained. Subsequent statements such as Verrill's in reassigning the type of a genus to another species have no effect. [details]