Skip to content

Data Portal

Explore and download the Museum’s research and collections data.

Aetheius

Number: 601.0
Author: Hübner
Bhl Page: http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/103196#page/116/mode/2up
Family: Riodinidae
Genus: Aetheius
Journal: Verz. bekannt. Schmett.
Year: 1819
Homonym Count: 1.0
Page: 109
Ref Id: 2846.0
Status: Suppressed name
Subfamily: Riodininae
Superfamily: Papilionoidea
Tribe: Helicopini
Senior Syn: OUROCNEMIS
Senior Syn Author: Bethune-Baker
Senior Syn Page: 175
Senior Syn Year: 1887
Type Country: ? COUNTRY
Type Depository: (? Depository)
Type Locality: ? Locality
Types: ? Type status
Type Des Ref Id: 5223.0
Type Des: by subsequent designation by
Type Des Author: Scudder
Type Des Year: 1875
Type Des Journal: Proc. amer. acad. Arts Sci., Boston
Type Des Title: Proceedings of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences. Boston
Type Des Volume: 10
Type Des Part: (2)
Type Des Page: 104
Type Des Bhl Page: http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/22173#page/112/mode/2up
Type Sp Author: Stoll
Type Sp Journal: Aanhang. Uitl. Kapellen
Type Sp Page: 25, pl.5, fig.5
Type Sp Year: 1787
Type Sp Ref Id: 8318.0
Type Sp Genus: Papilio
Type Sp: archytas
Memo Links: ['http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/search?searchTerm=AETHEIUS', 'http://www.ucl.ac.uk/taxome/gbn/Lamas_Genera_04ii08.xls', 'http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/127039', 'http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Riodinidae']
Memo: Hemming (1967) stated:- This generic name became lost in the literature some ninety years ago through an unfortunate misunderstanding as to the family to which the type-species is referable taxonomically. The circumstances were as follows : Hübner established this genus for three nominal species, all of them members of the family now known as the Riodinidae. One of these nominal species was Papilio archytas Stoll. This species had been treated by Kirby in 1871 (Syn. Cat. diurn Lep. : 632) as being a member of the family Hesperiidae, being placed by him in the genus Achlyodes Hübner. Scudder based the systematic portion of his work on generic names on the arrangement adopted four years earlier by Kirby, and he therefore also was under the erroneous impression that the above species was a Hesperiid when he selected it to be the type-species of Aetheius Hübner. Thereafter the name Aetheius virtually disappeared from the literature. The name of the type-species is currently treated - and for long has been treated - as a senior subjective synonym of the name Anteros axiochus Hewitson, [1867] (Ill. exot. Butts 4 : [77], pl. [42], figs 1, 2), the name of the type-species of a genus called Ourocnemis by Baker in 1887 (Trans. ent. Soc. Lond. 1887 : 175). The name Ourocnemis has been consistently employed for the nominal species discussed above ever since its publication over seventy years ago, while (as already explained) the name Aetheius has not been used at all. It would clearly be of no advantage if the long-neglected name Aetheius Hübner were now to be substituted for the well-established name Ourocnemis Baker. In the interests of nomenclatorial stability the Commission is being asked to suppress the name Aetheius Hübner, thus preventing the disappearance of the name Ourocnemis Baker. In accordance with the provisions of Article 80 the name Aetheius is here treated as -being invalidated, pending the publication of the decision by the Commission on the application submitted. Cowan (1968: 8.) made the following comment for this and other genera:- The status and type-species of the following genera are at present the subjects of pending applications to the Commission. Against each is shown its relevant Z.N.(S.) Case Number; * Aetheius Hübner, 1819; 1678 Capys Hewitson; 1748 * Euphaedra Hübner; 1686 * Gonophlebia Felder; 1688 Mantoides Druce; 1768 * Najas Hübner; 1686 Neolycaena de Niceville; 1758 * Ourocnemis Baker; 1687 * Pseudopontia Plotz; 1688 Scoptes Hübner; 1748 Thrix Doherty; 1768 Virgarina Druce; 1768 Of these six Aetheius, Gonophlebia, Najas are all nomina oblita, whose revival would threaten respectively the well-known Ourocnemis, Pseudopontia, and Euphaedra. The Commission is at present deferring rulings on nomina oblita. Aetheius Hübner, [1819], has been suppressed to conserve the name Ourocnemis Baker, 1887 (Riodinidae [now Lycaenidae, Riodininae,]), (Opinion 1381), 1986, Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 43 (1) : 42. Originally proposed by Hemming 1964, Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 22 : 103. No comments were recieved. In 1973 a comment from Cowan, was treated in the Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 30 : 133 - 134. Again no comment was recieved. A revision was published by Cowan 1983, Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 40 (4) : 246. Yet again no comment was recieved. Only in 1985 was the vote taken and passed to conserve Ourocnemis. The higher classification used here follows Lamas (2008).

Cite this as

We track changes to records and therefore you have a choice of citation options:

To cite the most up to date record data use the Latest URL.

Or to cite this specific version of a record's data, ensuring any followers of the link see the same data every time they visit the link, use the Version URL.

Additional Information

Format unknown
License Creative Commons Attribution Share-Alike
Dataset buttmoth
Dataset ID f8bc9b9c-009a-4689-bd01-ed621095c457
Resource Butterflies and Moths of the World
Resource ID c1727662-2d1e-426f-818c-d144552a747c