North American Association (NABA) Checklist & English Names of North American

Second Edition

NABA Names Committee Brian Cassie, Jeffrey Glassberg, Ann Swengel, Guy Tudor Copyright © 2001 by the North American Butterfly Association, Inc.

All rights reserved.

Published by the North American Butterfly Association 4 Delaware Road, Morristown, NJ 07960

Cover photographs by Jeffrey Glassberg: Dina Yellow, Oct. 3, 1995, Bauer Park, Miami-Dade County, American Copper, May 20, 1990, Chappaqua, Westchester County, New York Sonoran Blue, Feb. 27, 1998, Plum Canyon, Anza-Borrego State Park, San Diego County, California Sandia Hairstreak, May 30, 1999, Pine Canyon Trail, Big Bend National Park, Brewster County, Contents

Introduction 1 Swallowtails Family Papilionidae 5 Parnassians 5 True Swallowtails 5 Whites and Sulphurs Family 6 Whites 6 Sulphurs 6 Mimic-Whites 8 Gossamer-wings Family 8 Harvesters 8 Coppers 8 Hairstreaks 8 Blues 11 Metalmarks Family 12 Brushfoots Family 13 Snouts 13 Heliconians and Fritillaries 13 True Brushfoots 14 Admirals and Relatives 16 Leafwings 17 Emperors 17 Morphos 17 Satyrs 17 Clearwings 18 Monarchs 18 Skippers Family Hesperiidae 19 Firetips 19 Spread-wing Skippers 19 Skipperlings 22 Grass-Skippers 22 Giant-Skippers 25 Dubiously Reported 26 Commentary 27 For the Love of Butterflies Please photocopy this page to use as a membership application form

Are you fascinated by butterflies — sparkling but ephemeral spirits that are quintes- sential botanists — but don’t know how to become more involved? Then the North American But- terfly Association (NABA) is just for you! NABA is interested in all aspects of netless butterfly appreciation including observation, identification, gardening, photography, and conservation. Our quarterly magazine, American Butterflies, has spectacular color photos and articles by experts that provide the information you need for successful butterfly identification and garden- ing. Feature articles include detailed site guides to butterflying “hot spots” and explain the myster- ies of butterfly behavior. Our color newsletter, Butterfly Gardener, focuses on creating butterfly gardens — allowing you to create and visit gardens throughout — while keeping you apprised of news about chapters and people. We are working to save butterfly species throughout North America. Recent grants have helped endangered Schaus’ Swallowtails in Florida and contributed to developing a long-term survival plan for Monarchs. NABA has persuaded the U.S. army to alter plans that would have destroyed the last colony of Regal Fritillaries in the East, is working to save Miami Blues and is developing educational programs for schools and park rangers and naturalists. The NABA 4th of July Butterfly Counts (held throughout North America) that NABA con- ducts and publishes, provide a fun-filled way for beginners and experts alike to help measure the health of the environment by taking its butterfly pulse. There are currently 28 local NABA chapters, organizing a wide array of field trips, work- shops, conservation activities, and butterfly gardens. If there isn’t a chapter in your area (check our web-site listing at www.naba.org), why not start one? Our biennial meetings, held in butterfly-rich, scenic locales, are filled with exciting field trips, and workshops, led by nationally-recognized experts. Member Receive/Participate in ● American Butterflies Magazine NABA is a non-profit organization ● Butterfly Gardener Newsletter working to increase public enjoyment and ● 4th of July Butterfly Count conservation of butterflies. ● Biennial Meetings ● Local Chapters Yes! I want to join NABA and/or contribute to NABA’s Important Work. To join just ll out this form and mail to NABA, 4 Delaware Rd., Morristown, NJ 07960, C23 along with your check (in U.S. dollars) made out to North American Buttery Association or NABA.

Dues enclosed: Regular $25 ($30 outside U.S.) Family $35 ($40 outside U.S.) Special Sponsorship Levels: Copper $40 $100 Admiral $250 Monarch $1000 Institution/Library Subscription to all publications $45 Special Tax-deductible donation to NABA: $125 $200 $1000 Other______Name ______Address ______City______State______Zip______email (optional) ______Tel. (optional) ______Special Interests: Listing Gardening Observation Photography Conservation Other ______Introduction

This checklist includes all 722 species of but- this publication would be the basis for any future teries that have naturally occurred in North changes in the nomenclature of North American America, north of , and in Hawaii. This butteries. list can serve both as a means of keeping your The choice of scientic names used in the “life list” (or year list, or state list, or photo list) First Edition was not the result of species by and as a vehicle for standardizing the names of species decisions — the committee focused on North American butteries. We hope that the English names. Rather than produce an inde- availability of this checklist will serve to spur pendent evaluation of the correct status for each the growth of butterying in North America. taxon, the committee decided to follow the sci- The North American Buttery Association entic nomenclature that had been used by Opler (NABA), a non-prot organization founded in in Peterson Field Guide to Eastern Butteries the summer of 1992, is by far the largest group of (1992) and, for species not treated in that book, people in North America interested in butteries. to follow Scott’s The Butteries of North Amer- NABA’s mission is to increase public enjoy- ica (1986). ment and conservation of butteries. One of the In constructing this Second Edition of the factors that has discouraged public involvement NABA Checklist, the NABA Names Commit- with butteries has been the bewildering multi- tee1 has now independently evaluated the status plicity of buttery names, both English and sci- of scientic names. At the back of this check- entic. list, all changes from the First Edition are listed Buttery names are used for communica- and discussed. An asterisk following an entry tion. Communication occurs at the level of the in the checklist indicates that this name is dis- community, not at the individual or small group cussed in the Commentary section (but note level, and language only has meaning when the that many names that were discussed were not community has a consensus about what those changed). Votes of the Committee are included. words mean. Prior to NABA’s formation, each In addition, the Committee evaluated the inclu- author of a book used whatever names he/she sion of a number of Neotropical taxa in the First preferred, resulting in a Babel of names. In Edition, and moved some of these taxa to the many cases enthusiasts could not understand Dubious occurring list. how names in different books related to each The Committee was guided by the follow- other and became frustrated, leaving buttery ing important principles. First, the starting point study to a handful of people. for all discussion was the First Edition. The So, one of the rst actions of the nascent status of a taxon was not changed (e.g. from North American Buttery Association was to subspecies to species), unless the Committee form an English Names Committee. The results found compelling evidence that the status given of that committee’s work were published in 1995 in the First Edition should be changed.2 as the First Edition of the Checklist and Eng- Second, in considering information relevant lish Names of North American Butteries (here- to a possible change in status, the Committee after First Edition). Please see the Introduction only considered published data.3 The Commit- to that publication for a discussion of policies tee endeavored to locate all publications that regarding the selection of English names. In a contained data arguing for a status other than the remarkably short time, the publication of the one presented in the First Edition and contacted First Edition has led to much greater agreement various forums frequented by buttery enthusi- in the names used for butteries in publications, asts and lepidopterists requesting notication of and both the English and scientic names have any such publications. The list of publications been adopted by many publications. Buttery considered is fairly lengthy and is presented at enthusiasts have quite reasonably assumed that the end of the Commentary section. 1 In some cases we have decided to retain Subspecies the status of a taxon given in the First Edition, There are thousands of named subspecies of even though the authors of a published article, North American butteries. In many cases, these or articles, treat the taxon differently. In many names have little, if any, biological meaning. In of these articles, for example those dealing with general, we have not listed subspecies. Excep- the genera and , although tions include subspecies that are considered by the authors present much valuable new informa- some to warrant full species status or, in a tion about the biology of various species, we do few cases, subspecies that are particularly well- not believe that, given the ground rules for this marked or are well-known for other reasons. checklist, that there is enough conclusive evi- Subspecies are indicated by single quotation dence to change the First Edition status. marks around the subspecic English name, e.g. Many individuals provided advice and/or ‘Sierra Nevada’ Phoebus Parnassian. For some information that was helpful to the our delibera- subspecies, e.g. ‘Rocky Mountain’ Phoebus Par- tions. We gratefully thank George Austin, Rich- nassian, we have deleted the species name to ard Bailowitz, Jim Brock, Andy Brower, John save space, not because we believe that the Burns, John Calhoun, John Emmel, Greg Forbes, status of these taxa is different from other sub- Don Harvey, Ed Knudson, Norbert Kondla, Don species. Nominate subspecies are listed only if LaFontaine, Gerardo Lamas, Harry LeGrand, their English name differs from that of the spe- Dave Parshall, Ken Philip, Adam Porter, Gordon cies as a whole. Pratt, Bob Robbins, Art Shapiro, Jon Shepard, Felix Sperling, Andy Warren, Ward Watt, and 1 The NABA Names Committee consists of Brian David Wright for their help, although this is not Cassie, NABA Director, founder of the NABA- intended to imply that any of these individuals Massachusetts Buttery Club, and author of agree with any particular decision. numerous buttery and natural history books; Of course, almost everyone will disagree Jeffrey Glassberg, NABA President, author of with some Committee decision or another (no the Butteries through Binoculars series of eld one on the Committee agrees with all decisions), guides and numerous scientic publications; and some people may disagree with many of the Ann Swengel, NABA Director, Editor of the Committee’s decisions. It is not our intention to 4th of July Buttery Count Program, and author stie the opinions of those who disagree as to of numerous scientic publications relating to the validity of particular name choices. Rather, buttery population biology; and Guy Tudor, we ask all those who care about the future of NABA Director, President of the New York City butteries to use the name set adopted by the Buttery Club and co-author of a forthcoming Committee and, if they disagree with a Commit- book about butteries (in preparation). tee choice to say so. This gives the large number The committee is composed of people who of people interested in butteries a road map, are knowledgeable about and professionally enabling them to easily compare information in involved with butteries, but are not actively one book with that in another, while at the same publishing on the systematics of butteries. time making clear to the public the views of a There are a number of reasons for not having particular author. buttery systematists on this committee. One Regarding the capitalization, or lack thereof, reason is that is impossible to objectively evalu- of English names of buttery and species, ate the strength of one’s own research. A second the Committee has followed the style of NABA’s reason is that this leads to efdoms. A predict- magazine, American Butteries. Names are able result of having active buttery system- capitalized when they are taken from the ofcial atists on a committee charged with developing names list of an organization, e.g., NABA, Amer- a stable nomenclature is that each committee ican Ornithologists’ Union, Dragony Society member, to be collegial, will ordinarily defer of America. Otherwise, except for proper nouns, to the committee member whose expertise is lower case is used. in a particular group. A third reason is that 2 because single individuals become responsible ent very strong evidence that the original deci- for the of different groups, there will sion was incorrect. In United States law, in law- an unevenness in the treatment of these differ- suits between private individuals, juries decide ent groups - one individual may tend to lump in the case based upon the preponderance of the the group he/she treats while another individual evidence — if the weight of the evidence tilts may tend to split in the group he/she treats. ever so slightly toward one side, that side is declared the winner. But in criminal cases, 2 Re-evaluating the status of each taxon based where there is a strong public interest in fair- upon a preponderance of the evidence (rather ness, there is a presumption of innocence and than compelling evidence) leads to nomencla- cases are decided against the defendant only if tural instability. Imagine a pair of taxa for there is no reasonable doubt, i.e., the evidence is which there is disagreement as to whether they truly compelling. are well-dened subspecies or a single species. We believe that given the rapidly burgeon- There are many such pairs among North Amer- ing interest in butteries by the public, and ican butteries. Now imagine that one could the concomitant increase in the use of buttery objectively quantify the published evidence (one names by many thousands of individuals, by cannot) regarding the species-subspecies ques- environmental organizations, and by govern- tion for these taxa and that at the time of the ment entities, that these names should no longer First Edition the evidence was ambiguous but, be decided by the predilections and whims of on balance, slightly favored the hypothesis that individual authors. There are some who argue the two taxa were subspecies; that at the time that “nomenclature changes and that to seek a of considering information for the Second Edi- stable names set as NABA does is wrong.” This tion the evidence was still ambiguous but, on creates a straw man — that the NABA Checklist balance, slightly favored the hypothesis that the will not change even in the face of fresh knowl- two taxa were species; and that at the time of edge. The truth is that the NABA Checklist has considering information for the (future) Third changed and will continue to change in response Edition, the evidence was still ambiguous but, to welcome increases in our knowledge of but- on balance, slightly favored the hypothesis that tery populations. However, the NABA Check- the two taxa were subspecies. Many, perhaps list does not necessarily change in response to most, taxonomists would treat the two taxa as each buttery taxonomy-related hypothesis that subspecies on the rst list, as species on the is put forward. second and as subspecies again on the third. The major purpose of names, whether they 3We believe that publishing conclusions in for- are English or scientic, is to allow people to mats such as books and checklists, based upon communicate with each other. Our very strong unpublished data, is highly unscientic. Unfor- belief is that this purpose is best served by being tunately, this is the approach that has been taken conservative in name changes. So, in the imag- by a number of authors of buttery guides. inary case just presented, we would treat the Unpublished data, if it exists at all, cannot be two taxa as subspecies on all three lists. The evaluated by scientists to determine if the data two modes of evaluating evidence thus eventu- lead to the conclusion(s) that the author(s) has ally lead to the same result, but making changes reached, or if the data are reproducible. In addi- based only on compelling evidence results in tion, because the same data may be interpreted in more stability along the way. different ways, the important component of sci- Two somewhat analogous uses of data are entic publications is the presentation of actual in professional football and United States law. data, not the conclusions that authors may draw In professional football, referees make decisions from those data. Unfortunately, many buttery- on the eld that can be overturned by an exami- related publications present little or no data, nation of a videotape replay. But, for the initial instead presenting the author’s conclusions in decision to be overturned, the replay must pres- the guise of data. 3 Commentary Chinese Swallowtail xuthus. Introduced into Hawaii, this species is native to northeastern Asia, found in northeastern China, Phoebus Parnassian Parnassius phoebus. Korea, Siberia and Japan. It has been called Shepard and Manley (1999) illustrated scanning Asian swallowtail by Scott (1986a), citrus swal- electron microscope images of from P. lowtail by Holland (1931), and xuthus swal- phoebus smintheus (Rocky Mountains), P. phoe- lowtail by Tilden and Smith (1986) and Opler bus behrii (California Sierra Nevadas) and P. (1999). None of these names is well estab- phoebus phoebus from the . They stated lished or in widespread use. Many swallowtails that the arrangement of the divisions surround- use citrus as a foodplant, and xuthus ing the micropyle differs among phoebus, behrii has no English meaning. After deliberating, and smintheus with phoebus and behrii having the Committee decided to adopt the name Chi- cuboidal-shaped wedges and with smintheus nese Swallowtail, referring to the main country having pie-shaped wedges. Although they stated of origin. One Committee member preferred that the number of wedges surrounding the streak-celled swallowtail as being useful for micropyle in smintheus varies from 6 to 8, the identication, given that this is one of the very Committee could not conrm this by a visual few swallowtails in the world that have a set of examination of their illustrations. While there streaks in the FW cell above. Vote for Chinese does appear to be a subtle difference in the Swallowtail, 3-1. structure of the surrounding the micropyle, from their illustrations, there also appears to be Magnicent Swallowtail Papilio garamas. variation in smintheus. Bordelon and Knudson (2000) recently reported The real question is, even if there is a subtle about and illustrated a clearly identiable spec- but consistent difference in the structure of the imen collected in Cameron County, Texas in egg surrounding the micropyle, what is the evi- Sept.-Oct. 1967 by B. Finley following Hur- dence that this means these populations are sep- ricane Beulah, listing it as Papilio garamas arate species. So far as the Committee is aware, abderas. While abderas is clearly very closely there is no thorough scientic study examining related to garamas, a number of recent authors micropyle variation within, for example, sib- have treated abderas as a distinct species. lings, nor any study showing a strong correla- Because there is little published information tion between micropyle structure and species about the degree of relatedness of these allopat- status determined by other means. Given the ric taxa and because the Committee’s default foregoing, the Committee voted to continue to position is to consider extremely similar taxa treat North American phoebus-group popula- that replace each other geographically as being tions as one species. Vote 4-0. one species, the Committee decided to follow DeVries (1987) and Tyler et al. (1994), and treat Old World Swallowtail Papilio machaon. them as one species. Sperling and Harrison (1994) examined mito- This species now needs an English name. chondrial DNA polymorphisms and presented The only English names used heretofore have strong evidence that Baird’s Swallowtail is best been “black giant swallowtail,” used by Tyler viewed as a subspecies of Old World Swallow- (1975) and avocado swallowtail used by Warren tail. Accordingly, the Committee has decided and Llorente (1999) for garamas (but each to change the status of Baird’s Swallowtail to of these authors treated garamas and abderas a subspecies of Old World Swallowtail, Papilio as separate species, not providing any English machaon bairdii. Vote 4-0. One Committee name for abderas). Since this species is not member believes that the name Old World Swal- closely related to Giant Swallowtail and males lowtail is inappropriate for a native American have very prominent yellow bands, the Com- taxon, but the majority decided to retain the cur- mittee did not consider black giant swallowtail rent name. to be appropriate. There are reports of garamas 4 garamas using avocados, but no information is tions examined in this study were small. Sha- available about the taxon that enter the United piro reports (personal communication) that this States and it is not known whether avocado is 1992 paper presented preliminary work and that necessarily the major foodplant for this species it was intended mainly to raise questions for fur- or if other tropical swallowtail also use avo- ther study. In addition, there is ongoing research cado. A variety of other names were consid- using newer techniques that will almost cer- ered. Finally, the Committee decided to name tainly lead to signicant changes in our under- this species Magnicent Swallowtail, because standing of this group in the near future. it is one of the largest (the root word of mag- In view of the inconclusive nature of exist- nicent means large) and most striking swal- ing evidence and the prospect of new data gener- lowtails found in North America. One Commit- ation in the near future, the Committee decided tee member preferred splendid swallowtail. Vote to maintain First Edition status. Vote 4-0. 3-1. Giant White/Howarth’s White Mustard White Pieris napi. josephina/howarthi. Bowden (1988) crossed British napi with mac- Bailowitz (1988) provided evidence for con- dunnoughii from . He reported that sidering as a species distinct male napi “seemed rather unwilling to pair with from Giant White, describing a number of phe- macdunnoughii females, but one cage pairing notypic differences, including the wing place- occurred within a quarter of an hour. The recip- ment of androconial scales. The Committee has rocal pairing is easy. In either case fertility is decided to recognize Howarth’s White, Ganyra very good.” But, he reported that three large howarthi as a full species. Vote 4-0. broods of female napi x male macdunnoughii produced no F1 daughters, although an earlier Green Marble naina. cross (of marginalis from Oregon with napi) did Recently reported from North America by yield both sexes. No control crosses of napi Kondla and Pelham (1995), this species has x napi nor of macdunnoughii x macdunnoughii been called green marble by Layberry et al. were presented. It might have been more appro- (1998) and by Opler (1999). One Committee priate to cross individuals from a Siberian popu- member argued that because most marbles are lation with those of a Pacic Northwest popu- “green” that we should name this species for lation. The author concluded that napi is spe- the scree slopes that it inhabits in North Amer- cically distinct from both marginalis and mac- ica. However, in Siberia, where this species is dunnoughii. But, given the fairly extensive non- common, it ies in alpine meadows throughout forced mating that occurs when napi is placed the taiga and is not restricted to scree slopes with either marginalis or macdunnoughii and (Tuzov et al.1997). The Committee decided to the resulting fertile offspring, we believe that adopt the already used name, Green Marble. these data also provide support for a one species Vote 3-1. concept. Geiger and Shapiro (1992) examined allo- Sonoran Marble Euchloe guaymasensis. zymes of napi species group populations from There is a recent record from Bisbee, in Japan, Alaska and the western United States late March, 1997. This species has been called and tentatively concluded that there might be Sonoran marble by Opler (1999) and by Glass- two napi-group species in Alaska, angelika and berg (2001). The range of this Mexican endemic meckyae (both distinct from European napi) is restricted to the state of Sonora, Mexico other and from the napi-group species in western than the one U.S. stray, ying in the Sonoran United States and Canada, marginalis. There Desert. The Committee decided to add this are acknowledged difculties in determining the species to the list of species occurring north correct size of various allozymes for compari- of Mexico and to name this species Sonoran son. In addition, the sample sizes of the popula- Marble. Both votes 4-0. 5 Pearly Marble Euchloe hyantis. a genetic disjunction between sara and ora in A few recent authors have treated hyantis and southern Oregon, or between ora and stella, lotta as distinct species. To our knowledge, there along the crest of the Cascades, it seems prema- are no published data that would strongly argue ture to split this taxon. that these taxa are separate species and no pub- In Colorado, the relationships between high lished data of any kind that has appeared subse- elevation julia to pinyon-juniper populations quent to the First Edition. Vote 4-0. (ingrahami) and to stella to the northwest is very little understood. To the south, ingrahami in Desert Orangetip Anthocharis cethura. northern supercially more closely The Committee mistakenly treated cethura and resembles julia than it does thoosa of the Cali- pima as distinct species on our rst list. On that fornia-Nevada desert ranges. list, the Committee intended to adopt the tax- Opler (1999) lumped subspecies in New onomy used in Scott (1986a) for non-hairstreak Mexico, Arizona, southeastern California, and species not treated by Opler (1992) and Scott Nevada and treated them as thoosa. There are treated these taxa as one species. Because no published data that bear upon this taxonomic the status listed in the First Edition was a mis- arrangement. The Committee decided to retain take, and because a large blend zone exists the First Edition treatment of this species. Vote between cethura and pima in western Arizona 4-0. and Nevada, the Committee has decided to treat pima as a subspecies of cethura. Vote 4-0. Western Sulphur occidentalis. Ferris (1989a) described pseudochristina, from Sara Orangetip Anthocharis sara. Idaho and northern Utah as a separate species, Geiger and Shapiro (1986) demonstrated that but he also detailed (1993, page 43) a popula- populations of sara on the western lower slopes tion in Grant County, Oregon that appears to of the California Sierra Nevada are genetically be intermediate between occidentalis and pseu- distinct from populations of stella ying at dochristina. Considering the confusing state of higher altitudes. A small sample from Colorado, Colias systematics, that occidentalis and pseu- said to be of the subspecies julia, appears to be dochristina are allopatric, that a possible hybrid distinct from either of the two California pop- or intermediate population exists, and that many ulations. However, there is no published infor- knowledgeable individuals continue to treat mation about the genetics of populations in the pseudochristina as a subspecies of occidentalis, Pacic Northwest, nor has there been a genetic the Committee has decided to retain First Edi- examination of populations occurring geograph- tion status, treating pseudochristina as a subspe- ically between Colorado julia and California cies of occidentalis. Vote 4-0. stella to see whether there is a gradual change in the presence of various genetic markers or a Queen Alexandra’s Sulphur/Christina’s marked discontinuity. In addition, in the Pacic Sulphur /christina. Northwest, where there are two taxa in the com- The situation regarding the taxonomy of the plex, ora and stella, basically west and east alexandra group is very complicated. Kondla of the Cascades respectively, very experienced (1995) documented the confusing and conict- observers maintain very different views. Some ing welter of features that various authors have are of the opinion that ora and stella are not given as diagnostic of christina and alexandra. really distinguishable and that they form a cline. Scott (1986) treated christina as a subspecies of Others are of the opinion that ora and stella are alexandra and this was the basis for the First distinguishable and are separate species, with Edition status. Ferris (1988) in a revision of this ora as a subspecies of sara. Still others are group continued to treat christina as a subspe- certain that ora and stella are one species, but cies of alexandra, as did Klassen et al. (1989) that this species is distinct from sara. Until it and Acorn (1993). Ferris (1993) revisited this is ascertained whether or not there is a cline or group and now treated christina as a full spe- 6 cies, citing differences in UV reectance pat- rate kluanensis from christina. The Committee terns, in the red rim around the central spot on decided to retain First Edition status. Vote 4-0. the hindwing below, and in the hindwing below ground color – green on alexandra, yellow on Mead’s Sulphur/Coppermine Sulphur christina. He listed specimens of each taxon Colias meadii/johanseni. examined from some of the same locations – Scott (1986a) treated the single known speci- indicating that these taxa are sympatric in some men of the Mead’s Sulphur group from near areas. Kondla (1995) reported that the ground Bernard Harbour, Northwest Territories as being color on the hindwing on christina can be either a Mead’s Sulphur. Troubridge and Philip (1990) yellow or green. Although he mentioned that examined newly obtained specimens from near antennal color is a useful character in Alberta Bernard Harbour and described Colias johan- (pink for christina, buffy for alexandra), unmen- seni as distinct from C. meadii. tioned was that nearby alexandra columbiensis Johanseni is very similar to Mead’s Sulphur has pink antennas. and these two, together with another extremely According to Kondla (1995), Queen Alex- similar taxon, hypoborea (found in Siberia), are andra’s Sulphur and Christina’s Sulphur appar- the only species with the character that males ently can be separated as follows: Males gener- have a patch of androconial scales on the hind- ally with orange above – Christina’s; Hindwing wing above. In terms of wing pattern alone, below with central spot without red rim or with johanseni is also very similar to hecla, with very narrow red rim – Queen Alexandra’s Sul- which it ies and which is also a member of phur; Hindwing below with central spot with the Mead’s Sulphur group, but hecla lacks male moderate to thick red rim – Christina’s Sul- androconial patches. phur; Hindwing fringe without extensive pink Ferris (1993) detailed subtle differences in – Queen Alexandra’s Sulphur; Hindwing fringe the UV reectance patterns of meadii, on the with extensive pink – Christina’s Sulphur. On one hand, and johanseni and hypoborea on the the basis of data presented by Ferris (1993) other. Johanseni ies on tundra hillsides on and Kondla (1995), the Committee decided to drumlins (elliptical hills dropped by glaciers) change the status of Christina’s Sulphur to that while hypoborea ies in Siberian taiga, where of a full species. Vote 4-0. it can be common along dirt roads through the Ferris (1993) also treated krauthi (occurring woods. There is a distance of about 1000 miles in the Black Hills of South Dakota) as a distinct between the only known population of johan- species from alexandra, but treated harfordii as seni and any known meadii population, and a a subspecies of alexandra. Opler (1999) treated greater distance between johanseni and popula- harfordii and christina as distinct species, but tions of hypoborea. not krauthi. Regarding harfordii, because there Interestingly, the 2 drumlins at Bernard Har- are no denitive data, nor any new data, rele- bour are estimated to be only 6-12,000 years old vant to this question, published subsequent to – before that time this land was under the ocean the publication of the First Edition, the Commit- – implying that the taxon has evolved within tee decided to retain First Edition status. Vote that time. Victoria Island (just across the strait) 4-0. has not been checked for the presence of this Regarding krauthi, it is obviously very species and, given that there are innumerable closely related to other populations in the alex- drumlins on Victoria Island, this taxon may yet andra complex but is allopatric, occurring in prove to be widespread there. the Black Hills of South Dakota. Ferris (1993) Because this taxon is clearly distinct from also included as a subspecies of krauthi popu- hecla, ying with it, is separated by large dis- lations in Yukon named kluanensis. Layberry tances from meadii and hypoborea and is gen- et al. (1998) state that “We now have many erally distinguishable from them, the Commit- more Yukon specimens of this group…show a tee decided to recognize this taxon as a species. complete cline in all of the characters that sepa- Vote 4-0. 7 This species has been called Johansen’s sul- ing his “sulphur” to “yellow” since we have phur by Layberry et al. (1998), but the Com- already decided to use “yellow” for the mittee prefers not adopting patronymic names ) would perhaps be too confusing. The except for those that are long established and Committee believes that the name Ghost Yellow in widespread use. The nearest largish town to gives the right idea without having another color the locality where this buttery is found is Cop- in the name. This name has already been used permine, which is also the name of a large river by Mike Quinn, in the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Ser- in the area. The portion of the Beaufort Sea that vice checklist to butteries of the Santa Ana approaches the type area is Coronation Gulf. NWR. Vote to add Eurema albula to the United Also considered was that, so far as is known, States list, 4-0. Vote to name Eurema albula, this species is found on drumlins. One Commit- Ghost Yellow, 4-0. tee member preferred the name drumlin sulphur but the majority preferred Coppermine Sulphur. Ruddy Copper Lycaena rubidus. Vote 3-1. Opler (1999) treated White Mountains of Ari- zona population, ferrisi, as a distinct species Booth’s Sulphur Colias boothi. although there is no new published information This taxon was not on the rst NABA list bearing on this subject. The Committee decided since Scott treated this as representing hybrids to retain First Edition status. Vote 4-0. between hecla and nastes. Ferris (1993) contin- ued to treat boothi as a probable hybrid swarm. Dorcas Copper Lycaena dorcas. Layberry, et al. (1998) treated this taxon as a Layberry, et al. (1998) cited unpublished eld distinct species, citing unpublished recent eld research of L. Handeld and R. Webster and ele- work in northern Canada, but lumped it with the vated salt marsh populations in eastern Canada, Old World tyche (citing unpublished work by dospassosi, to species status. Because there exist Mikkola in Russia). However, they stated that no published data, the Committee voted to retain there may be some hybridization. Given that First Edition status. Vote 4-0. there are no published data indicating that boothi merits species status, the Committee decided to Sooty Hairstreak fuliginosa retain First Edition status. Vote 4-0. Edwards (1861), in his original description, spelled the species name as fuliginosa and so Ghost Yellow Eurema albula. the Committee decided to amend the name to Found through much of tropical , this fuliginosa from fuliginosum. Vote 4-0. species was reported to have strayed to the Rio Grande Valley of Texas in November, 1993 Hairstreak Satyrium favonius by Chuah and Cushing (1995) who provided a from Southern Hairstreak. clearly identiable illustration of the specimen. Prior to the First Edition, almost all authors This species has been called small white treated Satyrium favonius and Satyrium ontario by Barcant (1970) and white sulphur by Riley as separate species, using the English names, (1975). The Committee discarded the name southern hairstreak and northern hairstreak, small white since this species is a “yellow” not respectively. When these taxa were lumped in a “white” and it is not particularly smaller than the First Edition, the Committee tried to develop other yellows. an acceptable English name for the combined Of the roughly 63 species of Eurema (37 in taxa, but was unable to do so (read discussion the New World) this species appears to be the in First Edition). The Committee then decided whitest, both above and below. A few other spe- to use the name Southern Hairstreak for the cies are white above, but these are usually more lumped taxa. This has created quite a bit of well-marked below with an off-white ground confusion and awkwardness, causing people to color. The Committee decided that the name refer to the ‘Northern’ Southern Hairstreak and white yellow (using Riley’s name, but convert- ‘Southern’ Southern Hairstreak. 8 In an attempt to make this situation clear, occurs within San Francisco, and the type local- the Committee has decided to change the Eng- ity of viridis Edwards has been designated as lish name of this species to Oak Hairstreak. San Francisco by Clench, they therefore placed Satyrium favonius favonius is now the ‘South- viridis Edwards as a junior synonym of dume- ern’ Oak Hairstreak and S. f. ontario is now the torum Boisduval. But, other taxa in the Cal- ‘Northern’ Oak Hairstreak. Vote 3-1. lophrys dumetorum complex y just outside of San Francisco, in Marin County, California, for Bramble Hairstreak dumetorum. example, and there has been no published dem- Emmel, Emmel and Mattoon (1999b) treated onstration that the type of dumetorum Boisduval the dumetorum complex as being composed of could not have come from one of these popula- four species – dumetorum (=viridis), perplexa, tions. afnis, and apama. The authors stated that “we Although a cursory examination of the type feel that there are ample life history and biologi- specimen of dumetorum and other museum cal differences as well as signicant phenotypic specimens by a Committee member corrobo- adult differences, between the two entities [per- rated the view of Emmel, Emmel and Mattoon, plexa and afnis] to consider them separate spe- given that the arrangement of taxa in this group cies.” No independently assessable data were in the First Edition was based on the under- presented. Opler (1999) placed most of what standing that dumetorum was described from was considered as dumetorum in the First Edi- non-coastal California material, that xation of tion as afnis (including apama here) and split type localities is not binding under the ICZN, the populations on the northern California coast and given the uncertainty outlined above, we that were previously referred to as viridis (now believe that the most conservative course is to called by Opler dumetorum); however, he pro- continue to view viridis as referring to the San vided no data in support of these treatments. Francisco coastal populations until such time Scott (1986) stated that “J. Emmel found as published evidence clearly shows that this is that both species [viridis and dumetorum] y incorrect. The Committee decided to retain the together at one coastal site in Monterey Co. Cal- status used in the First Edition. Vote 4-0. if…where less than 10 percent of the adults are intermediate in appearance.” Since these spe- Sheridan’s Hairstreak Callophrys sheridanii. cies are extremely similar in appearance, the cri- Several recent authors have treated the sherida- teria by which intermediates were determined nii group as consisting of either three species would be important to know, but one might – sheridanii, comstocki, and lemberti (Emmel, expect that the 10% number would be an under- Emmel and Mattoon. 1999b) or of two species estimate of the actual number of hybrid types. – sheridanii and comstocki (Opler. 1999). To We consider large-scale hybridization at the only our knowledge there are no denitive data in site where these two taxa are known to meet support of these treatments and none have been as supporting evidence for keeping the status of published subsequent to the First Edition. The these taxa as subspecies. Committee decided to retain the status used in Emmel, Emmel and Mattoon (1999a) spec- the First Edition. Vote 4-0. ulated that the type specimen of dumetorum Boisduval was actually collected in San Fran- Juniper Hairstreak Callophrys gryneus. cicso, based upon unpublished rearing exper- Opler (1999) treated non-juniper-feeding popu- iments that reportedly show that, contrary to lations as distinct species, applying names pre- Clench’s view, the phenotype of the type speci- viously used for phenotypes to refer to food- men of dumetorum is within the range of phe- plant-specic populations – nelsoni, muiri, and notypes exhibited by San Francisco area coastal thornei. However, there is no information, pub- Callophrys populations. They then xed the type lished subsequent to the First Edition, to sup- locality of dumetorum as San Francisco and, port this treatment. The Committee decided to since there is only one Callophrys taxon that retain First Edition status. Vote 4-0. 9 Mallow Scrub-Hairstreak Nickerbean Blue Hemiargus ammon. istapa from Strymon columella. Glassberg (1999), reported the rst occurrence Recent authors have treated Strymon columella of this species in the United States and related (Fabricius, 1793) as a common and widespread that this Committee had decided to use the name species. Not having access to the type spec- Nickerbean Blue, based upon what was univer- imen, Comstock and Huntington (1943) rede- sally reported to be the major caterpillar food- scribed columella as antigua. But Robbins and plant in the (Riley 1975, Alayo and Nicolay (1998) examined the type of columella Hernández 1987, Smith et al. 1994). It now and showed that it is the same species described appears that, in Florida, this species is preferen- as antigua by Comstock and Huntington and tially using acacia rather than nickerbean. How- that it is limited to the West Indies. Comstock ever, the name Nickerbean Blue is now in usage and Huntington described antigua based upon (Glassberg, Minno and Calhoun 2000) and is consistent wing pattern differences between it still preferable to the only other English name and other Strymon. Robbins and Nicolay con- used, by Riley (1975) and Minno and Emmel rm these differences and also describe con- (1993) – Lucas’ blue because the Committee sistent differences in the structures of female prefers not to adopt patronymic names except genitalia. Thus columella refers to the species for those with long-established and widespread restricted to the eastern West Indies, and the usage. The Committee received input strongly name istapa, formerly considered a junior syn- arguing that because the name Nickerbean Blue onym of columella now applies to the wide- was of recent coinage and was (in the mem- ranging, common species that enters the United ber’s opinion) misleading, the name should be States. Based upon this information, The Com- changed to acacia blue. However, the majority mittee has decided to change the scientic name considered that reports of this species using of Mallow Scrub-Hairstreak to Strymon istapa. nickerbean in the West Indies were probably Vote 4-0. true, that many species of blues use acacias, and that it may yet use nickerbean in Florida. Vote to Blue boeticus. retain Nickerbean Blue, 3-1. This widespread Old World species was intro- duced to Hawaii. The species has been called Spring Azure . long-tailed blue by almost all British authors Pratt et al. (1994) described average differences and by Migdoll (1988); Lucerne blue by among various populations of Celastrina. They Pinhey (1965) and by Migdoll; peablue by did not treat the species status of any taxon dif- Smith (1989), by Wynter-Blyth (1957) and by ferently than it was treated in the First Edition. Corbet, Pendlebury and Eliot (1978); and pea Celastrina ladon humulus is listed as ‘Hops’ blue by Gay, Kehimkar, and Punetha (1992) by Spring Azure in the First Edition. It was Larsen (1991), by Opler (1999) and by Glass- described by Scott and Wright (1998) mainly on berg (2001). The tails on this blue are not longer the basis of ying several weeks after a ight than on our tailed-blues (there are many Asian of Spring Azures at the same localities and on species of blues that have longer tails) and the the basis of using hops (Humulus lupulus) as the name long-tailed blue would create confusion main caterpillar foodplant – but some popula- with the tailed-blues. Lucerne blue is a harm- tions use lupine ( argenteus). Although less but meaningless name. Pea Blue, which there are average differences between humulus refers to the fact that when shelling in Asia and the other local populations of Spring Azure, one frequently nds of this species C. l. sidrara, many individual adults of humulus inside, has the virtue of being short, is not con- and sidrara are phenotypically indistinguish- fusing, and aligns the name of the species in able and can be assigned unambiguously to pop- Hawaii with Asia, which was the source of the ulation only by association with the foodplant. introduction. Vote for Pea Blue, 4-0. Scott and Wright state that “Electrophoresis of adults..proved that C. humulus is most closely 10 related to whitish eastern U.S. taxa, not to sidr- Populations of Spring Azures that y ara [another ladon subspecies present in Colo- throughout the summer have been treated as rado].” However, electrophorectic data were not a full species, “summer azures,” Celastrina shown and remain unpublished. Although it is neglecta, by some. Pavulaan and Wright (2000) likely from data presented that humulus is not a stated that there are differences in male fore- second brood of sidrara, it is possible that pop- wing scale structure between C. ladon ladon ulations using different foodplants would have and C. ladon neglecta. However, developmen- different average developmental schedules and tally regulated structures such as male androco- different average phenotypes while still hybrid- nial scales are sensitive to changes in environ- izing to a fair extent. The Committee decided mental conditions, and the presence or absence to wait until more substantial data, indicating of male androconial scales is known to be vari- genetic isolation, were published before consid- able within individuals of a species (Berger ering this taxa a separate species. Vote, 4-0. 1986). Celastrina idella was described by Wright Although a number of authors have stated and Pavulaan (1999) as a new species of azure that the spring-ying azures are univoltine (and feeding on , Ilex. They stated that 3-6% there exists anecdotal evidence consistent with of individuals in southern New Jersey are near this hypothesis), there are no published rearing “lucia” and may represent hybrids with ladon studies that establish this. A number of unpub- and that areas of hybridization with ladon occur lished rearing studies show that, at least under in Virginia and the Carolinas but that the width of articial conditions, a signicant percentage of the hybridization zone is presently unknown and caterpillars found in April, pupate and emerge that “Should the hybridization zone [between as adults in June. idella and ladon] on the inner coastal plain The signicance of these studies is not prove to be substantially large, then the two known, because rearing conditions were arti- taxa are not separated at the species level in the cial and results, being unpublished, cannot be south. In that case, southern New Jersey would analyzed. In addition, there exist other unpub- harbor endemic populations of C. idella.” lished studies indicating that up to one-half Phenotypically indistinguishable spring indi- of Celastrina caterpillars found in September viduals occur within the range of “idella” but and kept under natural conditions, pupated and not on Ilex. Wright and Pavulaan attributed emerged the following April (the other one-half these individuals to early spring emergers of emerged in June)(personal communication from [normally] summer-ying ladon. However, David Wright). In light of the Committee’s view no data were presented to support this conclu- that published data do not conclusively estab- sion. Given the lack of knowledge of possible lish that Celastrina ladon neglecta is geneti- hybridization and concomitant gene ow occur- cally isolated from spring-ying populations, ring among these populations, the Committee we decided to retain First Edition status. Vote believes that it is premature to treat this taxon as 4-0. a full species and has decided to treat it as a sub- species – Celastrina ladon idella – until further Hawaiian Blue Vaga blackburni. work claries its status. Vote, 4-0. This species is an endemic Hawaiian native. It Some have used the English name “ has been called Blackburn’s bluet and Hawai- azure” for these populations. However, the wide- ian blue by Pyle (1981), Blackburn’s blue by spread European species, Celastrina argiolus, Tilden and Smith (1986)and green Hawaiian is called , and by a North American blue by Scott (1986), Hawaiian blue by Opler would reasonably be called holly azure. There- (1999) and Hawaiian blue by Glassberg (2001). fore, the Committee, considering the distribu- Although a species of blue, related to the azures, tion of these populations along the Atlantic this buttery is green below and purplish above. Coast, decided to name the subspecies, ‘Atlan- There are very few butteries found on the tic’ Spring Azure. Vote 4-0. Hawaiian Islands, and only two species that are 11 native. With so few butteries, it would be characters, size and larval hostplant, and larval a shame to use the uninformative patronymic characters which may not stand up to scrutiny of name Blackburn’s blue (or bluet) for this spe- the many populations not surveyed….” Although cies. The Committee decided to name this spe- it is stated that there is “parapatry (sympatry?) cies Hawaiian Blue. Vote 4-0. and synchrony of glaucon [another battoides subspecies] and bernardino at several sites along Euphilotes Blues. The Euphilotes blues pres- the east slope of the southern Sierra Nevada” no ent special problems. It is clear that the relation- data are presented to support this statement. ships among the many populations, often sep- Pratt (1994) treated bernardino, centralis, arated by geography and caterpillar foodplant baueri, and ellisii as subspecies of E. battoides. selection, are very complex. Each local pop- Pratt and Emmel (1999) treated these taxa as ulation is exquisitely adapted to its caterpillar distinct species, largely based upon caterpillar foodplant – a species or variety of foodplant use and adult ight period. Opler (), timing the emergence of adults to (1999), in addition to the above mentioned taxa, coincide with the owering of the plant. Because also treated E. b. intermedia as a distinct spe- the owering of varies greatly from cies. Because the variability of any given popu- species to species, the ight times of local pop- lation tends to be greater than the average differ- ulations of Euphilotes also varies dramatically. ences among populations, it is usually not pos- The interactions (and lack thereof) among these sible to assign an individual to a particular taxa populations lead to exceedingly interesting pop- based upon an examination of the phenotype ulation biology. of that individual (see, for example, the range A number of recent authors have provided of wing characters given by Pratt 1994). The important information that takes us down the importance of this fact is that, in most cases, road toward a more thorough understanding of it would be difcult or impossible to recognize this group. However, the Committee believes hybrid individuals where two of these taxa meet. that relationships in these groups are so complex Based upon available evidence, the Committee that, given our present knowledge of this group, believes that it is entirely possible that there is attempts to split Square-spotted or Dotted Blues signicant gene ow among all of these popula- into multiple species will likely be wrong in tions. The Committee has decided to await con- detail, even if it is eventually determined that vincing published data that show that particular more than one species is included in each of populations are clearly genetically isolated from these names. others before splitting this taxon. Vote 4-0.

Square-spotted Blue Euphilotes battoides. Dotted Blue Euphilotes enoptes. Mattoni (1988) elevated Euphilotes battoides Pratt and Emmel (1999) treated enoptes, mojave bernardino to species status. Mattoni stated and ancilla as distinct species, citing Pratt’s that “Synapomorphic characters of the species unpublished 1988 doctoral dissertation. How- include: 1) exclusive hostplants Eriogonum ever Pratt (1994) himself continued to treat all fasiculatum, E. cinerium and E. parvofolium 2) three of these taxa as one species. small mean adult size and 3) fourth instar Pratt and Emmel (1999) stated that caterpil- morphology and pattern (Pratt, unpub.).” How- lars of mojave are “more reliably different [than ever, the “exclusive” hostplants are not found are adult characters] from the other taxa of the E. in regions where other subspecies of battoides enoptes complex,” and added that “This taxon occur, small mean adult size is a very weak indi- [E. mojave] appears to be acting as a semispe- cation of species status, and the stated differ- cies.” They grouped various populations under ences in caterpillars are unpublished. No other the name ancilla, on the basis of using Eriogo- information is presented relevant to species num umbellatum as the caterpillar foodplant, but status. Mattoni says “…recognition of E. ber- stated that phenotypically, adults are variable nardino as a “species” is based on weak wing and that “it may be presumptuous to include 12 all of those subspecies which use Eriogonum on unpublished allozyme data, he states that rita umbellatum (as their exclusive host) under a and pallescens differ as much from each other single biotype, since adults from different popu- as either does from Euphilotes spaldingi (gener- lations which use appear ally considered to be a closely-related full spe- quite different.” They stated that “There are cies). Pallescens and rita are not distinguish- some areas (such as along the east slopes of able except by dissection. Because these taxa are the Sierra Nevada) where both E. enoptes and clearly very closely related and because there E. ancilla are found together, one on Eriogo- has been historic uncertainty over the place- num nudum (E. enoptes) and the other on Eriog- ment of emmeli, a taxon that in many ways onoum umbellatum (E. ancilla). They also seems phenotypically and geographically inter- co-occur in Oregon, southern Washington, and mediate between pallescens and rita, the Com- western Nevada. Probably, [emphasis added] mittee believes that it is best to await further E. ancilla is a distinct species, and we so treat published studies of this group before treating it here.” The meaning of “co-occur” was not pallescens as a full species. Vote 4-0. dened (some have used similar terms to mean being found in the same general vicinity, as Small Blue speciosa. opposed to the same or adjacent sites) and docu- Hammond and McCorkle (2000) described a mentation for the statement was not provided. population of Philotiella from Klamath County, Although enoptes enoptes and ancilla pseudoin- Oregon as a new species – P. . In termedia (to use the terminology of Pratt and both wing pattern and genitalic characters, the Emmel) are stated to co-occur, it is unclear to us recently described P. speciosa purisima (Prie- how the presence of each was determined, since staf and Emmel 1999) appears to be interme- they listed twenty-six variable wing characters diate between P. speciosa speciosa and leona. for Euphilotes, and in each case there exists a The reported foodplant of leona is Eriogonum complete overlap for the character. In other spergulinum, a close relative of a known food- words, individual enoptes enoptes and ancilla plant of P. speciosa speciosa – Eriogonum reni- pseudointermedia are phenotypically indistin- forme. The wing patterns of Small Blues are guishable, at least considering the characters known to be very variable (see, for example, given in this work. the photo of a mated pair in Opler 1999 and the The Committee agrees with Pratt and Emmel illustrations in Glassberg 2001) and the illus- (1999) when they say that “The distinctions trated phenotypes of leona fall within that varia- among the various taxonomic entities (species, tion. Leona is allopatric with other philotiella subspecies, races) applied to Euphilotes often populations (although it would not be surpris- are not clear-cut.” The Committee decided to ing if Philotiella populations occurred between maintain First Edition status. Vote 4-0. leona in southern Oregon and speciosa in north- western Nevada – these might be intermediate), Rita Blue Euphilotes rita. is phenotypically extremely similar, and so far The status of Euphilotes rita pallescens has as known has similar biology. It is clearly been controversial. Shields (1975) described the closely related to speciosa and, pending further taxon emmeli as a subspecies of rita and also study, the Committee decided to treat leona as a (1977) treated pallescens as a subspecies of subspecies of speciosa. Vote, 4-0. rita. Scott (1986) did likewise, stating that “The ssp. [of rita] all seem to intergrade (pallescens Acmon Blue/Lupine Blue with emmeli in Washington Co., Utah and ssp. Plebejus acmon/lupinus. emmeli is intermediate between the W and E These taxa are extremely closely related, and ssp. in the number of teeth on the male valva, although they seem to behave as separate spe- for example.)” More recently, Pratt (1994) cies in southern California, even there many has treated pallescens as a full species, placing people believe they are inseparable. It is pos- emmeli as a subspecies of pallescens. Relying sible that when enough information is available 13 they will be considered to be one species. Scott tee decided to name this newly described spe- (1998) suggested that Plebejus acmon texana cies Heather Blue. Vote 4-0. and P. a. lutzi should be treated as subspecies of Lupine Blue, Plebejus lupinus. It is not Rounded Metalmark impossible that this is correct. However, no new perditalis from Calephelis nilus. information was presented in support of this rad- McAlpine (1971) showed that the type of nilus ical realignment. One argument given was that is from Venezuela, but the type specimen is “Acmon” in much of the West outside of Cali- missing its abdomen. Because determination of fornia uses only buckwheats as caterpillar food- Calephelis to species often requires an examina- , as does Lupine Blue, while “Acmon” tion of the genitalia, we do not know whether in California uses legumes in addition to buck- the specimen represented by this type is the wheats. However, in both Alberta and Arizona same species that ies in southern Texas, and knowledgeable buttery enthusiasts are fairly there is good reason to assume that it is not. certain that the Acmon Blues in their areas (lutzi Because it is impossible to know what species and texana respectively) are using legumes in the name nilus actually refers to, the name of addition to buckwheats. This is based on their the species in the United States should not be nding Acmon populations to be common in nilus even if it is the same species as one that certain areas where they are unable to locate ies in Venezuela. The next available name for any buckwheats, but that have a profusion of the the United States population is perditalis Barnes suspected leguminous foodplants. Until there is and McDunnough 1918. The Committee voted a reliable scientic study of the situation, it is 4-0 to call this taxon Calephelis perditalis. best to adhere to the traditional view of all lepi- dopterists for the past 50 years. The Commit- Arizona Metalmark/Rawson’s Metalmark tee voted to list Acmon Blue as including texana Calephelis arizonensis/rawsoni. and lutzi. Vote 4-0. Opler (1999) treated these taxa as conspecic. Because there exist no denitive data nor any Arctic Blue Agriades glandon. data published subsequent to the First Edition, Emmel and Emmel (1999) cited an unpublished the Committee decided to retain First Edition study of rst instar caterpillars of Agriades by status. Vote 4-0. Greg Ballmer and Gordon Pratt as evidence that podarce is distinct from other North American Mormon Metalmark mormo. Agriades. In the absence of any newly published Pratt and Ballmer (1991) described three bio- data relevant to the status of Agriades glandon types (multiple brooded populations; univoltine podarce the Committee decided to continue to spring-ying populations; and univoltine fall- treat this taxon as a subspecies of Arctic Blue. ying populations) of Apodemia mormo. They Vote 4-0. stated that “Perhaps these three biotypes, which occur sympatrically, are distinct species.” They Heather Blue Agriades cassiope showed that various wing pattern differences Emmel and Emmel (1999) described Agriades among populations do not correlate with their cassiope as a cassiope-feeding, scree inhabitant biotypes. To the Committee’s knowledge, there of the California Sierra Nevada and Trinities. is nothing published that demonstrates a lack of On the basis of their published evidence of dif- signicant gene ow among these populations. ferences in wing shape and hostplant of sym- Opler (1999) treated duryi as a distinct spe- patric populations, the Committee has voted cies “on the recommendations of Greg Forbes 4-0 to treat Agriades cassiope as a distinct and Richard Holland,” and said “Further research species from Agriades glandon. Because this will no doubt modify this treatment.” There are seems to be the only species of blue whose cat- no published data that lead to the conclusion erpillar foodplant is a heather (Cassiope merten- that duryi is a separate species. The Committee siana – white mountain heather), the Commit- voted to retain First Edition status. Vote 4-0. 14 Nais Metalmark Apodemia nais/chisosensis. up the works (One Committee member strongly Opler (1999) treated A. chisosensis as a full disagrees with this statement). In addition, num- species. Because there exist no data published bers of other groups of butteries also have subsequent to the First Edition, the Committee “long” wings. Ithomiines, widespread in the decided to retain the status of the First Edition. American tropics have wings shaped liked hel- Vote 4-0. iconians. The wings of African actinotes, of mimic-whites (pierids in the subfamily Dismor- Julia Heliconian Dryas iulia from Julia. phinae), and of skippers in the genus The Committee prefers providing group names are all long. And, not all heliconians have long for species, so that it is clear to which group of wings – see Banded Orange Heliconian. butteries a species belongs. Because this spe- We realize that it may be an uphill battle to cies is a heliconian, the Committee decided to establish the name Zebra Heliconian since the add a group name, making this species Julia buttery is called zebra longwing in the many Heliconian (see Zebra Heliconian, below). Vote buttery zoos that display it and as the state but- 4-0. tery of Florida. But the botanical community doesn’t necessarily embrace a name that has Zebra Heliconian charithonia from been promulgated by horticultural interests and Zebra Heliconius charitonius. state birds, i.e., cardinal, aren’t necessarily iden- Brower (1994), has shown that the spelling of tical to American Ornithologists’ Union names. this species’ name in its original description by The options that we considered were: 1. Linnaeus was charithonia and that this spelling Leave the name alone. 2. Rename the species was formally placed on the ofcial list of spe- Zebra Heliconian and leave the names of all cic names by the International Commission on other species in the group as is. 3. Rename the Zoological Nomenclature (1956). Accordingly, species zebra longwing and leave the names of the Committee has decided to amend the scien- all other species in the group as is. 4. Rename tic name of this species from charitonius to this species zebra longwing and rename the charithonia. Vote 4-0. other species erato longwing, Isabella’s long- A number of NABA members contacted the wing, and large orange longwing. One Commit- Committee expressing the opinion that it would tee member’s preference was for option 3, the be a mistake to leave the English name for Hel- other three members preferred option 2. Thus iconius charithonia as the one word “Zebra” the vote was 3-1 to rename this species Zebra because this name is confusing and does not Heliconian. provide any group information. In our original list, we had intended to name this species zebra Zerene Fritillary Speyeria zerene. heliconian, to match the names Erato Helico- Emmel and Austin (1999) treated carolae, an nian, Isabella’s Heliconian, and Banded Orange isolated greater fritillary population in the Spring Heliconian. But, a Committee member at that Mountains of Nevada usually treated as a sub- time objected. species of Speyeria zerene, as a separate spe- The group name heliconian has been used cies, describing features that they state resemble by Klots (1951)(in his introduction to the group, features found in the species Speyeria coronis. but not actually as part of the name of any of the In many areas it is very difcult to distinguish species), by Brown and Mielke (1972) and by Zerene Fritillary, an extremely variable species, Holland (1930) who called this species the Yel- from Coronis Fritillary. Even if the Speyeria low-barred Heliconian. This group name relates population in the Spring Mountains has some directly to the scientic name which is derived features that seem Coronis-like it seems prema- from Mt. Helicon, home of the muses, a number ture to treat is as a separate species. The Com- of whom turn up as names of heliconian species. mittee decided to retain the status of the First Au contraire, longwing lacks any poetry at all. Edition. Vote 4-0. Those two g’s at the end of long and wing clog 15 Atlantis Fritillary Speyeria atlantis. and if any proof does exist it remains – to our From the available published evidence it appears knowledge – unpublished. Scott et al. provided that there may be two species of Atlantis Frit- a narrative describing how they see the relation- illary in parts of Manitoba, Alberta, Colorado ships in the atlantis group, but they provided and the Black Hills of South Dakota because almost no data to substantiate that narrative. at each of these localities people have reported Scott et al. described differences between the presence of atlantis group fritillaries that caterpillars of atlantis and hesperis and said fall into two phenotypes. However, knowledge “The hesperis larva is almost solid black (thus of the relationships among these populations the two middorsal lines are brown and not is murky. Scott (1988), focusing on silvered very noticeable) with black-tipped orange scoli versus unsilvered forms of atlantis concluded (branching spines)(Fig. 40) whereas sorocko that they were most likely polymorphic forms of [stated to be a subspecies of atlantis in the one species. Klassen et al. (1989) treated pop- southern Rockies] has more of a pattern (mot- ulations in this group as two species, Atlantis tled black & brown) with two middorsal creamy Fritillary, Speyeria atlantis and Northwestern lines and black-tipped orange-tan scoli (Fig. Fritillary, Speyeria electa, saying “Some authors 41).” But it does not appear that these dif- consider… electa to be actually a subspecies of ferences can be used to identify a caterpillar the Atlantis Fritillary and not a true species.” as hesperis or atlantis. Scott et al. reported Bird et al. (1995) also treated atlantis and electa that “larvae of hesperis and sorocko reared by as two species, saying “[atlantis] is duller and Spomer …were identical to Scott’s larvae of more heavily marked than [electa]” and that these … except the photo of hesperis larva has “S. atlantis hollandi is larger .. than S. electa the scoli only orangish-tan.” Scott et al. then beani.” reported that “Spomer reared Black Hills lurana Hooper (1973) stated that “At Meadow Lake and his photos (Fig. 39) prove that it is identi- Park the author [Hooper] found evidence of cal to Colorado hesperis, although the scoli cross breeding between S. a. hollandi and S. a. may be a bit paler (orange-tan).” Thus one can Helena,” however he failed to publish that evi- conclude that orange versus orange-tan scoli dence. Scott et al. (1998) said “Hooper (1973) does not allow identication. In addition, an wrote that the two interbreed at Meadow Lake examination of Scott et al.’s Fig 39 shows two Park Sask., lending hope to the one-species quite noticeable middorsal lines on the reported theory. However, N. Kondla recently examined lurana caterpillar, which appears much more those Meadow Lake Park specimens and found similar to their illustration of atlantis hollandi them to represent merely unusually dark Spey- (Fig. 42) than to their illustration of hesperis eria aphrodite manitoba, thus this was a case (Fig. 40). Thus noticeable middorsal lines do of misidentication, not intergradation.” The not allow one to characterize a caterpillar as foregoing is unfortunately an example of what atlantis or hesperis. occurs far too often, an author makes a state- Among those who believe there are two ment, presenting no actual data to support it, species of the atlantis group occurring sympat- then another author states that the rst author rically in Manitoba-Alberta, in Colorado, and in was wrong, presenting no actual data to support the Black Hills of South Dakota, there are dif- that statement. fering opinions as to which population to associ- Scott et al. (1998) stated that “Much explo- ate with eastern atlantis and which to associate ration by Klassen et al. (1989), Jim Troubridge, with “hesperis.” For example, if there are two and others has proved [italics added] that in the species in the Black Hills, there is no strong pub- Duck Mtn.-Riding Mts. Area of Manitoba, den- lished evidence that would show which of the nisi and hollandi occur within ight distance two should be associated with hesperis (Scott et of each other yet do not interbreed.” However, al. place lurana with hesperis, others disagree) Klassen et al. provided no data about possible or if possibly one of them should be treated as hybridization and did not discuss this at all, a full species in its own right. In addition, the 16 description of caterpillars, by Scott et al., of nau- that they are therefore one species – chariclea. sicaa, dorothea and capitanensis as quite dif- Examining the drawings it would be possible ferent from more northern populations, together to conclude that there are differences between with the nding by Glassberg (2000) that the eye most populations previously considered to be color of nausicaa is unique among the atlantis titania and those previously considered to be group (dorothea and capitanensis have yet to chariclea. No information was provided about be checked) suggest that these three taxa may the number of specimens from each population together be a distinct species. whose genitalia were examined. Even if, upon Statements in Scott et al. (1998) such as further study, the genitalia of all populations is “So the subspecies scheme we propose works found to be essentially identical, a conclusion out best if nikias is a ssp. of S. hesperis, and that all populations are part of the same species if “electa” (sorocko) is a spp. of S. atlantis” would not be warranted. There are many clearly clearly indicate that scientic research is needed distinct species that have very similar genitalia. to determine the validity of these hypotheses. Some workers still believe that there are The Committee decided to maintain First Edi- two species, one boreal zone (former “titania”) tion status as a stopgap – that status quite possi- and one tundra zone (chariclea). Layberry et bly is incorrect but any change made at this time al. (1998) state “the tundra form ies in alpine will also quite possibly be incorrect. Vote 4-0. meadows with the taiga form occurring in the boreal forest of nearby valleys with no evidence Mountain Fritillary napaea. of hybridization. In central Alaska the tundra The type locality of napaea is the Tyrolean Alps, form is strictly biennial, but the taiga form ies in Austria. Recently, Tuzov et al. (2000) treated every year. In other areas of northern Canada northern populations, including those in North the two habitat forms intergrade completely.” America, as a distinct species, alaskensis (Hol- There do not appear to be any published scien- land 1900). While possibly correct, we know tic data that bear on this question. The Com- of no denitive data nor any recently published mittee decided to retain the traditional status of data supporting this treatment and decided to the First Edition, that there are two species in maintain First Edition status. Vote 4-0. North America – chariclea and a more southerly taiga-dwelling species. Vote 4-0. Astarte Fritillary Boloria astarte. Since Shepard has shown that titania (an Tuzov et al. (2000) treated the far northern sub- Old World species) is not in the New World, species distincta as a full species. We know of this species needs both a new scientic and new no denitive data nor any recently published English name (because the name Titania’s Fritil- data supporting this treatment and decided to lary is used for Boloria titania in Europe). The maintain First Edition status. Vote 4-0. oldest available scientic name (for populations previously referred to as titania) is montinus Purplish Fritillary Boloria montinus (Scudder) Argynnis. Proc. Essex Inst., 3: 166 from Titania Fritillary Boloria titania/ (1863). TL White Mtns., New Hampshire. Thus Arctic Fritillary Boloria chariclea. the scientic name of populations previously Shepard (1999) showed that New World popu- referred to as Boloria titania now becomes Bol- lations are not titania. He illustrated drawings oria montinus, while far northern populations of male genitalia of true titania and chariclea remain Boloria chariclea. Vote 4-0. from Europe as well as examples of all named An English name that has been used for North American subspecies in the complex. A a number of the populations of Boloria monti- comparison of the drawings show that none of nus (in its current sense) is purple or purplish the North American populations matches titania fritillary. Because many of the populations do but that they are similar to chariclea. have a purplish cast (but aren’t really purple) the Shepard stated that the male genitalia of all Committee has decided to re-name this species North American populations are identical and Purplish Fritillary. Vote 4-0. 17 Arachne Checkerspot/ Dotted Checkerspot any crescent, the Committee decided to name Polydryas arachne/minuta. this species Pale-banded Crescent. Vote 3-1. Opler (1999) treated these taxa as conspecic. Because there exist no denitive data, nor data Chestnut Crescent argentea. published subsequent to the First Edition, the A male of this species was collected by Hoe Committee decided to retain the status of the Chuah on Nov. 14, 1993 at Peñitas, Hidalgo First Edition, treating these taxa as distinct spe- County, Texas and was illustrated by Chuah and cies. Vote 4-0. Cushman (1995). Other specimens found in the United States are illustrated by Bordelon and Chinati Checkerspot/Theona Checkerspot Knudson (2000). The overall color of the males Thessalia chinatiensis/theona. above is chestnut, and this feature is unusual Austin and Smith (1999) illustrated a number of among the crescents – perhaps 2 other species specimens collected in western Texas that they (atronia and otanes, both ranging from Mexico believe are hybrids between chinatiensis and to Panama) of the approximately 40 species theona. Theona is an extremely variable spe- share this trait. The Committee decided to name cies, and looking at the individuals illustrated, it this species Chestnut Crescent. Vote 4-0. is not clear that most of them necessarily are of a hybrid origin. If there is occasional hybridiza- Northern Crescent Phyciodes selenis. Scott tion between these taxa, that, in and of itself, is (1994) stated that the name cocyta (Cramer) has not sufcient grounds for treating them as con- priority over selenis. The basis for this is that, specic. Recently, seemingly pure populations although the type of cocyta (Cramer) is lost, of both chinatiensis and theona have been seen it was illustrated in “De Uitlandische Kapellen at the same location within Big Bend National voorkomende in de drie waerelddeelen Asia, Park, but not at the same time (Wauer, 2001). en America, vol 2.” 1777 (1779) and The Committee decided that it was premature to Scott, who illustrated copies of the original lump these taxa and decided to retain the status illustrations, claimed that they must be selenis. of the First Edition. Vote 4-0. There are problems with this conclusion. First, cocyta was described as coming from Surinam. Cuban Crescent/Pale-banded Crescent Of course, errors in determining locations where Phyciodes frisia/tulcis. species originated were not that rare. To con- The Caribbean taxon frisia is supercially quite clude, however, that an illustration was truly of distinct from the mainland taxon tulcis. How- a species from Canada and not Surinam, in our ever, following Scott (1986) the Committee view the illustration would need to be extremely treated these taxa as one species in the First Edi- accurate and completely and unequivocally rec- tion. We have now examined the overlooked ognizable as the species in question. After look- work, relating to this species, of Higgins (1981). ing at the illustration in Scott, we conclude that In it, he showed that, in addition to wing pattern neither of these conditions are met and that it differences, the male genitalia of the two taxa is speculation to suggest that the painting of are identiably distinct. Based on this informa- cocyta was based upon a specimen of Northern tion, the Committee has decided to treat tulcis as Crescent. distinct from frisia. Vote 4-0. Scott (1986b) reared Northern Crescents The newly split Phyciodes tulcis needs an from the Colorado foothills and released females English name. This species has been called in front of male Pearl Crescents on the plains. tulcis crescent, a scientic name masquerading Mating occurred readily with the production of as an English name, by Tilden and Smith (1986) hybrids and there appeared to be no reproduc- and by Opler (1992). A policy of this Committee tive isolation. This contrasted with attempted is a preference for not using a scientic name as natural, un-forced, matings of Pearl Crescent vs. an English name. Because this species has one Tawny Crescent and of Pearl Crescent vs. Field of the most prominent pale hindwing bands of Crescent where no matings occurred. 18 Many observers in a wide geographical lett family. The woman who nanced his and band, from New England through Wisconsin, McDunnough’s privately published Contribu- Michigan and Minnesota, report that is it impos- tions to the Natural History of the sible to distinguish these taxa. Porter and Muel- of North America, was a Jessie D. Gillett and ler (1999) examined allozymes from populations Barnes was married to Jessie Gillett’s sister, of crescents from northern Michigan, mapped as Charlotte. We know of no case where an completely within the range of Northern Cres- ending “e” was dropped in creating a scientic cent by Scott (1986b) and by Opler (1992) and name from a family name. And nally, Hol- from Ohio, mapped as completely within the land, who was a contemporary of Barnes, called range of Pearl Crescent by Scott and by Opler. this species Gillett’s checkerspot. The Commit- Porter and Mueller found that all populations tee decided to change the English name of this shared similar alleles, indicating that all indi- species to Gillett’s Checkerspot. Vote 4-0. viduals were part of a single species. Porter (personal communication) reports that some Oreas Comma/Gray Comma believe that crescents used in the Porter and Polygonia oreas/progne. Mueller study were from two tharos popula- Opler (1999) treated these taxa as conspecic. tions, although only Northern Crescents are Because we know of no denitive data regard- shown on range maps published by Scott and by ing the status of these taxa, nor any published Opler at the location where Porter and Mueller subsequent to the First Edition, the Committee obtained their “Northern” Crescents. decided to retain the status of the First Edition. Although the preponderance of the evidence Vote 4-0. favors the hypothesis that Northern and Pearl Crescents are a single species, the Committee Compton Tortoiseshell Nymphalis vaualbum decided to await more compelling data before from Nymphalis vau-album. lumping these taxa. Vote 4-0. A recent ruling of the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature said that, in sci- Gillett’s Checkerspot Euphydryas gilletii entic names, hyphens are to be dropped and from Gillette’s Checkerspot. words combined except article 32(b)iii “If the This species was described by Barnes in 1897. rst element of a published compound species- To the best of our knowledge, the rst English group name is a Latin letter used to denote a name given to this species was Gillett’s checker- character of the taxon, it is to be connected to spot, by Holland (1931). Ferris and Brown the remainder of the name by a hyphen.” The (1980) gave the name as Gillette’s checkerspot example given is c-album. Since vau is not a and Pyle (1981) and later authors, including the Latin letter and the code species a “a Latin First Edition, followed this spelling. Bird et al. letter” not letters, using the new rule the correct (1995) stated that “this species was named after scientic name for this taxon should be vaual- Clarence P. Gillett, who was an entomologist bum. Although the Committee believes that this at Colorado State University” in the 1800’s. new “rule” is completely unnecessary, we reluc- If Barnes demonstrably did name this species tantly agreed to follow it. Vote 3-1. for the Colorado State University entomologist, the English name should remain as Gillette’s Kamehameha Lady Vanessa tameneamea. Checkerspot because Clarence P. Gillette actu- This species is a Hawaiian Islands endemic. It ally spelled his name with an “e” at the end. has been called Kamehameha by Pyle (1981) Unfortunately, Barnes, in his original and by Tilden and Smith (1986), Kamehameha description in 1897, did not give any indication buttery by Scott (1986) and Kamehameha lady for whom he was naming the buttery. How- by Opler (1999) and by Glassberg (2001). The ever, as Zirlin (2001) demonstrates, the available Committee has previously decided not to use evidence strongly suggests that Barnes intended the word “buttery” as a group name. But, there to name the buttery after someone in the Gil- should be a group name for this species, rather 19 than just the naked Kamehameha. Since this to these species (Barcant called Malachite, the species is a lady, we have decided to name it bamboo page). The Committee decided not to Kamehameha Lady. This keeps a strong con- call this species a peacock, since we have called nection with the historical name while at the the genus Anartia peacocks and, while same time letting everyone know what kind of is related to Anartia, they do not form a natural buttery it is. Vote 4-0. group. The Committee decided to name this species Rusty-tipped Page, using the name that Cuban Peacock Anartia chrysopelea has had the widest currency. Vote 4-0. from Caribbean Peacock. This species was called Caribbean Peacock in Red-spotted Admiral Limenitis arthemis the First Edition and by Miller (1992). The from Red-spotted Purple. Committee used the name because it was our Although, with good reason, essentially all procedure to preferentially use the name chosen authors over the past 50 years have lumped the in Miller (if the name was an actual English taxa L. arthemis arthemis and L. arthemis asty- name with wide currency and the name did not anax, none of them has given an English name have some type of major problem) in order to to the species, instead referring to each subspe- harmonize as many name sets as possible. cies as White Admiral and Red-spotted Purple However, Miller incorrectly attributed this respectively (In the First Edition the Committee name to Opler and Krizek (1984) and to Scott provisionally used the name Red-spotted Purple (1986). Opler and Krizek called this species in reference to the whole species, a solution that Hübner’s anartia, while Scott treated chrysope- the Committee recognized as unsatisfactory at lea as a subspecies of Anartia lytrea and called that time). The Committee has now decided to the lumped taxon, Caribbean peacock. Riley provide a more appropriate English name for called this species Huebner’s anartia. So, prior the whole species – Red-spotted Admiral. This to Miller, no one had called this species, A. English name comports with the placement of chrysopelea, Caribbean Peacock, and with good the species in the genus Limenitis, whose mem- reason – this species is restricted to . bers are generally referred to as admirals, and Because the Committee followed Miller in error, with the fact that this species is the only North and because Caribbean Peacock is a poor name American admiral with red spots on the basal for this species, the Committee has decided to underside wing areas. The names of the subspe- rename it Cuban Peacock. Vote 4-0. cies will remain Red-spotted Purple and White Admiral, an imperfect solution that maintains Rusty-tipped Page Siproeta epaphus. continuity with the past. Vote 4-0. There is a specimen of this species in the collec- tion of Oregon State University at Corvallis that Lorquin’s Admiral/Weidemeyer’s Admiral is labeled “New Mexico: Dona Ana Co., Mesilla Limenitis lorquini/weidemeyerii. (near border), 13 Dec. 1960. Chs. Bruhn.” So far These species have long been known to hybrid- as we know, this species has not been recorded ize where they meet in the western Great Basin. from the northern tier of Mexican states, except Porter (1990), based upon an estimation of gene for Tamaulipas. But, this is a large, powerful ow derived from allozyme frequencies, argued buttery. It has been called rusty-tipped page by that they should be treated as conspecic. More Barcant (1970) and by Opler (1999) and orange- recently Boyd, et al. (2000) argued that, because tipped peacock by Warren (1999). This species the zone of hybridization is much narrower than, is closely related to Malachite, but does not for example, that between L. arthemis arthemis much resemble it in color or pattern (although it and L. a. astyanax, and because there appears is similar in size and shape). We assume that the to be signicant selection against females in at name “page” is intended in the usage of the word least one of the hybrid zones, that their specic meaning “attendant” or “servant,” although we determinations should be retained. Although have no idea of why this thought was applied arguing for conspecicity, Porter (1990) did say 20 “there does appear to be a partial intrinsic bar- Tropical Leafwing/Florida Leafwing rier to genetic exchange.” An examination of the Anaea aidea/oridalis. available data clearly indicates that Lorquin’s Opler (1999) treated these as one species and Weidemeyer’s Admirals are extremely although he treated them as distinct in an earlier closely related and that viewing Weidemeyer’s work (1992) that was the basis for the status in Admiral as a univoltine subspecies of the other- the First Edition. Because we know of no new wise multivoltine Lorquin’s Admiral would be published data regarding the species status of justiable. However, because these taxa have these taxa, the Committee voted to retain First traditionally been treated as separate species, Edition status. Vote 4-0. because the hybrid zones appear to be narrow, with signicantly fewer hybrid females than Dusky Emperor idyja. expected, the Committee decided to retain First Freidlander (1987) lumped Mexican (A. idyja Edition status. Vote 4-0. argus) and Caribbean (A. idyja idyja) popula- tions although these populations are allopatric Orion Cecropian odius from Orion. and their appearance is quite different. The In view of the Committee’s decision to name His- Mexican subspecies has strayed into extreme toris acheronta, Tailed Cecropian (see below), southeastern Arizona on at least three occa- the Committee has decided to provide the group sions. Because it is not “dusky,” and because name cecropian to this species. The new name is it has very prominent pale bands across the Orion Cecropian. Vote 3-1. forewings that easily differentiate it from other North American emperors, we have decided to Tailed Cecropian Historis acheronta. name Asterocampa idyja argus ‘Cream-banded’ This species was placed on the dubious list in Dusky Emperor, with the thought that further the First Edition. Kendall and McGuire (1984), study may well show that it should be consid- illustrated a clearly identiable specimen report- ered a separate species. Vote 4-0. edly collected by Veryl Board and John Hafernik on August 13, 1969 at Shafter, Presidio County, Little Wood-Satyr Megisto cymela. Texas. Although not yet recorded from northern Oliver (1982) stated that both viola and cymela Mexico, (it is only listed as far north as Veracruz exist in northern and central Florida, but he did by de la Maza 1987) this is a large species with a not describe in detail how he decided that indi- powerful ight. It is known to undertake migra- vidual Megisto were cymela or viola. He stated tions in South America (Williams 1930). In light that “cymela may have up to four broods” in of the above, the Committee decided to place Florida based upon the existence of specimens this species on the main checklist. Vote 4-0. labeled as from April, July, October and Decem- Its closest relative, Historis odius, is called ber. He also reared caterpillars from Pennsyl- Orion. Both species of Historis feed on Cecro- vania and Florida and found that when reared pia trees, a very unusual hostplant for butter- under warm temperatures and a 16 hour light ies. Unlike Orion, this species has a small tail. schedule, Pennsylvania caterpillars developed Opler (1999) called it acheronta; Riley (1975) without diapause while those from Florida did called it cadmus (although he used this as the diapause. He concluded that development was English name for the whole species, he goes on correlated with cymela having multiple broods to talk about H. a. cadmus as being the Jamai- in Florida, and that cymela and viola were prob- can subspecies); and Barcant (1970) called it the ably distinct, but his one-page note still treated Venezuela shoemaker (a name that won’t last). the two taxa as subspecies. On the basis of Oli- Neither acheronta nor cadmus has an English ver’s note, Opler (1984, 1992) treated viola as meaning. The Committee decided to use the a separate species. The NABA First Edition fol- name Tailed Cecropian, although one member lowed the taxonomy of Opler (1992). preferred the name cadmus. Vote 3-1. More recently, Catling and Calhoun (1997) showed that all purported phenotypic differ- 21 ences between cymela and viola vary continu- as wet, open spruce and tamarack forests around ously and independently. In addition, they pro- bogs. vided evidence that the few specimens that On the basis of the reported (but unfortu- Oliver used as a basis for his assertion of mul- nately not illustrated) signicant differences in tiple broods for cymela were either mislabeled genitalic structure and habitat, the Committee or misidentied, and that, contrary to Oliver’s has decided to recognize mancinus as a distinct belief, there is only one brood of any Megisto species from disa. The habitat-appropriate name in Florida. Oliver’s nding that Florida Megisto taiga alpine has been used by Layberry et al. and entered diapause when reared under warm tem- by Opler (1999) and the Committee decided to peratures is consistent with the fact that there is adopt the name Taiga Alpine. Vote for species but a single spring brood of Megisto in Florida. status, 4-0. Vote on English name, 4-0. The signicance of Oliver’s nding that Penn- sylvania cymela do not diapause when exposed Magdalena Alpine magdalena. to warm temperatures and altered photoperiod Layberry et al. (1998) “reluctantly” treated is unknown, but, since all Florida Megisto are mackinleyensis as a distinct species, saying that single-brooded, it is of no relevance to the “all other arctic butteries with disjunct ranges viola/cymela question. The Catling and Calhoun in the Rockies are considered to be a single paper presents compelling evidence that viola species.” They accepted Hilchie (1990) because and cymela are one species. Based upon this “populations of magdalena show no tendency in evidence, the Committee voted to treat viola as variation towards mackinleyensis, even in north- a subspecies of cymela. Vote 4-0. ern where the ranges of the two species approach each other.” Common Ringlet Coenonympha tullia. The closest the two taxa are known to Layberry et al. (1998) treated nipisiquit as a salt- approach each other is approximately 500 miles. marsh inhabiting population in eastern Canada, The habitats in which the two taxa are found is citing unpublished (at that time) work by R.P. identical. The major phenotypic difference is Webster. However, upon publishing the work that individuals of mackinleyensis have a dull, cited by Layberry et al., Webster (1999) stated reddish-brown patch on the forewing, although that further work is needed to determine the not all individuals can be identied on this basis, status of nipisiquit and continued to treat this and that females have slightly different antennal taxon as a subspecies. The Committee decided club color. to retain First Edition status. Vote 4-0. On these bases, many taxa with disjunct ranges would need to be treated as separate Taiga Alpine/Disa Alpine species. Tuzov et al. (1997) continued to Erebia mancinus/disa. treat mackinleyensis as a subspecies of magda- Layberry, et al. (1998) treated mancinus as dis- lena. Pending further study, the Committee has tinct from disa, restricting disa to the extreme decided to retain First Edition status. Vote 4-0. north (and Eurasia). They reported differences in genitalia as follows: “We found that there Four-dotted Alpine Erebia dabanensis. are several distinct differences in the genitalia Layberry et al (1998) and Opler (1999) treated between disa (both the North American and Eur- North American populations as youngi, distinct asian subspecies) and mancinus. For example, from Asian dabanensis. No data in support of the triangular process that projects anteriorly this treatment were presented. Vote to retain from the bottom of the genitalia (the saccus) is First Edition status, 4-0. a blunt triangle in disa, only slightly longer than its basal width, but it is a long, narrow, spine- Reddish Alpine Erebia kozhantsikovi. like process in mancinus, 3-4 times as long as Tuzov et al. (1997), Layberry et al. (1998) and wide.” Also, the habitat cited for disa is wet Opler (1999) treated North American popula- boggy tundra while that for mancinus was given tions as lafontainei, distinct from Old World 22 kozhantshikovi. No data in support of this treat- The Committee agrees that careful pub- ment were presented. The Committee decided lished studies are needed before changing the to retain First Edition status. Vote 4-0. status of this species. Vote 4-0.

Eskimo Alpine Erebia occulta. Early Arctic rosovi. Layberry et al. (1998) treated occulta as a junior Troubridge and Parshall (1988) described Oeneis synonym of anyuica, (citing Dubatolov. 1992). philipi from the Yukon Territory. It is stated to However, Tuzov et al. (1997, 2000) continued be an inhabitant of open spruce bogs in taiga, to treat occulta and anyuica as distinct species. feeding on cotton-grass, while the very similar The Committee decided to retain First Edition O. polixenes is essentially a dry tundra species status. Vote 4-0. feeding on sedges and grasses. Troubridge and Parshall stated that differ- Ridings’ Satyr ridingsii. entiation from Polixenes “is easy in some loca- Scott (1998) described wyomingo as a subspe- tions and more difcult in others.” In general, cies of ridingsii, distinguishing it from the nom- they are separated by the larger size of philipi, inate subspecies on the bases of its later ight by the gray-brown upper surface of phillipi, usu- times and reported gully perching (males of ally lacking the orange ush of polixenes, and by nominate ridingsii usually perch on hilltops). the more heavily striated hindwing below. Con- But, males of many buttery species exhibit sistent differences between caterpillars of the different mate-searching behaviors under dif- two species are described. They reported nd- ferent conditions. Scott stated that phenotypi- ing philipi and polixenes ying together at three cally the populations are indistinguishable. Scott different locations in Alaska and the Yukon. On (1986a) reported ight times of ridingsii as the basis of the information presented in Trou- June-early July at low altitude and mid July- bridge and Parshall, the Committee decided to early August at high altitude. Ferris and Brown recognize this taxon as a full species. Vote 4-0. (1980) stated that “In some localities Riding’s Layberry et al. (1998) stated that an exami- Satyr is always double-brooded, and a favor- nation of the original type of the Siberian Oeneis able year will bring out at least a partial second rosovi Kurentzov 1970 [not 1960 as stated] brood in other localities.” Opler (1999) treated showed that philipi is the same species as rosovi, wyomingo as a distinct species from ridingsii. which was described rst (and from an area of In the absence of any evidence that these popu- Siberia where philipi occurs) and thus has prior- lations are genetically distinct, the Committee ity as a name. Tuzov et al. (1997) treated rosovi decided to retain the status of the First Edition. as a synonym of chione Austaut 1911 which Vote 4-0. they, in turn, treated as a (probable) subspecies of Oeneis norna (Thunberg 1791). Others are White-veined Arctic Oeneis taygete. of the opinion that norna should be treated as a Tuzov et al. (1997) treated taygete as distinct subspecies of polixenes Fabricius 1775. Hab- from bore and their illustrations of the genitalia itat and foodplants given for both are similar of each show a clear difference. Layberry et al. (Tuzov et al. 1997, Layberry et al. 1998) and (1998) treated taygete as conspecic with Old different from that described for philipi. World bore saying “Populations have been dis- Kurentzov (1970), in his original descrip- covered in the east and the west where white- tion (kindly translated from the Russian for veined and non-white-veined individuals occur the Committee by Boris Yevtshikhevich of Red together with intermediate forms and a great Shift Technologies), said “Based on size and deal of variation in the sex patch. It seems more common habitat, O. rosovi is similar to O. jutta likely that the white veins are a characteristic of but its genitalia place it in the group of species taygete with a broad area of inter- that have hook-curved tops of valves.” Thus, gradation in the west, but more work is needed the habitat given for rosovi is spruce bog (simi- to fully resolve the issue.” lar to Jutta), rather than tundra. 23 Tuzov et al. (1997) stated that there were this species, spelled the species name as mexica- genitalic differences between norna and polix- nus and so the Committee decided to amend the enes, but their own illustrations of the genitalia name to mexicanus from mexicana. Vote 4-0. of these species show them to be extremely sim- ilar. Since philipi is distinct from polixenes, Valeriana Skipper Codatractus mysie from if norna is treated as a subspecies of polixenes Valeriana Cloudywing Thorybes valeriana. then philipi must be treated as distinct from Burns (1996) provided illustrations of a series norna. However, at this time the possible rela- of genitalic drawings that clearly establish that tionship to chitone is unknown. the species listed as Thorybes valeriana in the Because neither philipi, rosovi, chitone, nor First Edition belongs in the genus Codatractus, norna were included in the First Edition, the not Thorybes. Also in that paper, Burns argued Committee decided to accept the preponderance that the correct scientic species name for this of the evidence (as opposed to a compelling species is mysie, not valeriana. The species demonstration) and to use the name rosovi for valeriana was described by Plõtz (1881). Evans this species. Vote 4-0. (1952) synonymized mysie Dyar (described from This species now needs an English name. the “Patagonia Mountains, Arizona”) with vale- Layberry et al. (1998) and Opler (1999) called riana. Burns (1996) examined Plõtz’s unpub- it “Philip’s arctic.” The scientic name is lished color painting of his Eudamus valeriana now rosovi and the Committee prefers to avoid and stated that the name valeriana cannot apply new patronymic names whenever possible. The to mysie because “Besides serious discrepan- known range in North America is limited, but it cies in color pattern, each antenna of the painted also occurs in Siberia. Its habitat is open spruce skipper has a club with a long and only mod- bog, but Jutta Arctic is found here also, while its erately swollen body that abruptly dwindles to cotton-grass foodplant is used by other arctics. a very short, delicate and sharply reexed apic- The ight period of this species appears to begin ulus. All species of Codatractus, including earlier than most arctics and to end earlier than [mysie], have an unusual antennal club: it is almost all. Accordingly, the Committee decided basally stout and apically tapered but evenly to name this species Early Arctic. Vote 4-0. arcuate throughout its length – nothing is sharply reexed, and it is impossible to distinguish an Guava Skipper polybius apiculus.” However, many museum specimens from Phocides palemon. lose antennas, and it is not impossible that, faced Although on the cover of the First Edition with a specimen missing its antennas, the illus- Guava Skipper is listed as Phocides polybius, trator simply painted in generalized antennas. in the list itself it is included as “Guava Skip- More recently Burns (2001) illustrated the paint- per P. palemon (=polybius). The name given ing of the type of valeriana and showed that it in Opler (1992) was Phocides polybius and so clearly differs in pattern from mysie, which is this should have been the name used. Palemon the species that ies in southeastern Arizona. (Cramer) 1777 is a homonym of Caterocepha- Based upon the above, the Committee lus palaemon (Pallas) 1771 because both were decided to change the scientic name of this originally described in the genus Papilio and species to Codatractus mysie. Vote 4-0. because even though differing in the use of “ae” The Committee now considered the ques- [diphthong] or “e”, they are of the same deriva- tion of whether the change in scientic name tion and meaning [Palaemon (=palemon) was a necessitated a change in the English name. Opler Greek sea god], and are thus ruled by Article (1999) recently called this species desert mot- 58.1 of the Code to be homonyms. The Commit- tled skipper, based upon the use of that name by tee decided to correct this error. Vote 4-0. Warren and Llorente (1999). This option made sense to the Committee only if one intended to Mexican Longtail Polythrix mexicana. call members of the genus Codatractus, mottled- Freeman (1969), in his original description of skippers (as Warren and Llorente did). Thus 24 we would have white-crescent mottled-skipper sia, and placed jalapus in it. His illustrations and Arizona mottled-skipper. Although some of the genitalia of jalapus and athesis Hewitson believe that members of the genus Codatractus (the species that he makes the type of Thessia) are recognizable as a group in the eld, the make clear that these species are closely related. Committee is of the opinion that few observers However, he does not demonstrate that leaving would intuitively group Arizona Skipper, White- and placing, respectively, these two species in crescent Longtail, and Valeriana Skipper. In the genus Achalarus would create a polyphyletic addition, mysie is not really a desert inhabitant, genus and there is no discussion or explanation being found instead in sparse oak and juniper of why it would be incorrect to leave jalapus habitats in mountain foothills. We believe that in the genus Achalarus. Scott (1986) illustrated an advantage of standardized English names is crude drawings of portions of the genitalia of that they will ultimately prove to be more stable Achalarus albociliatus, toxeus and jalapus that, than scientic names. Accordingly, the Commit- although not necessarily demonstrating close tee decided to retain the name Valeriana for this afnity of these species, clearly do not preclude species, but change the group name from cloud- it. The Committee decided to retain First Edi- ywing to skipper. Vote 4-0. tion status. Vote 4-0.

Double-striped Longtail Urbanus belli. Gold-costa Skipper caicus An old specimen was located in the American from Caicus Skipper. Museum of Natural History (New York) col- The Committee discussed, at length, the pluses lection by Warren (1997). It has recently been and minuses of providing new English names called Bell’s greentail (Warren and Llorente for species that currently use a scientic name 1999). This species is one of only a few longtails as the rst part of their English name. The that have two parallel stripes on the hindwing Committee decided to move very cautiously below (most have the stripes broken into spots). in this area, changing these names only when Besides Plain Longtail (brown above), viter- 1. the current “English” name is of uncertain boana from Mexico (which may possibly be pronunciation and 2. when an extremely suit- conspecic with belli) and dubius from Colom- able actual English name becomes available. bia, only the newly described vilhius from Ron- In this case, the Committee decided that the donia seems to share this pattern. The Commit- name Gold-costa Skipper was greatly preferable tee decided to name this species Double-striped to Caicus Skipper because Caicus is of uncer- Longtail. Vote 4-0. tain pronunciation and because the gold-colored forewing costal margin of this species is a very Golden Banded-Skipper Autochton cellus useful mark for identication of this species in from Golden-banded Skipper. the eld. One Committee member thought that Although the Committee has generally not Caicus was not of uncertain pronunciation and changed the group name of well-known species should not be changed. Vote 3-1. to match newly created English group names, for example keeping Silver-spotted Skipper (not White Spurwing Antigonus emorsus. Silverdrop), preferring to consider these changes This species was listed in the First Edition but at some future date, changing the group name of without an English name. Because most spe- this species to conform to its proper group name cies in the genus Antigonus have a more or less – banded-skipper – is easy and painless for developed “spur” on their hindwing, the Com- almost everyone. A simple orthogonal change mittee decided to name species in this genus makes the new English name of this species spurwings. Because, unlike other spurwings, the Golden Banded-Skipper. Vote 4-0. species emorsus is mainly white (summer form) or with considerable white (winter form), the Jalapus Cloudywing Achalarus jalapus. Committee decided to name this species White Steinhauser (1989) erected a new genus, Thes- Spurwing. One Committee member thought that 25 this species’ wing-shape was not very spur-like False Duskywing Gesta gesta. and the summer form wasn’t very white. Vote Opler (1999) treated gesta and invisus as distinct 3-0, 1 abstention. species. Because there is no published informa- tion supporting this treatment, we retain First Red-studded Skipper Noctuana stator. Edition status. Vote 4-0. NABA (2000) reported and illustrated an indi- vidual of this species that was photographed at Common Checkered-Skipper/ the Santa Ana NWR, Hidalgo County, Texas on White Checkered-Skipper October 23, 1999 by Bob Stewart. An English Pyrgus communis/albescens. name is needed. Warren and Llorente (1999) The species status of Pyrgus communis albes- have called it red-studded skipper. The individ- cens has been controversial. Burns (2000), in an ual illustrated in American Butteries was very exhaustive and careful work, illustrating almost worn and dull. The orange, or red-orange, spots 400 individual genitalia (out of over 3000 dis- are much brighter and more prominent on fresh sected), now shows for the rst time that males individuals. The Committee decided to name of the Pyrgus communis complex can be sepa- this species Red-studded Skipper. Vote 4-0. rated into two groups based upon a difference in the genitalia. Sickle-winged Skipper thraso. That these two taxa retain distinct and diag- Opler (1999) placed this species in the genus nostic male genitalia over very large areas sug- and treated our northern population, gests that they are separate species. However, a tamenund as distinct from the more southern few points make us pause before treating these thraso presumably based upon unpublished taxa as separate species. Porter and Shapiro work by Andy Warren. Because there is no pub- (1990) have shown that differences in male gen- lished basis for changing these names, we retain italia do not necessarily result in a bar to suc- First Edition status. Vote 4-0. cessful mating. Females of the two putative species remain inseparable by any means. Both White-patched Skipper asychis. genitalic types were found together in limited Janzen et al. (1998) treated georgina (Central areas, but there are no data that would exclude America) as distinct from asychis (South Amer- the possibility that both types can be the off- ican) without presenting data to support this spring of a single female. Rearing experiments treatment. Although many knowledgeable indi- should be conducted. However, given the fact viduals believe these species to be distinct, there that, to our knowledge, there is no known exam- is no published information available. There- ple of a skipper species that has dimorphic (as fore, we retain First Edition status. Vote 4-0. opposed to variable) male genitalia, the Com- mittee reluctantly decided to recognize albes- Slaty Skipper Chiomara mithrax. cens as a full species. Vote 3-1. Although this species was listed in the First Edi- In the First Edition the English name of this tion, it was not provided with an English name taxon was listed as ‘White’ Common Check- and the only heretofore used English name we ered-Skipper. It now becomes White Check- know of is black-spotted skipper, used on a ered-Skipper. Vote 4-0. regional list of Mexican species (Warren and Llorente 1999). To our eyes, black spots are not Mojave Sootywing libya from the feature that impresses one upon rst view- Mohave Sootywing. The Committee recognized ing this species. Rather, the blue or slate-gray an inconsistency in spelling in the First Edition, reectance is what one sees. Names considered where in other cases spelling was Mojave but included black-spotted skipper, speckle-banded for this species it was Mohave. The Committee skipper, stone-gray skipper, mysterious skipper decided to rectify this mistake and has renamed and slaty skipper. The Committee decided to this species Mojave Sootywing. Vote 4-0. name this species Slaty Skipper. Vote 3-1. 26 Saltbush Sootywing Hesperopsis alpheus. [emphasis added] distinct species on the basis Opler (1999) treated gracielae as distinct from of differences in phenotype, phenology, dis- alpheus. Because there are no published data to tribution and habitat. Layberry, et al. (1998) support this treatment, we retain First Edition treated comma, assiniboia and colorado as dis- status. Vote 4-0. tinct species, stating that “range of colorado broadly overlaps with comma in British Colum- Many-spotted Skipperling cingo. bia, although the two rarely occur together.” Opler (1999) treated aea (northern population) They stated that assiniboia and comma “occur to be distinct from cingo based on unpublished together in central Saskatchewan and near The work by A. Warren. Because there are no pub- Pas, Manitoba. lished data to support this treatment, we retain Scott (1998a) says “I use the name Hespe- First Edition status. Vote 4-0. ria colorado here, because J. Donald Lafontaine and Norbert Kondla have written to me that ssp. Banana Skipper thrax. assiniboia and manitoba are sympatric in aspen Introduced into Hawaii from Asia, this species parklands from Alberta (including the Cypress has been called banana skipper by Corbet, Hills) to Saskatchewan and Manitoba, where Pendlebury and Eliot (1978), by Scott (1986), they evidently do not interbreed, thus would by Tilden and Smith (1986), by Opler (1992) seem to be distinct species. (However, Paul and by Glassberg (2001). No other known Eng- Klassen wrote to me that specimens from lish name has been used. Its caterpillars feed on Thompson & Gillam in central Manitoba are bananas, and sugar and coconut palms. Since somewhat intermediate. Also, the photos of H. this is one of the few butteries whose caterpil- comma assinboia and H. c. “borealis” in the lars feed on bananas (although at least one other new Alberta Butteries book look very similar species of Erionota does), and the English name to each other suggesting that they are con- banana skipper has been widely used, the Com- specic…” mittee decided to use the name Banana Skipper. The Committee believes that in controversial Vote 4-0. cases, statements of sympatry need to be docu- mented by publication of data that clearly show Violet-patched Skipper tyrtaeus how individuals were determined to belong to from Monca telata. each taxon, that essentially all individuals could Telata was described by Herrich-Schaeffer and be reliably classed as belonging to one taxon has yellow spots; tyrtaeus was described by or the other, without hybridization occurring. Plötz and has white spots. In preparing the First The Committee decided to retain First Edition Edition we overlooked the work of Bell (1941) status. Vote 4-0. in which he treated telata and tyrtaeus as dis- tinct species and illustrated drawings that clearly Glowing Skipper Anatrytone mazai. indicate marked differences between the genita- This rare stray to the lower Rio Grande Valley of lia of the two taxa. Austin, et al. (1996) stated Texas was listed but not named in the First Edi- that telata and tyrtaeus are sympatric at Tikal. tion. There has been no known English name, Tyrtaeus is found in Mexico and Texas. but recently Warren and Llorente (1999) called The Committee now recognizes tyrtaeus as a it De la Maza’s skipper. Native from northern species distinct from telata and thus the species Mexico south to Costa Rica, it is a close rela- entering the United States is Monca tyrtaeus. tive of Delaware Skipper, with the underside of Vote 4-0. mazai an even more luminous orange. Disfavor- ing patronymic names, the Committee consid- Common Branded Skipper . ered two similar names, glowing skipper and Bird et al. (1995) treated assiniboia as a subspe- sunglow skipper, before deciding to name this cies of comma “for consistency with contem- species Glowing Skipper. Vote 3-1. porary literature” but said that they are likely 27 Toltec Roadside-Skipper tolteca Purple-washed Skipper Panoquina sylvicola. from Prenda Roadside-Skipper Amblyscirtes Recently, in Robbins et al. (1996), the name syl- prenda. vicola (Herrich-Schaffer, 1865) was treated as a The Committee mistakenly treated prenda synonym of lucas (Fabricius, 1793) on a list of as a distinct species from tolteca on our rst butteries found in a Peruvian park. Although list. On that list, we intended to adopt the possibly correct, so far as we know, there is taxonomy used in Scott (1986) for non-hair- no published information that would justify this streak species not treated in Opler (1992), treatment and so decided to retain First Edition and Scott treated these taxa as one species. status. Vote 4-0. Evans (1955) described prenda as a subspe- cies of tolteca. Freeman (1973) elevated prenda Arizona Giant-Skipper aryxna. to species status, saying that it differed in wing Roever (1999) described Agathymus gentryi as pattern, by being smaller in size and lighter in a new species. He stated that it is sympatric coloration. He noted that “biologically the two only with Agathymus polingi. Roever said are very different, as prenda occurs in arid or that gentryi phenotypically resembles Agathy- semi-arid terrain very often ying in the heat mus aryxna baueri but differs in that [in baueri] of the day, whereas tolteca is a jungle species “outer margin of spots comprising the postme- nearly always found in shaded areas; and that dial band in spaces 1-3 does not form a com- there were slight differences in the genitalia.” paratively straight line as in gentryi because the Burns (1990) said, “Freeman (1973) raised spot in space 1 is offset distally,” and that “the [prenda] to the rank of species without adequate well dened postmedial band on the ventral sur- justication.” More recently Freeman (1993) face of the secondaries in A. b. freemani is lack- again placed prenda as a subspecies of tolteca ing in A. gentryi.” saying that he now saw no signicant differ- The foodplant of gentryi is given as ences between them genitalically, although the deserti ssp. simplex while that of baueri is given other differences noted still remain. Prenda as Agave chrysantha and A. mckelveyana. Hap- enters the U.S. in southeastern Arizona, while loid chromosome number is given as 15, while nominate tolteca closely approaches the Lower that of baueri is given as 13. Rio Grande Valley of Texas. The Committee sees little difference between Given the absence of convincing evidence the specimens of gentryi illustrated by Roever that the two taxa are distinct species, and because (1999) and the specimen of baueri illustrated procedurally we erred in the First Edition, the in Tilden and Smith (1986), plate 39, no. 2. Committee has decided to treat prenda as a sub- The populations described as gentryi are allo- species of tolteca. The name Toltec roadside- patric with other populations of aryxna and have skipper, based upon the scientic name and the previously been considered to be subspecies of Toltec people, has been used by Opler (1999) baueri (Emmel and Emmel 1973) or aryxna and by Warren and Llorente (1999) for the (Bailowitz and Brock 1991). Haploid chromo- lumped species and the Committee decided to some numbers are notoriously difcult to deter- adopt this name. Both votes 4-0. mine and the ultimate meaning of differences, even if denite, are uncertain. Many mammal Violet-clouded/Olive-clouded Skipper populations with different chromosome num- arabus/dysaules. bers are completely capable of interbreeding Although many believe these taxa to be conspe- and are clearly one species. The same has been cic and they were so treated by Opler (1999), found for (Halliday, et al. 1994). there is no denitive or newly published infor- The Committee decided to continue treat mation to support this treatment. The Commit- baueri and gentryi as subspecies of aryxna. Vote tee decided to retain First Edition status. Vote 4-0. 4-0.

28 Dubiously Occurring Species Mexican Cycadian Eumaeus toxea. The following species have been reported to The following is largely based upon Kendall and have occurred in the United States but are likely McGuire (1984). Seven specimens in the Los to have been mislabeled, misidentied, to have Angeles County Museum are labeled as from been transported to the United States by human Hidalgo County, Texas, March 1915, ex collec- agency, or need further verication for other tion Lloyd M. Martin. In March 1981, Martin reasons. Some of these species were included informed Roy Kendall by telephone that he had on the U.S. list in the First Edition, because, in obtained the specimens from Louis H. Bridwell. constructing that list, the Committee followed Mr. Bridwell was a dealer. He also supplied a Opler (1992) and Scott (1986). The Committee specimen of Three-tailed Swallowtail, labeled has now independently examined the bases for as from Cameron County, Texas. inclusion of many species, and in some cases No other known reliable reports of this spe- has concluded that there is sufciently substan- cies exist for Texas (although it does occur not tial evidence to remove the species from the list far south of the border). It is possible that Mr. of species believed to have occurred naturally in Bridwell was not extremely careful about label- North America north of Mexico. ing specimens, or that he received and resold specimens from individuals who were careless. Cuban Kite-Swallowtail Eurytides celadon. In addition, because specimens from the United Although this Cuban species might reasonably States had a higher value, there was incentive be expected to stray northward, so far as the for dealers to mislabel specimens, and some Committee can determine, there exist only a few were known to do so. We therefore consider unsubstantiated sight records as evidence that these specimens to not be a reliable indication this species has occurred in the United States. that this species occurred naturally in the United Included on the main list in First Edition. Vote States. One specimen in the U.S.N.M is labeled to move to the Dubious list, 4-0. Burnet County, Texas and probably dates from before 1900. Burnet County is just northwest large white Pieris brassicae. of Austin, approximately 425 miles north of This European species was found on Staten the nearest known population of this species Island, New York in September, 2000 (see photo in southern Tamaulipas, Mexico. Included on at www.naba.org/sightings) and there have been North American list in First Edition. Vote to a number of other reports over the years. The move to the dubious list, 4-0. likelihood that it was transported by human agency is extremely high. Cyanophrys amyntor. Reported by Kendall and McGuire (1984) as Apricot Sulphur Phoebis argante. being collected from Brewster County Texas, There are a few specimens of this species in Woodward ranch south of Alpine on March 15, the American Museum of Natural History (New 1977 by Timothy Vogt of Illinois. Mr. Vogt York)(AMNH) labeled as having been collected also reportedly collected Dynamine tithia at the in Florida. Apricot Sulphurs do occur in Cuba same locality on the same date. Not included in (but are rare there), but there is reason to First Edition. believe that the AMNH specimens are incor- rectly labeled. They are old, from areas other Nogales Metalmark Calephelis dreisbachi. than southern Florida, and labeled as having McAlpine (1971) described dreisbachi from a been collected at localities such as Chokolos- series of 5 males and a female collected at kee that Kimball (1965) showed are unreliable. San Blas, Sinaloa, Mexico. He made a female, There are a number of unsubstantiated reports collected by K. Roever along route 93, six from Texas, where it may naturally stray. How- miles north of Nogales, Arizona, a paratype. He ever, we know of no authentic specimen or pho- said that the genitalia of the allotype female tograph. Vote to move to the Dubious list, 4-0. from Sinaloa and of the paratype female from 29 Nogales, are similar and are distinct from other this species. Not included on the North Ameri- Calephelis. He also said that “No other speci- can list in First Edition. mens of C. dreisbachi…have been collected at Nogales” nor between Nogales and Sinaloa, a Mexican Eighty-eight asteria. distance of about 400 miles “so it is possible that Reported from Hidalgo County, Texas, July 1, the assumed female paratype…was accidentally 1939, and, according to Kendall and McGuire transported to Nogales which is the main entry (1984), collected by a D. Ring. This species is and exit port between Western Mexico and the a West Mexican endemic whose range, accord- United States.” ing to de la Maza and Turrent (1985) and Luis, The area of southeastern Arizona where the et al. (1996) is from southwestern Nayarit to reported specimen of dreisbachi was found has Colima. The distance of approximately 650 been surveyed for butteries by many enthusi- miles between this known Pacic Coast range asts over the past thirty years, without any more and southern Texas makes it unlikely that this dreisbachi being located. The Committee there- species occurred naturally in southern Texas. fore decided to place this species on the “Dubi- Included on the North American list in First ous” list. Vote 4-0. Edition. Vote to move to the Dubious list, 4-0.

Lasaia maria. Dynamine tithia. Reported as “recently reported for se. Ariz.” by Reported as being collected from Brewster Opler (1999). However, there exists no authen- County, Texas, Woodward ranch south of Alpine ticated report. Not included in First Edition. on March 15, 1977 by Timothy Vogt of Illinois. The specimen, clearly identiable as tithia, is Cramer’s Eighty-eight Diaethria clymena. illustrated in Kendall and McGuire (1984). Since There are several old, and untrustworthy, reports tithia is known only from South America (Neild. of this striking South American buttery in Flor- 1996), it is almost certain that the specimen did ida, but at least one record is convincing – a not enter the United States in a natural manner. single worn adult found visiting damp soil at Not included in First Edition. Royal Palm Hammock in Everglades National Park in 1944 (Klots. 1951). This species does Brownish Cracker Hamadryas iphthime not occur in the West Indies, ranging from Trini- The only known report of this species from the dad south through South America (Neild. 1996) United States is a specimen at the American and so it is likely that this individual was trans- Museum of Natural History, New York, from the ported to Florida by human agency. Included William C. Wood collection labeled as having on North American list in First Edition. Vote to been collected in August in Burnet County, move to dubious list, 4-0. Texas. According to Jenkins (1983) the nearest known populations are in Tamazunchale and Diaethria anna. Kendall and McGuire (1984) Tuxpan, Mexico, about 600 miles south. The reported that a Robert C. Simpson informed great distance from known populations, cou- them that he had seen and collected a specimen pled with other unusual reports from Burnet of this species at Rio Grande Village in Big County, Texas (see, for example, Mexican Cyca- Bend National Park on May 6, 1973. He never dian), creates a high likelihood of mislabeling. mounted the specimen and it was presumed Included on North American list in First Edi- destroyed in a re. Although anna does range tion. Vote to move to Dubious list, 4-0. close to the Lower Rio Grande Valley, and may yet be found there, its known range does not Karwinski’s Beauty Smyrna karwinski. closely approach the Big Bend area (de la Maza Although cited as occurring in Texas by older and Turrent 1985). Even if the sight record of an authors, we know of no authenticated records. eighty-eight in West Texas were to be believed, Included on the North American list in First it would not be certain that the sighting was of Edition. Vote to move to the Dubious list, 4-0. 30 Chestnut Leafwing Anaea echemus. Urbanus pronta. According to Kendall and McGuire (1984) a Reported by McGuire and Rickard (1976) from female of this species, in the Illinois Natural Madero, Hidalgo County Texas (but not illus- History Survey collection, is labeled as having trated). Later dissection proved that the speci- been collected on May 22, 1938 at Weimar, men was actually Urbanus pronus (Kendall and Colorado County, Texas (located between Hous- McGuire 1984). ton and San Antonio). No other information is available. The known range of this species is the Confused Pellicia Pellicia angra. West Indies. The probability of mislabeling is We have been unable to locate any authenticated high. Included on North American list in First records of this species, one that is easily con- Edition. Vote to move to the Dubious list, 4-0. fused with Glazed Pellicia. Included on North American list in First Edition. Vote to move to Opsiphanes boisduvalii. the Dubious list, 4-0. A dead individual of this species was found in an RV park in Pharr, Hidalgo County, Texas Staphylus azteca. sometime in the past 10 years. The woman who A specimen reported by Freeman (1977) as a found it brought it to the Texas Buttery Fes- female, collected June 2, 1940 north of Alpine, tival, held in October 1998 in Mission, Texas, Brewster County, Texas, was subsequently deter- where it was identied. mined to be a Mazans Scallopwing. Individuals of this species were seen in Sep- tember and October 1998 in the Monterrey, huasteca. Mexico area, so the natural occurrence of this This species was listed by Ferris (1989b). We species in the United States seems reasonable. know of no authenticated records. However, the buttery was never seen alive in the United States and it is possible that, for example, it was brought northward on the grill of an RV. Accordingly, the Committee declines to add this species to the list of butteries occur- ring naturally north of Mexico. Vote 4-0. Typographical Errors in the First Edition Morpho peleides. The following changes are due to typographical Two sight records (rather eeting) of this spec- errors in the printing of the First Edition tacular Mexican species from the Rio Grande Neophasia terlooti to Neophasia terlootii Valley of Texas may well be correct, but we Satryium fulginosum to Satyrium fuliginosum await further substantiation of this species’ pres- Callophrys sheridani to Callophrys sheridanii ence in the United States. Chlosyn acastus to Chlosyne acastus Pearly-Eye to Pearly-eye Greta polissena. Oarisima to According to Kendall and McGuire (1984), two Chiodes to Chioides specimens of the subspecies umbrana, in the Royal Ontario Museum, are labeled “Texas” from a Mr. Belfrage, 1870, ex. Coll. Bethune. This species ranges from Costa Rica to , with umbrana limited to Costa Rica and Panama (DeVries 1987). The probability of mislabeling is high.

31 References Brown, K.S. and Mielke, O. 1972. The Heli- Acorn, J. 1993. Butteries of Alberta. Lone Pine conians of Brazil. Part II. Introduction and Publishing: Edmonton general comments, with a supplementary Alayo, P.D. and Hernández, L.R. 1987. Atlas de revision of the tribe. Zoologica (New York) las Mariposas Diurnas de Cuba. Editorial 57: 1-40. Cientifíco-Técnica: Havana Burns, J.M. 1990. Amblyscirtes: Problems with Austin, G.T., Haddad, N.M., Mendez, C., Sisk, species, species groups, the limits of the T.D., Murphy, D.D., Launer, A.E. and genus, and the genus groups beyond - a look Ehrlich, P.R. 1996. Preliminary annotated at what is wrong with the skipper classica- checklist of the butteries of Tikal National tion of Evans. J. Lep. Soc. 44: 11-27. Park and vicinity, Guatemala. Tropical Lep. Burns, J.M. 1996. Genitalia and the proper 7: 21-37. genus: Codatractus gets mysie and uvydixa Austin, G.T. and Smith, M.J. 1999. Revision - in a compact cyda group - as well as a of the Thessalia theona complex. In T.C. hysterectomy, while cephis gets part of Pol- Emmel (ed.). Systematics of Western North ythrix. J. Lep. Soc. 50: 173-216. American Butteries. Mariposa Press: Burns, J.M. 2000. Pyrgus communis and Pyrgus Gainesville. pp. 359-396. albescens are separate transcontinental spe- Bailowitz, R.A. 1988. Systematics of Ascia cies with variable but diagnostic valves. J. (Ganyra)(Pieridae) populations in the Lep. Soc. 54: 52-72. Sonoran Desert. J. Res. Lep. 26: 73-81. Burns, J.M. 2001. Valeriana Skipper: How its Bailowitz, R.A. and Brock, J.P. 1991. Butteries scientic name changed from Thorybes of southeastern Arizona. Sonoran Arthro- valeriana to Codatractus mysie. American pod Studies, Inc.: Tucson Butteries Spring 2001: 36-37. Barcant, M. 1970. Butteries of Trinidad and Catling, P.M. and Calhoun, J.V. 1997. Genus Tobago. Collins: London Megisto in Florida and the taxonomic status Bell. 1941. On Lerodea telata and tyrtaeus. Ent. of Megisto viola. Holarctic Lep. 4: 27-33. News 52, No. 7, 183-185. Chuah, H.H. and Cushing, D.S. 1995. Eurema Berger, L.A. 1986. Systematique du genre Colias albula and Anthonassa argentea: new F. Lepidoptera-Pieridae. Lambillionea 86: records for the United States. Tropical Lep. 7-8. Suppl. 6: 43-44. Bird, C.D. et al. 1995. Butteries of Alberta. Comstock, W.P. and Huntington, E.I. 1943. The Provincial Mus. of Alberta: Edmonton Lycaenidae of the Antilles. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Bordelon, C. and Knudson, E. 2000. New Sci. 45: 49-130. records of Lepidoptera from Texas and the Corbet, A.S., Pendlebury, H.M. and Eliot, J.N. USA, and illustrations of other interesting 1978. The Butteries of the Malay Pen- species. News of the Lepidopterists’ Soc. 42: insula. Malayan Nature Society: Kuala 3-7, 19. Lumpur Bowden, S.R. 1988. On Pieris (Artogeia) mar- De la Maza-E. R. 1987. Mariposas Mexicanas. ginalis macdunnoughii Remington. J. Res. Fondo de Cultura Economica, S.A.: Mexico, Lep. 26: 82-88. D.F. Boyd, B.M., Boyd, B.M. Austin, G.T. and De la Maza-E, R. and Turrent, R.D. 1985. Mex- Murphy, D.D. 2000. Hybridization of Lime- ican Lepidoptera. Eurytelinae I. Sociedad nitis in the western Great Basin. Holarctic Mexicana de Lepidopterologia Pub. Especi- Lep. 6: 37-74. ales, 4. Brower, A.V.Z. 1994. The case of the missing DeVries, P.J. 1987. The Butteries of Costa H: Heliconius charithonia (L., 1767) not Rica. Vol. 1. Princeton University Press: “Heliconius charitonia (L., 1767)” J. Lep. Princeton. Soc. 48: 166-168.

32 Dubatolov, V.V. 1992. New subspecies of diur- Ferris, C.D. 1989a. A new species of Colias nal lepidoptera of the families Nymphalidae from Utah. Bull. Allyn Mus. 128. 1-11. and Satyridae from Yakutia [in Russian]. Ferris, C.D. 1989b. Supplement to: A Catalogue/ Vestnik Zoologii 6: 40-45. Checklist of the Butteries of America North Edwards, W.H. 1861. Proc. Acad. Nat. Sci. Phil- of Mexico. The Lep. Soc. Memoir No. 3. adelphia 13: 164. Ferris, C.D. 1993. Reassessment of the Colias Emmel, J.F. and Emmel, T.C. 1999. A new spe- alexandra group, the legume-feeding spe- cies of Agriades from the Sierra Nevada cies, and preliminary cladistic analysis of and Trinity Alps of California, and the biol- the North American Colias. Bull. Allyn Mus. ogy and geographic variation of Agriades 138: 1-91. podarce in California. In Systematics of Ferris, C.D. and Brown, F.M. 1980. Butteries Western North American Butteries. Mari- of the Rocky Mountain States. University of posa Press: Gainesville. pp. 287-302. Oklahoma Press: Norman Emmel, J.F., Emmel, T.C. and Matton, S.O. Freeman, H.A. 1969. Records, new species and 1999a. The types of California butteries a new genus of Hesperidae from Mexico. J. named by Jean Alphonse Boisduval: Lep. Soc. 23, suppl. 2: 1-61. designation of lectotypes and a neotype, Freeman, H.A. 1977. Staphylus azteca, new and xation of type localities. Boisduval record for the United States. J. Lep. Soc. 31: described dumetorum from “California.” In 62. Emmel, T.C. (ed.). Systematics of Western Freeman, H.A. 1993. Notes on Amblyscirtes North American Butteries. Mariposa Press: Scudder, with the description of two new Gainesville. pp. 3-76. subspecies. Annals of Carnegie Museum 62: Emmel, J.F., Emmel, T.C. and Matton, S.O. 341-350. 1999b. New Theclinae subspecies of Lycae- Friedlander, Tim. 1987. Taxonomy, phylogeny, nidae from California, separation of Inci- and biogeography of Asterocampa Rober salia mossii and Incisalia fotis and seven 1916 (Lepidoptera, Nymphalidae, Apaturi- species groups of the subgenus Callophrys. nae). J. Res. Lep. Vol. 25, No. 4. Winter In Emmel, T.C. (ed.). Systematics of West- 1986. 1-337. ern North American Butteries. Mariposa Gay, T., Kehimkar, I.D. and Punetha, J.C. 1992. Press: Gainesville. pp. 159-170. Common Butteries of India. Oxford Uni- Emmel, T.C. and Austin, G.T. 1999. What is versity Press: Bombay. Argynnis carolae? The cytotaxonomy and Geiger, H. and Shapiro, A.M. 1986. Electro- systematic position of a Speyeria relic spe- phorectic evidence for speciation within the cies from Nevada. In Emmel, T.C. (ed.). nominal species Anthocharis sara Lucas Systematics of Western North American But- (Pieridae). J. Res. Lep. 25: 15-24. teries. Mariposa Press: Gainesville. pp. Geiger, H. and Shapiro, A.M. 1992. Genetics, 443-450. systematics and evolution of holarctic Pieris Emmel, T.C. and Emmel, J.F. 1973. The Butter- napi species group populations. Zeitscrift ies of Southern California. Natural History fur Zoologishes Systematick und Evolution- Mus. of Los Angeles County: Los Angeles. forschung 30: 100-122. Evans, W.H. 1952. A catalogue of the American Glassberg, J. 1999. Nickerbean Blues arrive in Hesperiidae in the British Museum (Natural Florida. American Butteries Summer 1999: History). Part II. Pyrginae. Section 1. Brit- 22-25. ish Museum, London. Glassberg, J. 2000. Eyeing the greater fritillar- Ferris, C.D. 1988. Revision of several North ies. American Butteries Fall 2000: 14-17. American Leguminosae-feeding Colias spe- Glassberg, J. 2001. Butteries through Binoc- cies with description of a new subspecies. ulars: The West. Oxford University Press: Bull. Allyn Mus. 116: 1-28. New York.

33 Glassberg, J., Minno, M.C., and Calhoun, J.V. Klassen, P., Westwood, A.R., Preston, W.B. 2000. Butteries through Binoculars: Flor- and McKillop, W.B. 1989. The Butteries ida. Oxford University Press: New York of Manitoba. Manitoba Mus. of Man and Halliday, R.B., Barton, N.H. and Hewitt, G.M. Nature: Winnipeg 1994. Genetic and chromosomal polymor- Klots, A.B. 1951. A Field Guide to the But- phisms in hybridizing populations of the teries of North America East of the Great grasshopper Podisma pedestris. Biol. J. Plains. Houghton Mifin: Boston Linn. Soc. 21: 299-305. Kondla, N.G. and Pelahm, J.P. 1995. First record Hammond, P.C. and McCorkle, D.V. 2000. A of the buttery Euchloe naina from North new species of Philotiella from the Oregon America. Canadian Field-Naturalist 109: Cascade range. Holarctic Lep. 6: 77-82. 259. Harvey, D.J. 1991. “Higher classication of Kondla, N.G. 1995. Sulphur butteries of the the Nymphalidae” In H. Frederik Nijhout. Colias alexandra complex in Alberta. Blue The Development and Evolution of Butter- Jay 53: 15-27. y Wing Patterns. Smithsonian Institution Larsen, T.B. 1991. Butteries of Kenya. Oxford Press: Washington University Press: Oxford Higgins, L.G. 1960. A revision of the Melitaeine Layberry, R.A., Hall, P.W. and LaFontaine, J.D. genus Chlosyne and allied species. Trans. R. 1998. The Butteries of Canada. University Ent. Soc. London, 12: 381-475. of Toronto Press: Toronto Higgins, L.G. 1981. A revision of Phyciodes Luis, A.M., Llorente, J.B. and Vargas, I.F. 1996. Hübner and related genera, with a review of Distribucion geograca, estacionalidad y the classication of the Melitaeinae (Lepi- comportamiento de Diaethria asteria Tropi- doptera: Nymphalidae). Bull. British Mus. cal Lep. 7: 39-44. (Natural Hist.), Series. 43: Mattoni, R.H.T. 1988 (1989). The Euphilotes 77-243. battoides complex: recognition of a species Hilchie, G.J. 1990. Classication, relation- and description of a new subspecies. J. Res. ships, life history, and evolution of Erebia Lep. 27: 173-185. magdalena. Quastiones Entomologicae 26: McAlpine, W.S. 1971. A revision of the butter- 665-693. y genus Calephelis (Riodinidae). J. Res. Holland, W.J. 1931. The Buttery Book. Revised Lep. 10: 1-125. Edition. Doubleday: New York McGuire, W.W. and Rickard, M.A. 1976. New Hooper, R.R. 1973. Butteries of Saskatchewan. Hesperiidae records for Texas and the United Mus. Nat. History: Regina States. J. Lep. Soc. 30: 5-11. Janzen, D.H. and Burns, J.M. 1999. http:// Migdoll, I. 1988. Field Guide to the Butteries janzen.sas.upenn.edu/index.html of Southern Africa. New Holland Press: Janzen, D.H., Sharkey, M.J. and Burns, J.M. London 1998 (1999). Parasitization biology of a new Miller, J.Y. 1992. The Common Names of North species of Braconidae (Hymenoptera) feed- American Butteries. Smithsonian Institu- ing on larvae of Costa Rican dry forest skip- tion Press: Washington. pers. Tropical Lep. 9 (suppl. 2): 33-41. Minno, M.C. and Emmel, T.C. 1993. Butteries Jenkins, D.W. 1983. Neotropical Nymphalidae of the Florida Keys. Scientic Publishers: 1. Revision of Hamadryas. Bull. Allyn Mus. Gainesville. 81: 1-146. NABA. 2000. Run, don’t walk, for stray adven- Kendall, R.O. and McGuire, W.W. 1984. Some tures. American Butteries Spring 2000: new and rare records of Lepidoptera found 43 in Texas. Bull. Allyn Mus. 86: 1-50. Neild, A.F.E. 1996. The Butteries of Venezuela. Kimball, C.P. 1965. Lepidoptera of Florida. Part I. Meridian Publications: London Division of Plant Industry: Gainesville

34 Oliver, C.G. 1982. Distinctiveness of Megisto Priestaf, R.C. and Emmel, J.F. 1999. An extraor- c. cymela and M. c. viola. J. Lep. Soc. 36: dinary new subspecies of Philotiella spe- 153. ciosa from coastal Santa Barbara County, Opler, P.A. and Krizek, G.O. 1984. Butteries California. In Emmel, T.C. (ed.) Systemat- East of the Great Plains. Johns Hopkins ics of Western North American Butteries. University Press: Baltimore. Mariposa Press: Gainesville. pp. 283-286. Opler, P.A. 1992. A Field Guide to Eastern But- Pyle, R.M. 1981. The Audubon Society Field teries. Houghton Mifin: Boston. Guide to North American Butteries. Knopf. Opler, P.A. 1999. A Field Guide to Western But- New York. teries. Houghton Mifin: Boston. Riley, N.D. 1975. A Field Guide to the But- Pavulaan, H. and Wright, D.M. 2000. The biol- teries of the West Indies. Demeter Press: ogy, life history, and taxonomy of Celas- Boston. trina neglectamajor. Taxonomic Report 2, Robbins, R.K., Lamas, G., Mielke, G.H.H., no. 5: 1-18. Harvey, D.J. and Casgrande, M. 1996. Tax- Pinhey, E. 1965. The Butteries of Southern onomic composition and ecological struc- Africa. Nelson & Sons: Johannesburg. ture of the species-rich buttery community Plötz, C. 1881. Die Hesperiinen-Gattung Gon- at Pakitza, Parque Nacional del Manu, Peru. iurus Hub. und ihre Arten. Bull. Soc. Impe- In Manu: The Biodiversity of Southeastern riale Naturalistes Moscou (Moscow) 55: Peru. Wilson, D.E. and Sandoval, A. (Eds.). 1-22. Smithsonian Institution Press: Washington Porter, A.H. 1990. Testing nominal species D.C. pp. 217-252. boundaries using gene ow statistics: the tax- Robbins, R.K. and Nicolay, S.S. 1998 (1999). onomy of two hybridizing admiral butter- Taxonomy and nomenclature of Strymon ies. Systematic Zoology 39: 131-147. istapa and S. columella. J. Lep. Soc. 52: Porter, A.H. and Mueller, J.C. 1999. Partial 318-327. genetic isolation between Phyciodes tharos Roever, K. 1999. Descriptions of new Agathy- and Phyciodes cocyta. J. Lep. Soc. 52: mus from the southwestern United States. 182-205. In Emmel, T.C. (ed.). Systematics of West- Porter, A.H. and Shapiro, A.M. 1990. Genitalia ern North American Butteries. Mariposa and taxonomy: lack of mechani- Press: Gainesville. pp. 491-500. cal isolation in a buttery hybrid zone (Lep- Scott, J.A. 1986a. The Butteries of North Amer- idoptera: Pieridae). Ann. Ent. Soc. Amer. 82: ica. Stanford University Press: Stanford. 107-114. Scott, J.A. 1986b. The courtship of Phyciodes, Pratt, G.F. 1994. Evolution of Euphilotes by and the relationship between Phyciodes seasonal and host shifts. Biological J. Lin- tharos tharos and Phyciodes tharos mor- nean Soc. 51: 387-416. pheus (=pascoensis) in Colorado. Papilio Pratt, G.F. and Ballmer, G.R. 1991. Three bio- New Series 5: 1-8. types of Apodemia mormo (Riodinidae) in Scott, J.A. 1988. Speyeria atlantis in Colorado: the Mojave desert. J. Lep. Soc. 45:46-57. rearing studies concerning the relation Pratt, G. and Emmel, J.F. 1999. Revision of the between silvered and unsilvered forms. J. Euphilotes enoptes and E. battoides com- Lep. Soc. 42: 1-13. plexes. In Systematics of Western North Scott, J.A. 1994. Biology and Systematics of American Butteries. pp. 207-270. Phyciodes. Papilio New Series 7: 1-120 Pratt, G.F., Wright, D.M. and Pavulaan, H. 1994. Scott, J. 1998. “New Western North American The various taxa and hosts of the North Butteries” Papilio New Series No. 11 pp. American Celastrina. Proc. Ent. Soc. Wash. 1-12. 96: 566-578.

35 Scott, J.A., Kondla, N.G. and Spomer, S.M. Tuzov, V.K. et al. 1997. Guide to the Butteries 1998. Speyeria hesperis and Speyeria atlan- of Russia and Adjacent Territories. Vol. 1. tis are distinct species. Papilio New Series Pensoft: Soa, Bulgaria No. 8, pp. 1-31. Tuzov, V.K. et al. 2000. Guide to the Butteries Scott, J.A. and Wright, D.M. 1998. A new Celas- of Russia and Adjacent Territories. Vol. 2. trina from the eastern slope of Colorado. Pensoft: Soa, Bulgaria Papilio New Series. No. 9. 1-15. Tyler, H.A. 1975. The Swallowtail Butteries Shepard, J.H. 1999. The correct name for the of North America. Naturegraph Publishers: Boloria chariclea/titania complex in North Healdsburg, California America. In Emmel, T.C. (ed.). Systematics Tyler, H., Brown, K.S. and Wilson, K. 1994. of Western North American Butteries. Mar- Swallowtail Butteries of the Americas. Sci- iposa Press: Gainesville. pp. 727-730. entic Publishers: Gainesville Shepard, J.H. and Manley, T.R. 1999. A species Warren, A.D. 1997. Urbanus belli (Hesperi- revision of the Parnassius phoebus com- idae: Pyrginae): A new record for the United plex in North America. In Emmel, T.C. States. News of the Lepidopterists’ Society. (ed.). Systematics of Western North Ameri- 39: 41, 60. can Butteries. Mariposa Press: Gainesville. Warren, A.D. and Llorente, J.B. 1999. Butter- pp. 717-726. ies of Mismaloya, Jalisco, and adjacent Shields, O. 1975. Studies on North American parts of Banderas Bay and southern Nayarit, Philotes IV. Taxonomic and biological notes, Mexico. Dugesiana (Journal of the Ent. and new subspecies. Bull. Allyn Mus. 28: Dept. of the University of Guadalajara) 6: 1-36. 17-32. Shields, O. 1977. Studies on North American Wauer, R.H. 2001. Denitive Destination: Big Philotes V. Taxonomic and biological notes, Bend National Park. American Butteries continued. J. Res. Lep. 16: 1-67. Spring 2001: 4-17. Smith, C. 1989. Butteries of Nepal. Tecpress: Webster, R.P. 1999. The life history of the Mari- Bangkok time Ringlet, Coenonympha tullia nipisquit. Smith, D.S., MIller, L.D. and MIller, J.Y. The J. Lep. Soc. 52: 345-355. Butteries of the West Indies and South Williams, C.B. 1930. The Migration of Butter- Florida. Oxford University Press: Oxford ies. Oliver and Boyd: Edinburgh Sperling, F.A.H. and Harrison, R.G. 1994. Wright, D.M. and Pavulaan, H. 1999. Celas- Mitochondrial DNA variation within and trina idella: A new buttery species from between species of the Papilio machaon the Atlantic coastal plain. The Taxonomic group of swallowtail butteries. Evolution Report. 1, no. 9: 1-11. 48: 408-422. Wynter-Blyth, M.A. 1957. Butteries of the Steinhauser, S.R. 1989. Taxonomic notes and Indian Region. Bombay Nat. Hist. Soc.: descriptions of new taxa in the Neotropical Bombay Hesperiidae. Part I. Pyrginae. Bull. Allyn Zirlin, H. 2001. Taxonomists Just Wanna Have Mus. 127: 1-70. Fun: Gillett’s Checkerspot. American But- Tilden, J.W. and Smith, A.C. 1986. A Field teries Spring 2001: 44-47. Guide to Western Butteries. Houghton Mif- in: Boston Troubridge, J.L. and Parshall, D.K. 1988. A review of the Oeneis polixenes (Fabricius) complex in North America. Canadian Ent. 120: 679-696. Troubridge, J.T. and Philip, K.W. 1990. A new species of Colias from Arctic Canada. Cana- dian Ent. 122: 15-20. 36 Notes

37