In response to the comment by Fautin & Daly (BZN 68: 204–205), I reiterate that the homonymy in question does not present a problem because Haliplanella Hand, 1956 will disappear in synonymy.
We respond to den Hartog & Ates (BZN 67: 166–167) who commented on our appeal (BZN 66: 312–316) to resolve a homonymy by suppressing the name Haliplanella Treadwell, 1943 (for a polychaete annelid) in favour of the name Haliplanella Hand, 1956 (for an actiniarian – a sea anemone). Most of the comments by den Hartog & Ates (BZN 67: 166–167) relate to taxonomy, not nomenclature. We reiterate our conviction that both taxonomy and nomenclature would best be served by the action we request.
The introduction by Hand (1956) of the genus Haliplanella and of the familyHALIPLANELLIDAE was exclusively based on the assumed presence of a combination ofthree types of nematocysts in the acontia. However, two of these belong in reality toone variable type (Den Hartog & Ates, in press). Therefore we (re)assign Sagartialuciae Verrill, 1898 to the genus Diadumene.Manuel (1981/1988, p.