To which species should the name heynei Rühl, [1893] (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) be referred?
Historical records of Melitaea cinxia (Linnaeus, 1758) and M. arduinna (Esper, [1783]) from the mountains of Central Asia, including named subspecies and forms, are reviewed with particular reference to the name heynei Rühl, [1893], which has been associated with both of the aforementioned species....
Saved in:
Published in | Zootaxa Vol. 4531; no. 1; p. 81 |
---|---|
Main Authors | , |
Format | Journal Article |
Language | English |
Published |
New Zealand
11.12.2018
|
Subjects | |
Online Access | Get more information |
Cover
Loading…
Summary: | Historical records of Melitaea cinxia (Linnaeus, 1758) and M. arduinna (Esper, [1783]) from the mountains of Central Asia, including named subspecies and forms, are reviewed with particular reference to the name heynei Rühl, [1893], which has been associated with both of the aforementioned species. It is concluded that the name heynei should be associated with M. arduinna and not M. cinxia. For the sake of nomenclatural stability, a specimen of M. arduinna from the southern slope of Alai Mountains (Kyrgyzstan, Daroot-Korgon) is designated as the neotype of Melitaea cinxia var. heynei Rühl, [1893]. The morphological features of M. cinxia and M. arduinna, including the subspecies of the latter, are compared and figured. The historic and recent misidentifications of M. cinxia as M. arduinna and vice versa are exemplified. |
---|---|
ISSN: | 1175-5334 |
DOI: | 10.11646/zootaxa.4531.1.3 |