Hübner, 1819 (type species Papilio bixae Linnaeus, 1758), Lindsey (1921) erected Second Interim Report of the the genus Apyrrothrix (type species Erycides araxes account of “the difference in habitus and the NABA Names Committee form ofHewitson, the secondaries”. 1867) to Although receive it, Lindsey on has until recently not been widely followed

combinationin this separation, Apyrrothrix Mielke araxes (2005a) was able Scientific Names Subcommittee: Michael Braby, Marc Epstein, Jeffrey into separatinglist well over Pyrrhopyge a dozen citations into a number for the of Glassberg (ex officio), Peter W. Hall, Yu-Feng Hsu, Torben Larsen, David genera, formally resurrected Apyrrothrix. Mielke (2002),, with Lohman, Naomi Pierce, Malcolm Scoble, John Tennent, Dick Vane-Wright A. araxes (Hewitson) and A. arizonae (Godman (Chair/Secretary), Angel Viloria, Shen-Horn Yen 27 genera of Pyrrhopygina recognized by & Salvin) as the only included species. Of the treated as monobasic, and another 2 (including English Names Subcommittee: Alana Edwards, Jeffrey Glassberg (Chair/ ApyrrothrixMielke (2002), almost half (13) are currently Secretary), Fred Heath, Jim Springer, Julie West used in combination) have only with 2 species. araxes and arizonae: ErycidesThree Hübner, other generic1819 (type names species have Papiliobeen pigmalion Myscelus Hübner, 1819 (type species Papilio nobilis Eudamus Cramer, 1779), Papilio Cramer, 1777), and This is the second report of the proteus Linnaeus, 1758). Of these, Erycides is Swainson, 1831 (type species reconstituted NABA Names Committee. For more information about the Committee, www.butterfliesofamerica.com/ih02/ currently recognized genus Phocides Hübner, considered to be a subjective synonym of the including aims, principles and procedures, BMNH20120713_DSC8437_i.htm;Myscelus araxes accessed 1819, Myscelus is in use for another recognized please visit www.naba.org/ftp/NABA_ 1868:1.xii.2012] 176. Dull Firetip’s English and scientific genus, and Eudamus names_committee_2012.pdf Pyrrhopyge araxes(Hewitson); Herrich-Schäffer, names remain unchanged, Pyrrhopyge of Urbanus is an objective synonym araxes. names can be applied to araxes or arizonae in the context Hübner,of the currently 1807. Thus accepted none ofgeneric these NABA-NC 2014-04 Pyrrhopyge araxes Pyrrhopyga cyrillus(Hewitson); Plötz, 1879: Edwards, 529. 1875: 794. Pyrrhopyge araxes arizonae Godman & Type locality: Mexico (Oaxaca). Type material Top: Sept. 7, 2012. Parker Canyon in Museum for[sic] Naturkunde, Berlin (ZMHU). The decision lies between Pyrrhopyge and Salvin, 1893, Apyrrothrix araxes arizonae Lake, Cochise Co., AZ. Apyrrothrixclassification. of the American Hesperiidae. (Godman & Salvin, 1893), Pyrrhopyge arizonae Godman & Salvin, 1893, or [http://www.butterfliesofamerica.com/L/ih/ Bottom: Aug. 19, 2005. Etla- Erycides araxes Hewitson, 1867, and Pyrrhopyga Apyrrothrix arizonae (Godman & Salvin, cyrillus-Pyrrhopyga-syntype-recto-ZMHU_i.htm; Guacamayas Rd., OAX, Mexico. cyrillusWith Plötz, respect 1879, to werespecies based names, on material both 1893): potential change of scientific name Pyrrhopyge race arizonae accessed 1.xii.2012] from Mexico — and the latter has long been Fort Grant. Type material in Godmanthe Natural & Salvin, Scientific Names Subcommittee History1893: 253. Museum, Type locality: London USA, (BMNH). Arizona, [http:// near former. Following its introduction by Godman This case presents two problems with respect recognized as a subjective synonym ofP. the araxes to the current NABA checklist: In which genus Pyrrhopyge arizonae from Arizona, Pyrrhopyge arizonae was formally should the taxon currently listed as Pyrrhopyge www.butterfliesofamerica.com/ih02/ 1951: 38. treated& Salvin as (1893) a subspecies as a “distinct race” of araxes be included? And should the North BMNH20120713_DSC8436_i.htm;Eudamus araxes accessed Apyrrothrix araxes Godman & Salvin; Burns American populations currently included under by Dyar (1905) and 255.1.xii.2012] & Janzen, 2001: 38, 41. then arizonae continued to be treated almost P. araxes (a species originally described from Barnes & McDunnough (1917: 17). Since Pyrrhopyge araxes(Hewitson); arizonae Wright, 1905: (Hewitson); Mielke, 2002: of araxes until Burns Mexico) be regarded as a separate species — or 222;Apyrrothrix Opler & Warren, arizonae 2002: 4; Mielke, 2004: 26; not? universally as a subspecies Apyrrothrix araxes Godman & Salvin; Mielke, 2005a: 51. & Janzen (2001) proposed that it should be 16.Dyar, 1905: 111; Evans, 1951: 38. (Godman & Salvin); the male genitalia of material from Arizona Erycides araxes Hewitson, 1867: 2. Type given full species status, based on comparing Apyrrothrix araxes arizonae(Hewitson); (Godman Lindsey, & 1921: Mielke, 2002: 222; Mielke, 2004: 26; Mielke, locality: Mexico. Type material in the Natural Although2005a: 52. Erycides araxes Hewitson has most History Museum, London (BMNH). [http:// with specimens from the vicinity of Mexico City. Pyrrhopyge araxes araxes often been placed in the genus Pyrrhopyge genitalia of populations from intermediate areas But according to Opler & Warren (2002), the 26 American Butterflies,Fall/Winter 2015 Salvin); Lindsey, 1921: 16. 27 (Hewitson); Evans, exhibit intermediate characters to those cited Pyrrhopyge arizonae and cyrillus, but others are not yet Apyrrothrix araxes arizonae. doesgenus not (dropping appear toto befewer well than corroborated 4 per genus or if sequences, three of these have names: araxes, [The]Apyrrothrix analysis seems araxes very. I am helpful inclined here, for andthis by Burns & Janzen (2001), and point out that founded insofaritself as is clearexcluded). (phylogenetic This classification or be treated as species. I think Burns is correct, combination… [so] I vote forbecause it is plausible to consider againstother geographic species status variants for arizonae are known. Caterino named. I suspect that these eventually will a(3) strong case for a good generic entity separate et al. (2003) made an earlier committee ruling from Pyrrhopyge. These are some of my reasons: treated araxae and arizonae as separate.. However, cladistic) arguments for these divisions have and he usually is! Only one of them enters U.S. The generic name Apyrrothrix Mielke (2005a), citing Burns & Janzen (2001), typologynot, so far more as I can than tell, phylogeny. been presented. If not, then Mielke’s he publishedHowever, they about all this diverged complex rather being recently split into The type species of the genus Apyrrothrix haswork not (2002) published appears his argumentation.to me to be based on (~0.5mya), and there is no solid documentation Lindsay, 1921 is (by original designation) is available. Currently the situation seems unresolved, “If we go to the Tree of Life (http://tolweb. These skippers are quite distant from Erycides araxes Hewitson, 1867, the taxon although the Butterflies of America website ) we see that the 27 typicalseveral Pyrrhopygedistinct species. (Warren et al., 2012), based treatson Opler arizonae & Warren as a skippers means different genera usually), but diagnosis establishes clear distinctions between (2004)subspecies and ofPelham araxes (2008),. and in opposition to listedorg/Pyrrhopygina/94268 under Pyrrhopygina (downgraded from are closer to Chalypyge (8%, MelanopygeCOI distance, Jonaspyge— for , Pyrrhopygewe are dealing and with. Apyrrothrix Mielke’s, not morphological only in male Burns & Janzen (2001), still genera recognized by Mielke (2004) withoutare simply any etc. Also, considering how huge Pyrrhopyge Scientific Name Discussion phylogenetic or cladistic structure. The ToL list tribal status by Warren et al., 2008), frontoclypeus,genitalic structures, abdominal but also terga, in several etc.). This other sensu lato (Evans) is, it is not constructive to non-traditional characters for butterflies (as the committee, a member commented: The Chalypyge, Melanopyge, etc as subgenera inside nomenclatural combination has been at least Following release of the first draft case to includedis evidently molecular based on data Mielke’s for 7 ofwork, the cainterpreted Apyrrothrixmaintain it ,as but such. this In has my not taste been I would published. have speciesin the light of Pyrrhopygina of Warren et al.currently (2008). recognized, The latter Regardless, Apyrrothrix is the oldest name, and NABA Names Committee (Caterino et al., representing 7 of the 27 genera, including130 justified by morphological studies since Lindsay and skipper is .” erected the genus. Mielke’s revision seems 2003) has already consideredarizonae, and Burns’ decided paper to Apyrrothrix araxes Pyrrhopyge zenodorus Apyrrothrix araxes arizonae (formerly treated as a subspecies of , I think the best supported name for the U.S. onsufficient genetic to distance me, and between is now 13 generic years entitiespublished. retain(Burns araxes & Janzen,. Unless 2001) there where is new he treatedpublished the P. phidias U.S. populations as but now widely accepted as a separate species). are exactly the sorts of data and interpretation hereI give in total discussion credibility (included to [the] in information the document To these points the Chair responded: “These information that provides data arguing for a araxes groups with Creonpyge (a monobasic In their cladogram (Warren et al., 2008: p. 6), we need (leaving aside the issue of how large “Chairman’s comments”). thinksplit, thethat Committee we should shouldstick to not the reconsider genus question the genus), and these two together then form a region we are still pretty happy with e.g. Scientific Name Decision should a genus be — in the Indo-Australian onsame this issue. one. Otherwise, it’s an endless loop. I Euploea (ca Delias Arhopala Pyrrhopyge araxes, 2 in for Pyrrhopyge, Mysoria + Sarbia, and Elbella + Apyrrothrix araxes arizonae ‘quadrichotomy’ with the single representatives 60), (200 +) and Parelbella here is rather fundamental to the mode of ApyrrothrixVotes cast: 8 araxes in favor of The Chair responded: “At first sight this NABA(200 ++), working for example). — the cases However, we consider our problem not favor of ; 1 in favor of . In my view this does not provide any taxonomicseems a difficult way of case. trying However, to assess that options. difficulty For Pyrrhopyge araxes ;is 1 toabstention be maintained (non-return). on the convincing evidence for separate generic status 5 years (as in the present case) — but, more theonly NABA arises list, if one stability thinks is in the the goal, ‘normal’ and is to be NABA checklist. theof any 27 ofnominal the included genera ‘genera’; listed as it constituting does provide the importantly,only ought to the have data been and ‘out argumentation there’ for at leastwe some evidence consistent with the view that Pyrrhopygina likely do form a monophyletic (As in all cases, if convincing maintained unless there is very convincing domain. This normally means published, or new data are published indicative that one or can use to decide have to be in the public opened.) evidence that a change is needed, and that that in some reputable online database. Are these more changes are required, the case can be re- group (family level groupings being the object of ofevidence “arizonae”, has beenas now published pointed orout, otherwise this was made English Names Subcommittee available. With respect to the species status interest for the Warren et al. 2008 paper). the data and interpretations publicly accessible? Apyrrhothrix“Unless more published evidence comes Irelationships am not sure, …but based it would on more appear than not. COI, If inand are cato hand demonstrating unequivocallyPyrrhopyge that already rejected by the NABA committee in 2003 Given that Dull Firetip is the official NABA (type species differsPapilio at bixae generic L., currently level from treated the his information would not appear admissible for website(Caterino still et al.,regards 2003). arizonae as a subspecies English name for this species, and that there is as a40 synonym species currentlyor subspecies included of P. phidiasin L.), in BOLD, the data still need interpretation. … [T] of araxes“Currently the Butterflies of America no change in the scientific name of the species, retaining Pyrrhopyge araxes for the purposes of correct action for the NABA list has to be to the English Names Subcommittee saw no reason should continue to place araxes as a species the currentpresent NABAand, in list.” that case, I would still favour maintain. theTaking species these name two asviews araxes together, our to change the English name. belongingmy view for to the the purposes genus of the NABA. If at list, a we English Name Decision separate species status of arizonae Pyrrhopyge . Should later date its generic separateness were fully committee members: (1) I agree that it would be ever be documented and then accepted, no loss of too earlyThree to comments make changes, were althoughreceived fromthe recent Votes cast for maintaining Dull Firetip: 5. Votes unequivocally established, given the allopatry information on the potential species complex cast for changing this name: 0. involved, no loss of information is likely. suggests changes may be made in future. As for information is likely. However, in this context I within“The the generic Pyrrhopygini separation proposed is, however, by Olaf a the genus, the predisposition for lepidopterists Dull Firetip is maintained as the have received the following very interesting and Mielke,challenge. a widely The extensive acknowledged splitting authority of genera on NABA name for Pyrrhopyge araxes. potentially highly relevant comment: Neotropical skippers, results in a scheme of “[This taxon represents] … an interesting the(butterfly category taxonomists (as is the casein particular) with birds). to (2) ca 5 species per complex of several phenotypes that can be create numerous genera is simply devaluing 28 American Butterflies,Fall/Winter 2015 29 27 genera, with an average of grouped into 5 or 6 groups by genitalia and COI Jan Dauphin NABA-NC 2014-05 Polygonus name (savigny) for a species of Polygonus that near ally and containing 2 very similar species” manueli Polygonus manueli Bell & Comstock, way south to Argentina. Only two subspecies are Polygonus 1948, versus Polygonus savigny currentlysupposedly recognized, extends from the secondsouthern being USA punctus all the [emphasis added]. At the time RileyPolygonus made his (Latreille, 1824): potential change of manueliidentification, only a single species of would have been recognized — scientific name “The genus Polygonus currently contains onlyBell &two Comstock recognized (Lesser species Antilles — the only). one in not being described until 1948. Thus it question here, and P. leo. Both are widespread assignedis very plausible the Latreille that Riley type tofailed amyntas to appreciate (now Scientific Names Subcommittee that two species were involved, and thus Hesperia savigny leo maintained savigny as a name pertaining to leo in Central and South America, both can occur ). On this authority Evans (1952) then simply Lectotype (designatedLatreille, by Mielke 1824: 716,& 741. leo appears known from the Greater Antilles Type locality: “Antilles” [West Indies?]. in the southern states of the USA — but only stated by Latreille, for the subspecies of leo (using it, not unreasonably given the provenance (Cuba, Hispaniola, Jamaica — as confirmed Casagrande,Polygonus manueli2002: 40) in Musée National on Hispaniola, and Brown & Heineman, 1972, one.g., Jamaica), by the major extending works to of the Schwartz, Bahamas, 1989, Porto found in Cuba and some other Antillean islands). d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris. Manuel’s Skipper’s English and Bell & Comstock, Rico and western Lesser Antilles. As indicated “Evans did not study the typesavigny material as in scientific names remain unchanged, Paris personally; had he done so, he would American1948: 4, fig. Museum 1. Type of locality: Natural Nova History, Bremen New a senior name for manueli Polygonus manueli. almost certainly have recognized York.[=Dahlbergia], Santa Catarina, Brazil, in from the Lesser Antilles — which presumably report on the Latreille skipper types includes above, there is a subspecies of the former . Viette’s (1956) Polygonus manueli therefore excludes islands in this area as well as Oct. 13, 2014. Mission, Hidalgo Co., TX. the Greater Antilles as candidates for the true collection, and how some of the skipper types an important account of the fate of Latreille’s [Polygonus leo savigny Bell & Comstock; Evans, type locality of Hesperia savigny came to be in Paris, others in London. On this 1952: 55, pl. 14. basis he recognized a number of problems with . So, if the Paris Polygonus savigny (Latreille); Evans, 1952: of America website as the Lectotype of savigny 54. Misidentification.] isMuseum authentic, specimen then the illustrated published on type the localityButterflies (Latreille); Mielke & southern Brazil is the same species as P. savigny ParisRiley’s specimen (1926) paper. considered However, by Riley crucially to be for the our Casagrande, 2002: 40; Mielke, 2004: 75; Mielke, (Latreille) described from the “Antilles”, or not. typepurposes of Hesperia here, he savigny was clearly satisfied that the 2005b: 318. is false (very common at that time). If false, its strong similarity of the type specimens of the most likely origin would be Surinam or southern was valid and, as can been considered for years to be Polygonus in Latin America were beginning to become America website, he added additional labels twoWere nominal the answer species, to be which “no”, thenof them given occurs the very in Brazil — although by the 1820s other sources be seen from the images on the Butterflies of manueliThe scientific name for Manuel’s Skipper has to ensure correct recognition in future. On southern Texas could be a further issue to be “The “savigny available. in the NABABell checklist& Comstock, (2nd 1948 (type locality three labels, none original to Latreille: a printed Santa Catarina, Brazil), and this is how it is listed MNHN “type” label, Lectotype” a MNHN stock is shown label as saying having H.this savigny basis I, andthink it wehas have the same to accept phenotype that this as the resolved. edition). However, included in Polygonus (the other being leo specimen represents the valid primary type of had examined a syntype of Hesperia savigny According to Evans (1952), the two species Mielke & Casagrande (2002: 40) stated that they label added in 1956 by late MNHN staff Polygonus manueli. P. leo) is also included member“American Pierre Collection”, Viette. andThis a relates determination to a paper species named by Bell & Comstock in 1948 as for this name, and considered it to represent (Gmelin, 1790)) are “very similar” — but as theLatreille, same 1824,species designated as the holotype it as the P. manuelilectotype. he published in the same year (Viette, 1956). names in contention that appear to relate to a notthe Hammocka problem. Skipper Thus if it( is agreed that savigny single“Thus species we haveof Polygonus two nominal — savigny species from an andon the manueli NABA arelist, not this the similarity same species, is evidently then Polygonus uncertain origin, manueli from southern Brazil the implication would be that a third species Taking Viette’s paper, and earlier publications savignyIf so, based, with on P. priority, manueli the scientific name of we can now see how the current situation came — and we are concerned to determine which of Polygonus by Riley (1926) and Evans (1952) into account, synonymManuel’s Skipperof the nominate would become subspecies . about. of these names to apply to specimens with the a junior subjective Polygonus, bothwould polytypic. have to be recognized. savigny Mielke (2005b) catalogued just two species in “In the 1920s Norman Riley, assisted by same phenotype that have been found in the and Mielkemanueli & pertain Casagrande to the (2002) same species. offered no savigny, he simply Polygonus does F. Le Cerf, studied numerous Latreille skipper United States. Thus it would appear critical Fortunatelyevidence other type than materials their assertion for both taxathat are well Scientific Name Discussion include only two species, leo and another, and in extenso: “The type astypes a synonym in Paris. ofWith Acolastus respect amyntas to (Fabricius, to have further evidence that material of manueli listed this Latreille name (Riley, 1926: 233) both. The Chair commented illustrated by Warren et al. (2012). savigny that “Therematerial are from some the Polygonus U.S. can be barcode assigned to accepted the proposed synonymy. Probably Bell & Comstock, 1948, All recent major sources appear to have manueli1775) — as very amyntas likely confirmed in his mind http://www. is from southern Brazil; regarding Acolastusby the illustrations in ‘Seitz’, which depict Latreille, 1824, it was originally stated “se reflecting this, searching using Google gives at of Polygonus. Papilo (seeamyntas Evans, is a1952: primary 54,55). data in the BOLD system ).( A basic analysis trouve aux Antilles.” The types are illustrated 1360 hits for “Polygonus manueli” but 1830 . homonym,Scudder explicitly is areplaced junior objective by Papilio synonym leo boldsystems.org/index.php/Taxbrowser_ http://www.butterfliesofamerica.com/L/“Recent accounts consider these two Taxonpage?taxid=17533 for “Polygonus savigny”. The questionPoylgonus that polygonus_s_savigny_types.htm kindly performed for me by David Lees manueliwe have to decide upon, therefore, is whether Polygonus “A genus with no there is overwhelming evidence that Gmelin, 1790 (see Vane-Wright, 1975). Evans reveals division of the data into two major 30 American Butterflies,Fall/Winter 2015 nominal taxa conspecific, and use the senior 31 Bell & Comstock, described from (1952: 53) says of clades. The first (some 43 records) includes all but one sample of “leo” including material Polygonus savigny should be used for now, in Polygonus manueli is to be maintained agreement on the NABA checklist. manueli manueli from Mexico. Looking at the ofHidalgo this species County, from Texas, North on 17America October (Glassberg, 2004 from Cuba and Florida, but alsomanueli one labelled — the with everything recently published. (Knudson et al., 2004). This was the only record undersides are not shown, but I think these are exactlyTo thiswhat the I would Chair sayresponded: if I were It writing is interesting a English Names Subcommittee images, there leoare, 3as labelled the barcode as data would researchthat [the respondent]paper. But the says consensus “for now”. list That for NABA is 2012) until a female wasAmerican found at Butterflies the National). Butterfly Center on May 17, 2015 (see pg 33, suggest. Given that Manuel’s Skipper is the official NABA Antigonus erosus is not regarded as misidentified Hot Seens, this issue of The second major clade comprises all English name for this species, and that there is reflects a fundamentally different approach/ ca no change in the scientific name of the species, name associated with this species is Hesperia requirement. Having said that, we can speculate polytypic. The only other species-group labelled “leo Mexico”. The latter is probably a manueli is the English Names Subcommittee saw no reason westermann Latreille, consistently treated as a 50 samples labelled “savigny” plus one that [the] “unpublished data that he can’t a Brazilian species separate from the similar to change the English name. synonym since Kirby (1877). Polygonusignore” [indicates] evidence that English Name Decision Antigonus frommisidentification Mexico). All toothe (maybesavigny sampleslabels or aretags from were continuing to use manueli would in fact be Hübner, 1819 (type species: Urbanus erosus), somehow switched on the misfits, one each found in USA. So … in this case, Seven generic names othererosus than and/ Votes cast for maintaining Manuel’s Skipper: 5. or westermann: Urbanus Hübner, Hesperia Votes cast for changing this name: 0. Brazil)Mexico —and close Central to the America, true type with locality one exception: for misleading [misidentifications are pernicious; Manuel’s Skipper is maintained Fabriciushave been, Achlyodescombined Hübner, with Thanaos manuelia single .sample This single from sample Sta Catarina groups (southern as sister to ofsynonyms the savigny are not] — made in my view even as the NABA name for Polygonus Nisoniades Hübner, Helias Fabricius, and all of the others listed as savigny, with a fairly couldtougher also by be the southern uncertainty Brazil. over I think the provenance we should manueli. Systasea Boisduval, large (but currently uninterpreted) gap. type — which very plausibly exception are in use for generic groupings other This suggests the possibility that what is making any decision. than the Edwards.group of species All of these currently names included with one currently regarded as savigny could be two therefore consider revisiting this one before in Antigonus Thanaos,

savingy The following five comments were NABA-NC 2014-09 Antigonus erosus Erynnis ; the Antigonusexception beinghas two junior bothspecies names (or more). could applyIf so, givento the the southern doubts Brazil about subsequently received from Committee Antigonus erosus (Hübner, 1812), species considered to be an objectiveChaetoneura synonym Felder of & the provenance of the type, conceivably comments.members: (1) (2) With Agree the with proviso waiting that for the now (it new to the list Felder, 1862Schrank. (type species Chaetoneura hippalus soundscase should as though be revisited, we will as get per better Chairman’s resolution Feldersubjective & Felder) synonyms: and Systaspes would“species”. probably Were that be punctus to be the! On case, the the other name hand, Scientific Names Subcommittee (type species: Antigonus corrosus Mabille). to apply to U.S. populations at species level Urbanus vetus Erosus Weeks, 1905 support only two species, leo and another, then after [the respondent] has published his data). Hesperiidae and the fact that erosus is the type Hübner, 1812: pl. [153], theif we oldest were namehappy for to theaccept latter that would the BOLD indeed data the(3) Notrue change type locality from present of this taxon,usage untilthere more is one whereabouts of type material unknown, speciesTherefore, of Antigonus given the ,present Antigonus classification is currently of the the figs 1–4. Type locality uncertain (no data); seem to be savigny, with manueli a junior research is done. (4) Regardless the problemsavignyi of combined with erosus that can be applied to it. probably lost. Date of publication: Hemming, manuelivalid type should specimen, be retained and so asthe a namejunior [ synonym.] Hesperia westermann only generic name amongst those that have been 1937: 404. subjective synonym at species level. is stabilized and available. The other name 791. Type locality Brazil. Type material collected Scientific Name Discussion uncertainties,“If we cannot one find could more argue published that for orNABA by Langsdorff Latreille, 1824: 728, thepublicly existing accessible usage of data manueli now, givenbe continued all these at theAs evident best temporary from the solution.information (5) Mydisplayed thinking in not to accept Antigonus erosus as the name for the “Chairman’s comments” this seems to be . Syntype in BMNH (image at: thisThe species,Chair commented: on addition I cannotto the NABA see any list. reason I shall is a credible possibility that that there may be http://www.butterfliesofamerica.com/L/ih/westermanni westermannLatr_i.htm). Original synonymy by ifpresent, it is assumed but kept there under are review.only two No species loss of of data yetis that another since specieswe have in information this group, thatwith there it being Achlyodes erosus Kirby, 1877: 836 [as , sic]. Polygonuswould be involved in North whatever America the final outcome, unclear which would be the species entering the comment:be voting for the its name adoption. for this skipper would based on the existing taxonomic system, the Thanaos westermanni(Hübner); Westwood, 1852: dependThe on committee the neotype received designation, the following but at the 524. primary type of savigny and. theHaving type said material that, subsequent to the publication of the Mielke moment it is not possible to suggest anything [sic] (Latreille); Butler, of manueli clearly belong to the same currently U.S., and since we have already waited 14manueli years Nisoniades westermanni but Antigonus erosus. 1870c: 97. accepted morphospecies. But we are still left and savigny, that we should wait another year [sic] (Latreille); Kirby, with the problem, where did the primary type of and Casagrande paper that synomized Helias erosus a committee member: The case is well 1871: 630. savigny actually come from?” urgency here. Systasea erosa One comment was received from or so and then revisit the question. There is no (Hübner); Kirby, 1879: 239. clear that the name should be applied without [sic]; Godman & Salvin, 1895: Scientific Name Decision Antigonus erosus problem.documented in the NABA draft … It seems to me opinionThe mostlycommittee relies received on unpublished the following data that 411. Polygonus manueli, (Hübner); Evans, 1953: 157; comment: [This is] a toughmanueli one, is because a Brazilian my Mielke, 2004: 43; Mielke, 2005c: 442; Glassberg, species, so it should Votes cast: 3 in favor of 3 P. manueli Polygonus savigny, 1 2012: 307 (fig.). I can’t ignore. Anyway, in favor of deferring decision (≡ 3 votes for Antigonus erosus it is a name junior tonot savigny be used in any for case,[the] and ), 5 in favor of A specimen identified as butterfly [that enters North America]. However, abstention (non-return). 32 American Butterflies,Fall/Winter 2015 (Hübner) was observed at Shary Road, Mission, 33 Scientific Name Decision binomen Hesperia pelopidas Fabricius (type Antigonus erosus, 1

AntigonusVotes cast: 10 erosus in favor is of adopted by NABA locality uncertain, most likely Surinam) really abstention (non-return). juniorrefers toname this that species? we can Should be sure that does eventually apply? Antigonus Thirdly,prove not six to generic be the case,names is otherthere thanan available Mylon as the scientific name for the be sure that Mylon is the correct, or at least best first recorded from Texas by Knudson et generichave been name applied to use? to this butterfly — so can we al. (2004). English Names Subcommittee species, at least in part, on unpublished images Fabricius (1793) based and named this Dusted Spurwing English names already in use for this species: collectionmade by William was sold Jones by auction from one after or hismore death in Common Spurwing: Glassberg: Garwood (2007); and Lehman Glassberg specimens in the Dru Drury collection. Drury’s (2012). 1804, and some of his specimens thereby passed Powdered Grey Spurwing Antigonus erosus is added to the Mylon pelopidas is added to the (2004). to Alexander Macleay. Macleay’s huge insect : Hoskins (2015). NABA Checklist and its English name NABA Checklist and its English name collection is now in Sydney, Australia. Finding becomes Dusted Spurwing. becomes Pale Mylon. a specific specimen in the Macleay Collection The name Dusted Spurwing is in somewhat locatedis a major there. task There (Chair, is pers. no report obs.); that to date, the typevery greater usage than is Common Spurwing, Aug. 9, 2014. Frontera Corrazol, July 25, 2015. Parque Agua Blanca, materialfew type ofspecimens Hesperia relatingpelopidas to has Drury been have found been including being the only name used in any U.S. Chiapas, Mexico. Tabasco, Mexico. H. pelopidas Therefield guide. are currently The lead nine author species of the of 2004 spurwings work now uses Dusted Spurwing at her website. Fewin Sydney if any —other and depositories indeed for authentic may never the group name for the genus Antigonus — and have come into Macleay’s possession anyway. only— previously two of them, adopted this species on the NABAand A .Checklist nearchus ,as NABA-NC 2014-11 Mylon pelopidas Hitherto known only from Mexico south to Mylon pelopidas (Fabricius, 1793), species Paraguay, Mylon pelopidas has now been Drury material are known. The dusted gray color of the males is unique new to list recorded from North America based on a single nameThe probably two William does applyJones toimages a member do not of help what have widespread (= common) distributions. isin nowthis regardtreated — as other the Mylon than pelopidasconfirming species that the Scientific Names Subcommittee th and thus the name Dusted Spurwing might be a Hesperia pelopidas male encountered at Sycamore Canyon, Santa Englishvaluable Namefield identification Discussion aid. Cruz County, Arizona, 12 September 2005, group (Austin, 2000). Certainly the images Fabricius, 1793: 350. Type by Kim Davis and Mike Stangeland (Davis et show a skipper that is “dingy gray-brown locality: “Indiis” [Surinam?]. Type material in particularal., 2005). Theby reference identification to the was account confirmed of Austin by overall” (Glassberg, 2012: 325), but it would One example of Committee members’ comments undersides).Drury Collection [probably lost?]. Iconotype: dissection and evaluation of the genitalia,Mylon in pers.be impossible obs.). Arguably to make this a critical may be identification a case where “Common doesn’t tell me anything. Dusted does JonesPyrgus Icones pelopidas 6: pl. 27, fig.2 (upper and included by Austin in the pelopidas species on the basis of the Jones’ paintings (Chair, (2000), noting that, of the six species of Englishand I feel describesName Decision the butterfly well.” group, “pelopidas a specimen from amongst the syntypic material Achlyodes ozema (Fabricius); Butler, 1870a: ofdesignation Achlyodea of ozema a neotype should could be considered, be justified. If so, 280. has the most distinctive male so long as any such specimen conforms to Votes cast for species name: 5 cast for Dusted, 0 Leucochitonea pelopidasButler, 1870b: 515. Type thisgenitalia, species with, are long, so distinct slender they harpes” can be (Davis assessed et the current concept of pelopidas, and is also cast for Common, 0 cast for Powdered Grey. 1871:locality: 617. Nicaragua, Honduras, Brazil [BMNH]. al., 2005: 103). Apparently the male genitalia of (Fabricius); Kirby, ozema. In that way ozema would become an Dusted Spurwing is adopted as the Antigonus ozema Eudamidas ozema beenin the accepted field, even as without North American the use of by a Glassberghand- available for designationpelopidas as the , lectotypereducing ofthe NABA name for Antigonus erosus. (Butler); Plötz, 1884: 28. lens (Davis et al., 2005: 106). This species has risk of further uncertainty. Mylon pelopidas (Butler); Godman & Salvin, There are, potentially, three taxonomic objective synonym of 1895: 386. issues(2012: affecting 325). the name of this species. In the the type material), it were decided that the (Fabricius); Mabille, 1903: nameIf, Hesperia for some pelopidas reason (such Fabricius as discovery could not of 63;Mylon Evans, ozema 1953: ab. 148; brunnea Mielke, Mabille 2004: &50; Boullet, Mielke, apply to the taxon currently known as Mylon 2005c: 608. pelopidasabsence of authentic type material, and given pelopidas, the species name Achlyodes ozema pelopidasthe great exo-phenotypic similarity between would appear to be the most likely substitute. 1917: 55. Type-locality: Mexico, Brazil [MNHN, and the five other members of the Paris]. from Mexico group — can(Austin, we be 2000; certain Davis that et the al., 2005) — at least two of which are also known According to Godman & Salvin (1895), Holland 34 American Butterflies,Fall/Winter 2015 (1927) and Hayward (1933), butterflies 35 Eudamidas ozema in Eudamidas Scientific Name Decision NABA-NC 2014-13 of the same form as the species now known as that to accommodate pelopidas would require Mylon pelopidas, 1 in Amblyscirtes simius identified as have genitalia ; if split into three, it is likely M. pelopidas Mylon ozema, Amblyscirtes simius Edwards, 1881, versus ensure that at least some of the type material of Votes cast: 9 in favor of Notamblyscirtes simius (Edwards, 1881): . However, it needs to be checked to erection of a new genus. However, in current A. ozema does actually conform to this current Mylon is the only name applied to favorMylon of pelopidas is 1adopted abstention by (non-return). NABA as potential change of scientific name classifications. (e.g. Mielke, 2005c; Warren et al., pelopidas Antigonus original syntypic series is mixed then, if feasible, 2008, 2009), Scientific Names Subcommittee adiagnosis. lectotype Moreover, selection should beit prove made that that the best Scientific Name Discussion recorded from Texas by Knudson et al. the scientific name for the Amblyscirtes simius Mylon is not Edwards, 1881: 6. Type serves the interests of stability. The Chair commented: “This case is not quite Mylon certain were the current group of species English(2004). Names Subcommittee Museumlocality: USA, of Natural Colorado, History. Custer [http:// County, Oak LeucochitoneaWith respect lassia to generic Hewitson, names, 1868), other the than taxon assigned‘cut and dried’. to Mylon Application split into of two or more Creek Canyon. Type material in Carnegie currently Godman named & pelopidasSalvin, 1894 Fabricius (type species has been separate groups. Is the monophyly of Mylon as Dingy Mylon: combined in the genera Hesperia English Names already in use for this species: butterfliesofamerica.com/notamblyscirtes_Chaerephon simius (type species Papilio comma Linnaeus, 1758), we do more to ascertain that? Likewise, the Pale Mylon: Glassberg (2007); Glassberg simius.htm; accessed 16.xi.2012] Fabricius, 1793 currently circumscribed well founded? Should Pyrgus Hübner, 1819 (type species Papilio species name is at some risk from the (in my Pallid(2012), Mylon Stomyles simius (Edwards); Barnes & alveolus P. malvae Linnaeus, Warren et. al. McDunnoughYvretta simius (1916). 1758), Achlyodes Hübner, 1819 (type species : Hoskins (2015). Amblyscirtes simius(Edwards); Draudt (1924). Hübner, 1800 = view very unlikely) discovery of the original Papilio busirus Leucochitonea approximately the same number of web hits, ?genus simius (Edwards); Hemming (1935). type material. Given that uncertainty, is any Leucochitonea discussed in the current case notes)? Dingy Mylon and Pale Mylon returned Amblyscirtes” simiusEdwards; Freeman (1943). levubu Cramer, 1779),Antigonus Hübner, function served by designating a Neotype (as (Edwards); Burns (1990). Wallengern, 1857 (types species English Name Discussion 1819 (type species Urbanus erosus Hübner, name on the horizon, so to speak, and think Pallid Mylon, less than one-tenth as many. NotamblyscirtesNot-“ (Edwards); Scott 1812), Wallengren,and Eudamidas 1857), it unlikely“Having this said will that, change I do innot the see near any future. other (1992: 146); Pelham (2008). are currently placed in the genus Mylon. To my Amblyscirtes simius (type species Papilio melander P. Swift Guide Scott, 2006: 70. Type species: eyes,One Committee at least three member or four said of these “Fifteen are species paler designation. menippus Fabricius, 1776Godman = P. maimon & Salvin, Fabricius, 1895 Edwards, 1881, by original than . Notamblyscirtes simius 1775). Cramer, 1780 = The name is in use in Glassberg’sMylon pelopidas for the M pelopidas Of these genera, Hesperia belongs to the (2012). So on balance I currently propose to .” Another Committee member (Edwards); Scott Hesperiinae, whereas all the rest including vote for the adoption of nd commented “I don’t like the term dingy as a In(2006); the current Pelham NABA (2008). checklist (2 edition), Mylon belong to the subfamily Pyrginae. species encountered in the U.S. by Davis and decription for butterflies. Would you want to Leucochitonea is currently regarded as a small, thatStrangeland the name (Davis would et depend al., 2005).” on the neotype be called dingy?” A third Committee member designation,The committee and the received specimen a comment:selected should stating contributed “I’m not a big fan of either Pale or includedthe Simius in Roadside-Skipper the genus Amblyscirtes is one of over Pyrgus, Achlyodes and Antigonus are all in 187220 species (type of species: North AmericanHesperia vialis hesperiids exclusively African genus (Ackery et al., 1995). Dingy. Pale because of the confusionpelopidas highlighted. I above. Dingy since for the Mylons, the word 1862). All of these species, with theScudder, exception ozemaprobably be from Suriname, and at that point Edwards, onedingy of doesn’t the current seem names to quit but fit whatfor about Ashy of simius Finally,use for separate,Eudamidas valid is currently genera, with regarded all three as a the name for the U.S. butterflyMylon would pelopidas likely be. Mylon?know we “ should try to be conservative and pick represented in the New WorldMylon (Mielke, 2005c). . However, if published information is , have male genitalia with a very committeeconsidered, members: today’s name (1) is similar ‘ground-plan’. As noted by Evans (1955), junior subjective synonym of (Evans, Two comments were received from English Name Decision Mylon, M. lassia is in use as the MacNeil (1975), Stanford (1981) and Scottsimius 1953; Mielke, 2005c). Designation of a senior name for a recognized species, while are(1986, in many 1992, respects 2006), and radically discussed different. in detail In Within neotype has its attractions. However, unlikely melander discussingby Burns (1990), these differences, the male genitalia and certain of other as the discovery of the type material might Votes cast for speciesgroup name: name, 5 1st cast ballot: for Mylon, 2 cast 0 for M. As long as the specimen on which the North characters (including the female genitalia, maimon Cramer is regarded as a junior Americanbe, there is record an outside of M. chancepelopidas of itsis clearly discovery. cast for skipper, 0 cast for any other name. subjective synonym of another species, Mylon into three species assemblages that simius was not a member of Amblyscirtes (Fabricius, 1775). Austin (2000) tiePale, between 2 cast for two Dingy, names, 1 cast the proceduresfor Ashy. If aof ballot the based on differences in wing pattern and which— but alsodeclined differ), to erectBurns a (1990) new genus was foremphatic it, as dividedgenital morphology: the lassia, menippus [= thisvouchered has been and proposed). labelled, then (2) Mylon it would pelopidas. not really I of the English Names Committee results in a maimon pelopidas species groups. The totallybe NABA’s rely role on the to designatecriteria used a neotype to identify (not this that English Names Subcommittee call for a run-off as a peripheral isolate of one of the numerous generic name Mylon Neotropicalhe considered skipper it might genera. eventually be placed these, and] and the junior Eudamidas male genitalia included). Very long story and, ballot that includes only the top two vote-getting s.s. applies to the first of taxon recorded once from Arizona (distinctive names. In this case, only Run-off ballot: 3 cast the pelopidas species group does not include as in many cases, we should keep adopting this “Amblyscirtes” simius to the second; for Pale, 2 cast for Dingy. name until another study demonstrates the Pale Mylon is adopted as the NABA as toScott whether (1992) or notreferred he had to intended this species to erect as Not- opposite. name for Mylon pelopidas. a new genus, Notamblyscirtes, giving rise, for to this uncertainty species. Mylonany species-group subsequently taxon split that into istwo the genera, type of it is an available genericpelopidas name. wouldWere the be includedgenus 36 American Butterflies,Fall/Winter 2015 Scott (2006) referred to this uncertainty, stating37 conceivable that that this genus was “inadvertently but validly Finally, it may be worthy of note that the of simius from Amblyscirtes is considered combination “Notamblyscirtes simius” generates compelling,If, however, then the which evidence generic for name separation should purposesonly imagine of the that NABA this putativechecklilst relationship we cannot is not evident from genital morphology. For the “almostAmblyscirtes 1000 ‘hits’ simius using” generates Google —more suggestive than be applied? On the evidence of the literary twentythat it has times been that widely number. accepted. However, undertake wholesale revisions. Given the Chaerephonsynonym presented above, at first sight there biologicallyopinion of Burns misleading (backed to bycontinue Scott) andto list the simius Pamphilawould appear citrus to be at least five Stomylescontenders: Scientific Name Discussion withinresults Amblyscirtesof Warren et al., I think it would be Godman, 1900 (typePyrgus species textor for the change to Notamblyscirtes simius — the Mabille,Yvretta 1889); Hemming, authorship and date. Soof NotamblyscirtesI currently intend being to vote Scudder, 1872 (typePamphila species citrus Mabille, toThe the Chair horrible commented: name Notamblyscirtes “A rather perplexing, surely Geyer, 1827–1831); Amblyscirtes originallyissue on the an face accident?, of it. Apart on the from face aversion of it, it does The species simius Edwards species1935 (type Amblyscirtes species look as if simius lies well outside the group Scott, 2006.” 1881, is removed from the genus Notamblyscirtes1889); Not-‘ ’ Scott, 1992 (type of taxa clustered around the type species of AmblyscirtesThe committee, because received the species a comment belongs opining to a Amblyscirtes and placed in the genus Amblyscirtes Edwards, 1881); and Amblyscirtes that this [butterfly] should not remain in Notamblyscirtes. Accordingly, the Chaerephon Scott, 2006 (type species pinpointing cases where highly autapomorphic be in the same genus. and that this species English name is changed from Simius replaced by YvrettaEdwards,, the 1881). type species However, of which,of these species are sometimes. However, inmolecular fact internal evidence to groups is isdifferent somewhat tribe, similar and thus, to Euphyes by definition,, but stands cannot is an invalid junior homonym, Roadside-Skipper to Simius Skipper. Pamphila citrus of species (genera) that lack the outstanding to be a member of the genus Polites sequences. 1872 (type species, is considered Hesperia peckius by Burns Kirby, (1994) out from anything else in a library of DNA June 5, 1997. Penrose, Fremont Co., Scudder, features but are otherwise very similar to CO. included under Polites in the current NABA each other. In this case, however, the available conclusionThree comments reluctantly were before received reading from the checklist.1837) — aThe quite type different species group of Stomyles of species is molecular evidence, not cited in the draft due to committee members: (1) I’d reached this considered to be a junior synonym of Hesperia an oversight on my part, appears unequivocal. Warren et al. (2008: 18/19) state the following: chairman’s comments. It would, in my view, named” by him in 1992 but, because of the aesculapius genus Amblyscirtes Burns (1990) commented on the hesperiine have been better to have followed Burns and left ambiguity, he then named the genus again in a species, simius, did not belong in Amblyscirtes, had been made with contending genera. Amblyscirtes Fabricius, aesculapius 1793, included. Thus on the the only … He also noted that one well alone until more extensive comparisons contenders,NABA checklist if simius as the is Lace-winged to be placed Roadside-in a separate manner fully acceptable under the ICZN Code. genusSkipper, from Amblyscirtes Amblyscirtes based on male genitaliasimius that may ‘‘differ be related radically’’ to a However, given that a new name has simiusbeen does Pelham (2008) rejected the 1992 ‘naming’, but and Notamblyscirtes Neotropicalfrom other species genus unfamiliarin the genus. to him,However, Burns notapplied belong it is to difficult Amblyscirtes not to. accept(2) I understand it, given that that accepted the 2006 version as the current correct subject to automatic correction,, are Not-‘ Notamblyscirtes’ treatedover concern simius that as incertae sedis, and did not the view of all commentatorsNot isamblyscirtes that so name for the genus of this skipper. Examination . Scott (2006) suggests that, Scott deliberately called it of Scott (1992) indicates that PelhamAmblyscirtes was ” be consensus in the peculiarity of the genitalic Scott, 1992, is valid, whereas as noted above, suggest to which of Evans’s groups of hesperiine I prefer the 2006 version. (3) There seems to simiuscorrect — the relevant section (starting p. 146) that the correct authority and date for this proposed the generic name Notamblyscirtes morphology of this taxon, which excludes it Pelham (2008) is emphatic that it is not, and genera it may belong. Scott (2006) subsequently refersis headed only by to the ““Amblyscirtes words “Not-“” simius for simius. In addition to N. simius, we sampled from Amblyscirtes. I respect Burns opinion “A. simius Edw.”,”, he but does thereafter not designate in his atext type Scott species, one Amblyscirtes species, A. exoteria, whose generic name must be Scott, 2006. In conclusion, and in discussing the characters considered” or even just simius were to be placed presence in Amblyscirtes has not been disputed morphologist and a renowned expert in following Pelham (2008) and the arguments and criteria very much. He is an outstanding to separate simius from “true Amblyscirtes”, in a separate genus from Amblyscirtes, then its presented above, if the two species are situated in separate tribes. -Amblyscirtes would be Notamblyscirtes simius Notamblyscirtes(e.g. Burns, 1990). simius According is in Hesperiini, to our results, in Hesperiidae. I am conservative and I would not correct scientific name in the NABA checklist validate Not Scott 1992, because simiushe refers.” back to Burns (1990), and then adds 1881), on recombination with Notamblyscirtes a sister relationship with Euphyes circumstances described in the NABA draft case. (Edwards, formally the name cannot be available in the “[Burns]For the could purposes not find of the the proper third edition genus for 5). Amblyscirtes exoteria, presumably along (177: BS of the NABA checklist, two questions arise. with other Amblyscirtes species, is situated in simiusScott, 2006. does belong to some named but as yet Moncini, in a sister relationship with Mnasicles andShould publication. this species For belong the moment in another I would genus adopt There remains, however, the possibility that already available, it needs formal demonstration that Amblyscirtes simius + Remella Notamblyscirtes simius. acceptedFirst, is the as evidencea member on of which the genus the assertion Amblyscirtes un-associated Neotropical genus, as suggested (167: BS 8), corroborating Burns’ compelling? The principalEdwards insight cannoton this be Scientific Name Decision isby it Burns better (1990) to retain and simius not contradicted in Amblyscirtes by Scott (1990) conclusion. Notamblyscirtes simius, (1992). In which case, a final question arises — “If we accept the evidence of Warren et Amblyscirtes simius, 1 abstention , even al. (2008), and their corroboration of Burns thenquestion simius still should appears continue to derive to befrom included Burns in accept its transfer to Notamblyscirtes, for fear the species simius Votes cast: 9 in favor of if we do not believe it belongs there, rather than (1990) opinion, then it seems compelling that Amblyscirtes(1990). If the, theevidence genus isin not which compelling, it was originally Amblyscirtes. The question could now become, 1 in favor of be synonymized with another genus established is simius just an oddshould species be ofremoved Euphyes from? As (non-return). beforethat the 1992? latter, monobasic genus will eventually Euphyes NABA checklist as Amblyscirtes simius should described over 100 years ago. The skipper previously included on the 38 American Butterflies,Fall/Winter 2015 must be very familiar to Burns, I can 39 henceforth be called Notamblyscirtes simius.

English Names Subcommittee al., 1996: 252; Mielke & Casagrande, 2002: 59; prefer original orthography whereverlucas to sylvicolapossible., Mielke, 2004: 75; Mielke, 2005d: 1137. and Currentlucas to lucasi.usage, Thusat least a search as revealed for “Panoquina by use Simius Roadside-Skipper of “Google”, appears to favour English Names already in use for this species: beThe Panoquina species name sylvicola for the Purple-washed : Cassie et al. (2001) andSkipper this hasis how been it isconsidered listed in the for NABA many checklistyears to lucas” gave 2300 hits, “Panoquina thsylvicola” (2nd (Herrich-Schäffer, 1865), 1750, “Panoquina lucasi” none, “Turesis lucasi” It would appear that, given the removal of hits.14, and This “Turesis suggests lucas” that 154the replacement [on 17 November of Simius Roadside-Skipper from the genus stated edition). that, in However, their opinion, Robbins, sylvicola Lamas, (type Mielke, both2012]. Turesis “Turesis lucas complanula” by Turesis complanula,resulted in 646 and of roadside-skippers, the English Names Harvey & Casagrande (1996: 252) explicitlyHesperia Panoquina sylvicola by Panoquina lucas has been Committee has three options: 1, leave this lucas widely accepted, and that the spelling lucas is in opportunityspecies as Simius of this Roadside-Skipper; name change to create 2, change a locality Cuba) is a junior synonym of common use whereas lucasi is not. the name to Simius Skipper; 3, take the reportedFabricius, that they 1793 had (type examined locality a syntype[West of lucasIndies])., which Mielke they & designated Casagrande as (2002) lectotype, later and Panoquina as Commentsmore meaningful English name. that this did represent the same species as a a necessaryIn passing, replacement it is noted for that Prenes Hemming (1934: syntype of (1872:38) introduced 81), preoccupied the generic by name simius Goniloba sylvicola Prenes The English name of Purple-washed 1865 — which specimen they designated (Actinopterygii). The generic name isScudder not at appears to be not closely related to Amblyscirtes, Skipper remains the same but the myOne own Committee inclination member would said be to“Because not keep lectotype for that nominal species.Herrich-Schäffer, If so, based issue. Gistl, 1848 scientific name is changed from Panoquina lucas, compelling that Hesperia lucas Fabricius, Panoquina sylvicola to Panoquina the current name, Simius Roadside-Skipper.” withon priority, G. sylvicola the scientific name of the Purple- Four questions thus arise.Goniloba Is the evidence sylvicola lucas. toAnother hear of offered any other “Simius insightful Skipper proposed is the most new washedthe nominate Skipper subspecies would become. Illustrations of both names.”conservative name change although I’d like lectotypes appear a juniorto demonstrate subjective that synonym this is ofthe 1793, is a senior synonym of June 5, 2013. National Butterfly Center, case. checklistHerrich-Schäffer, should remain 1865? IfPanoquina not, then sylvicolathe scientific Hidalgo Co., TX. The skipper previously included name of the Purple-washed Skipper in the NABA on the NABA checklist as Simius lucas and sylvicola are accepted as [Note: Butler (1870a: 262, pl. 3, Hesperiafig. the(Herrich-Schäffer, same, should Panoquina 1865). On lucasthe other (Fabricius, hand, Roadside-Skipper, Amblyscirtes lucas4d) would appear to have been ultimately even if lucas (Fabricius), with Goniloba sylvicola simius, should henceforth be called responsible for the identification of Simius Skipper, Notamblyscirtes his newwith genus the butterflyTuresis. H. cited lucas by was Godman similarly (1901: second1793) be question accepted is asyes, the then scientific it is still name necessary of the synonym. But if in your opinion they do not representHerrich-Schäffer the same accepted species, as then a junior you mightsubjective simius. 616, pl. 104, figs 22, 23) as the type species of toPurple-washed determine the Skipper? correct formIf the ofanswer the species to the Turesis epithet: lucas (as in the original orthography), or sylvicola be retained. In this treated by Evans (1955: 190) and Hemminglucas with lucasi. case I think there would be some expectation NABA-NC 2014-14 wish to vote that sylvicola(1967: 451) as the type species of Scientific Name Discussion Panoquina sylvicola stability,Godman, it1901. would If thebe necessary synonymy to of designate Hesperia lucas — including the possibility that Panoquina sylvicola (Herrich-Schäffer, 1865) is upheld then, in order to preserve case largely comes down to whether or not thethat type you representsgive an alternative an extinct identification species. For for versus Panoquina lucas (Fabricius, 1793): H. lucas” as the type theThe type Chair specimens commented: of lucas “The and question sylvicola in this really example, the species represented by the type potential change of scientific name speciesthe oldest of Turesisavailable — name which synonymous is currently withtaken belong to the same species. To my inexperienced material of Jemadia aethiops (Gmelin) — an toGodman’s be Goniloba misidentified complanula “ Scientific Names Subcommittee 18th invalid homonym — is matched by a number of Hesperia lucas Herrich-Schäffer,G. complanula Swifteye the Guide photographs — show butterflies with the C specimens, but is not precisely the same as as1869 the (e.g. type Mielke, species 2004: of Turesis 82; Cock,. T. complanula 2009). Mielke is hasdiagnostic lost the features purple sheengiven inof Glassberg’sthe underside (2012) — Fabricius, 1793: 339. Type (2005d: 1328) explicitly cites or is a female, ineven which though case the it should Fabrician be plaintype Ianything suspect thataethiops I have Gmelin seen collectedmay represent since (Vane-an locality: “S. America Islands” [West Indies]. Type Wright 1975; Vane-Wright & Hughes 2005). Goniloba sylvicola brown. Is the forewing of the lucas type less extinct species.” material in ZMUK, Copenhagen. a relatively uncommon neotropical skipper, extended than one would expect? Or is this lucas F. Herrich-Schäffer, 1865: 55. unknown from North America.] lucas “is another sexual dimorphism difference? are largely dispelled by the following comment Type locality: Cuba. Type material in Museum Berlin, Berlin. subjectHemming to automatic (1967: correction 451) insisted to the that Latinized the “If these specimens are considered to However, such concerns regarding für Naturkunde der Humboldt Universität zu Prenes sylvicola un-latinizedlucasi modern [sic] patronymic pertain to the same species, and if they are of island and inland forms are similar, and accepted as genuine primary types (I think they received: [The] morphology and COI sequences (Herrich-Schäffer); Scudder, Panoquina sylvicola genitive “ ” under Article 31(a) of the Code are), then it seems to me there is no good reason people, so the name is Panoquina lucas. 1863: 81. and is here so corrected.” However, this is not a original orthography is preferred by butterfly (Herrich-Schäffer); Panoquina lucas lucas mandatory change under present code (ICZN, Panoquina committee members: (1) After careful reading Watson, 1937: 7. 1999: Article 32.5). In general, contemporary not to accept the change of the scientific name Two comments were received from 40 American Butterflies,(Fabricius);Fall/Winter Robbins 2015 et lepidopterists (except in continental Europe) for the Purple-washed Skipper to 41 of the case and comments I see a good case of annotated catalogue of the Papilionoidea Entomologist’s monthly Magazine 7 Section I. British Museum, London. synonymy where the principle of priority has to and Hesperioidea of the Afrotropical Region. Evans, W.H. 1953. A Catalogue of the American : 55–58, be applied as well as the original spelling of the Cassie, B., Glassberg, J., Swengel, A. and Hesperiidae. Part III. 92–99. Austin, G.T. 2000. Hesperiidae of Rondônia, Tudor, G. 2001. North American Butterfly Pyrginae. Section 2. British Museum, London. one. Too many unknowns. CSIRO, East Melbourne, Australia. (Groups E, F, G) Brazil: “Antigonus” genus group (Pyrginae), Association (NABA) Checklist & English Names Evans, W.H. 1955. A Catalogue of the American specific epithet. (2) I wish to abstain from this nd with taxonomic comments and descriptions of North American Butterflies (2 edn.). Hesperiidae. Part IV. (Groups H to P) Scientific Name Decision of new species from Brazil and Guatemala. NABA, Morristown, New Jersey. Hesperiinae and Megathyminae. British Panoquina lucas, none Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society 54(1): Caterino, M., Glassberg, J. & Heraty, J. Museum, London. Panoquina sylvicola, abstentions (1 Votes cast: 8 in favor of Fabricius, J.C. 1793. Entomologia Systematica Barnes, W. & McDunnough, J.H. 1916. Notes American Butterflies 11 2003. in favor of 3 return). on1–28. North American diurnal Lepidoptera. Report of the NABA Names Committee. deliberate; 1 accidentally spoiled vote; 1 non- Cock, M.J.W. 2009. Freeman, H.A. 1943. New Hesperioidea, with Contributions to the Natural History of the (Hesperiidae) of Trinidad(2): Part 24–27. 16, volume 3(1). Hafniae. Lepidoptera of North America 3 The skipper butterflies Hesperiinae, Genera Group J, Vettius (Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera). Entomological NABA checklist as Panoquina sylvicola 8 pls. Naevolus. Living World, Journal of Trinidad notes on some others from the United States (2): 51–156, News 54 shouldThe skipper henceforth previously be called included Panoquina on the Barnes, W. & McDunnough, J.H. 1917. Check and Tobago Field Naturalists’ Club 2009 – : Garwood, K. and Lehman, R. 2004. lucas. List of the Lepidoptera of Boreal America. : 72–77. , accessed Butterflies: 11–31. [online at: http://ttfnc.org/livworld/ Bell, E.L. & Comstock, W.P. 1948. A new genus Northeastern Mexico. Self-published. English Names Subcommittee Herald Press, Decatur, Illinois. lw2009/2009p11cock.pdf Glassberg, J. A Swift Guide to the and some new species and subspecies Davis, K., Stangeland M. Warren, A.D. Weslaco, Texas. 17.xi.2012] Butterflies of Mexico and Central America. of American Hesperiidae (Lepidoptera, 2005. Mylon pelopidas: a new record for 2007. Purple-washed Skipper has heretofore been Rhopalocera). American Museum Novitates News of the Glassberg, J. 2012. A Swift Guide to Butterflies namethe NABA of the English species name from for sylvicola this species. to lucas the Lepidopterists’ Society 47 Sunstreak Books, Morristown, New Jersey. Arizona and the United States. of North America Notwithstanding the change in the scientific Brown, F.M. & Heineman, B. 1972. Jamaica and (1379): 23 pp. (4): 103–104, 106, Morristown, New Jersey. its Butterflies. Draudt, M.W.K. 1921–1924. B. Grypocera, . Sunstreak Books, 110. Godman, F.D. & Salvin, O. 1893–1894. Biologia English Names Subcommittee saw no reason to In Gross- Burns, J.M. 1990. Amblyscirtes: problems with Centrali-Americana. Insecta. Lepidoptera- change the English name. E.W. Classey, London. Schmetterlinge der Erde 5 English Name Decision species, species groups, the limits of the Rhopalocera genus and genus groups beyond—a look at breitköpfige Tagfalter. Seitz, A. (ed.), : 836–1011, 31 pls. Dyar, H.G. 1905. 2 [part]: 241–360, pls 73–81. Alfred Kernen, Stuttgart. Godman, F.D. & Salvin, O. 1895. Biologia Votes cast for maintaining Purple-washed Journal of the Journal of the New York Dulau & Co., B. Quaritch, London. Centrali-Americana. Insecta. Lepidoptera- Skipper: 5. Votes cast for changing this name: 0. Lepidopterists’what is wrong withSociety the 44 skipper classification Entomological A Society review 13 of the Hesperiidae of Evans (Hesperiidae). of the United States. Rhopalocera The skipper previously included on Burns, J.M. 1994. Edwards, W.H. 1875. Report upon the (1): 11–27. (3): 111–141. the NABA checklist as Purple-washed Poanopsis goes in the origines group—and collections of diurnal Lepidoptera made in London. 2 (121): 385–400, pl. 85; (125): Tvretta forms the Split rhesus skippers: group—of Mexican Polites genus 401–416, pl. 87. Dulau & Co., B. Quaritch, Skipper, Panoquina sylvicola, should Godman, F.D. 1901. Biologia Centrali- (Hesperiidae). Journal of the Lepidopterists’ and Arizona during the years 1871, 1872, henceforth be called Purple-washed Americana. Insecta. Lepidoptera-Rhopalocera Society 48 portions of Colorado, Utah, New Mexico, Skipper, Panoquina lucas. Burns, J.M. & Janzen, D.H. 2001. (1): 24–45. 1873, and 1874, with notes upon all species L. Mead, and a list of all species collected, 2 [part]: 589–782, pls 101–112. Dulau & Co., known to inhabit Colorado, by Theodore Hemming, F. 1935. Biodiversity B. Quaritch, London. of Pyrrhopyginae skipper butterflies Humphreys, A.A., Report upon Geographical of Rhopalocera. Stylops 4 Journal of the Notes on seventeen genera Acknowledgement (Hesperiidae) in the Area de Conservación andby W.H. Geological Edwards. Explorations In Wheeler, and G.M. Surveys & 5 Hemming, F. 1937. Hübner Lepidopterists’ Society 55 : 1–3. Guanacaste, Costa Rica. Butler, A.G. 1870a. Catalogue of Diurnal : 15–43. (volume 1). Royal Lepidoptera Described by Fabricius in the Edwards, W.H. 1881. Hemming, F. 1967. The generic names of The committee is grateful for extensive (Zoology): 737–794, 6 pls. Entomological Society of London, London. Collection of the British Museum. British species of diurnal Lepidoptera found comments received from Nick Grishin. prepared, we regret to announce that committee Museum, London. DescriptionsTransactions of new of the (Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera). Bulletin of During the period over when this report was American Entomological Society 9 the Britishbutterflies Museum and their(Natural type-species History), Butler, A.G. 1870b. within the United States. Evans, 1951. A Catalogue of the American Entomology : Americanmember Dr Butterflies Torben Larsen. passed away. For a : 1–8. Descriptions of some new Hesperiidae. Part I. Introduction and Group A. Herrich-Schäffer, G.A.W. 1865. brief obituary please see page 46 of this issue of Transactions of the Entomological Society of , Suppl (9) 509 pp. Londondiurnal Lepidoptera,1870 chiefly Hesperiidae. Pyrrhopyginae. British Museum, London. Correspondenz-Blatt des zoologisch-Die References Butler, A.G. 1870c. The genera of Hesperidae Evans, W.H. 1952. A Catalogue of the American mineralogischenSchmetterlingsfauna Vereines der Inselin Regensburg Cuba. Ackery, P.R., Smith, C.R. & Vane-Wright, R.I. in the collection(4): of 485–520. the British Museum. Hesperiidae. Part II. (Groups B, C, D) Pyrginae. 1995. Carcasson’s African Butterflies. An 19 42 American Butterflies,Fall/Winter 2015 43 (3/4): 52–60. Herrich-Schäffer, G.A.W. 1868. Prodromus Mabille, P. & Boullet, E. 1917b. Oklahoma. systematis lepidopterorum. Versuch Bulletin de la Pelham, J.P. 2008. Vane-Wright, R.I. 1975. Description University. 83 pp. einer systematischen Anordnung der Société entomologique de France 1917(1): Journal of by J.F. Gmelin (Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera), d’hespérides nouveaux (Lep.). Correspondenz-Blatt Research on the LepidopteraCatalogue of 40 the butterflies Bulletin of the British MuseumThe butterflies (Natural named des zoologisch-mineralogischen Vereines in of the United States and Canada. MacNeil, C.D. 1975. Family Hesperiidae. In Plötz, C. 1879. History 32 SchmetterlingeRegensburg 22 [part]. 54–60. : xiv + 658 pp. The Butterflies of North Pyrrhopyga und ihre Arten. Stettiner Vane-Wright, R.I. & Hughes, H.W.D. 2005. ) Entomology (2): 17–64, 6 pls. Herrich-Schäffer, G.A.W. 1869. Prodromus America EntomologischeDie ZeitungHesperiinen-Gattung 40 The Seymer Legacy. Henry Seymer and Henry (11): 172–176. Howe, W.H. (ed.), systematis lepidopterorum. Versuch Seymer Jnr of Dorset, and their entomological einer systematischen Anordnung der , pp. 423–578. Doubleday & Co., (10/12): 520– Mielke, O.H.H. 2002. Pyrrhopyginae: Plötz, C. 1884. paintings, with a catalogue of Correspondenz-Blatt Garden City, New York. 538. Achlyoden. Jahrbücher des nassauischen Plants (1755–1783). Forrest Text, Tresaith, des zoologisch-mineralogischen Vereines in Hesperiidae). Revista Brasilera de Zoologia, Die Hesperiinen-Gruppe der Butterflies and Schmetterlinge [part]. Vereins für Naturkunde 37 Regensburg 23 gêneros novos19(1): e 217 revalidados–228. (Lepidoptera, Riley, N.D. 1926. On the identity of certain Viette, P. 1956. Note sur quelques types de : 1–55. Ceredigion, Wales. (4): 56–64; (5): 67–77; (9): Mielke, O.H.H. 2004. Hesperioidea. 95. Hesperiidae (Lep.) described by Latreille. Latreille. Lambillionea 56 Hewitson, W.C. 1867. Descriptions of One Curitiba 130–141; (11): 163–172; (12): 184–204. Hesperiidae. In Lamas, G. (ed), Atlas of Transactions of the Royal Entomological Warren, A.D., Ogawa, J.R. & Brower, A.V.Z. Hundred New Species of Hesperidae. John Van (11/12): 88–92 Neotropical Lepidoptera. Checklist: Part 4A. Society of London 74 2008. Phylogenetic relationships of Voorst, London. Hesperioidea – Papilionoidea . Robbins, R.K., Lamas, G., Mielke, O.H.H., subfamilies and circumscription of tribes Holland, W.J. 1927. The Lepidoptera named by Association for Tropical Lepidoptera / : 231–241) Harvey, D.J. & Casagrande, M.M.. 1996. in the family Hesperiidae (Lepidoptera: Annals of the Carnegie , pp. 25–86 Taxonomic composition and ecological Hesperioidea). Cladistics 24 Museum 17 Mielke, O.H.H. 2005a. Catalogue of the George A. Ehrmann. Scientific Publishers, Gainesville. Warren A.D., Ogawa, J.R. & Brower, A.V.Z. Hoskins, A. 2015. American Hesperioidea: Hesperiidae : 1–35. (2): 299–364, pls 25–30. community at Pakitza, Parque Nacional dei 2009. com (Lepidoptera). Volume 1. Complementary Manu,structure Perú. of theIn species-rich butterf1y Hesperiidae (Lepidoptera: Hesperioidea) www.learnaboutbutterflies. Hübner, J. 1812. Sammlung exotischer and Supplementary Parts to the Checklist (eds). Manu. The biodiversity of Southeastern based onRevised combined classification molecular of andthe family Schmetterlinge of the Neotropical Region. Hesperioidea: Peru. La biodiversidadWilson, dei D.E. Sureste & Sandoval, del Perú A., morphological data. Systematic Entomology Hübner, Augsburg. Hesperiidae: Pyrrhopyginae. 34 volume 1: pl. [153]. Jacob Brasileira de Zoologia, Paraná, Brazil. Kirby, W.F. 1871. A Synonymic Catalogue Warren, A.D., Davis, K.J., Grishin, N.V., Pelham Sociedade pp. 217–252. Smithsonian Institution, : 467–523. of Diurnal Lepidoptera Mielke, O.H.H. 2005b. Catalogue of the Schwartz, A. 1989. The Butterflies of Hispaniola. J.P. & Stangeland E.M. 2012. Interactive Washington, DC. London. American Hesperioidea: Hesperiidae Listing of American Butterflies. Online . John van Voorst, (Lepidoptera). Volume 2. Pyrginae 1: Kirby, W.F. 1877. A Synonymic Catalogue of Scott, J.A. 1986. The Butterflies of North http://www. Eudamini University of Florida Press, Gainesville. Diurnal Lepidoptera. Supplement. America Voorst, London. Paraná, Brazil. resource accessed 1.xii.2012 at: . Sociedade Brasileira de Zoologia, Watson, F.E. 1937. New Hesperiidae from John van Mielke, O.H.H. 2005c. Catalogue of the . Stanford University Press, Stanford, butterfliesofamerica.com/ Kirby, W.F. 1879. Catalogue of the collection Scott, J.A. 1992. Hostplant records for of diurnal Lepidoptera formed by the late American Hesperioidea: Hesperiidae California. American Museum Novitates (Lepidoptera). Volume 3. Pyrginae 2: Pyrgini. the Antilles (Lepidoptera; Rhopalocera). William Chapman Hewitson of Oatlands, Westwood, J.O. 1850–1852. In (906): 1–10. Walton-on-Thames; and bequeathed by him to butterflies and skippers (mostly from The Genera of Diurnal the British Museum. John Van Voorst, London. Brazil. Colorado) 1959–1991, with new life histories Doubleday, Sociedade Brasileira de Zoologia, Paraná, ecology. Papilio Lepidoptera, Mielke, O.H.H. 2005d. Catalogue of the and notes on oviposition, immatures, and E. & Westwood, J.O., Knudson, E.C., Bordelon, C., Jr. & Warren, Scott, J.A. 2006. Notamblyscirtes Green & Longmans, London. American Hesperioidea: Hesperiidae (New Series) (6): 171 pp. volume 2. Longman, Brown, A.D. 2004. Antigonus erosus Hübner genus within Hesperiidae, Hesperiinae. In Wright, W.G. 1905. The Butterflies of the West (Lepidoptera). Volume 5. Hesperiinae 2: J. Scott, new Coast of the United States. Megaleas – Zenis News of the Lepidopterists’ Papilio Society(Hesperiidae, 46 Pyrginae), a new US record Zoologia, Paraná, Brazil. Scott, J.A. (ed.), Taxonomic studies and new Whitaker & Ray, from South Texas. . Sociedade Brasileira de Latreille, P.A. 1824. In Latreille, P.A. & Godart, Mielke, O.H.H. & Casagrande, M.M. 2002. taxa of North American butterflies. San Francisco. (4): 111–113. Scudder, S.H. 1872. Suggested citation J.B., Encyclopédie Méthodique. Histoire Notas taxonômicas em Hesperiidae (New Series) (12): 70. naturelle. Entomologie. 9 A systematic revision of (Lepidoptera). Revista Brasileira de Zoologia American some of the American butterflies,Report. Peabody with brief NABA Names Committee. 2016. Second Interim (2): 706, 707, 711– neotropicais, 19 com descrições de novos taxa Butterflies 23 Lindsey, A.W. 1921. The Hesperioidea of Academynotes on thoseof Sciences known to occur in Essex Report of the NABA Names Committee 793. veuve Agasse, Paris. Opler, P.A. & Warren, A.D. 2002. Butterflies County, Massachusetts. America north of Mexico. University of Iowa Curitiba (Suppl. 1): 27–76. Stanford, R.E. 1981. (3/4): 26-45. of North America. 2. Scientific Names List 4: 24–83. Studies in Natural History 9 In for Butterfly Species of North America, north Mabille, P. 1903. Lepidoptera Rhopalocera. Brown, F.M. (eds), SuperfamilyButterflies of Hesperioidea the Rocky [4]: 114 pp, 2 pls. of Mexico Fam. Hesperidae . Genera Insectorum MountainLatreille, 1802 States (skippers). Ferris, C.D. & All photos this article by Jeffrey Glassberg, [as updated January 20, 2004]. except as indicated. [sic] , pp. 67–108, 117–144. Contributions of the C. P. Gillette Museum 44 (17a): American 1–78. Butterflies,Fall/Winter 2015 University of Oklahoma Press, Norman, 45 of Arthropod Diversity, Colorado State