Alcidis
| Number: | 918.0 | |
|---|---|---|
| Author: | Scudder | |
| Bhl Page: | http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/22173#page/114/mode/2up | |
| Family: | Uraniidae | |
| Genus: | Alcidis | |
| Journal: | Proc. amer. acad. Arts Sci., Boston | |
| Page Comment: | (a cheironym) | |
| Year: | 1875 | |
| Homonym Count: | 2.0 | |
| Of Value: | ; | |
| Page: | 107 | |
| Part: | (2) | |
| Ref Id: | 5223.0 | |
| Status: | Unavailable name | |
| Subfamily: | Uraniinae | |
| Superfamily: | Geometroidea | |
| Volume: | 10 | |
| Senior Syn: | ALCIDES | |
| Senior Syn Author: | Hübner | |
| Senior Syn Page: | pl.[218] | |
| Senior Syn Year: | 1822 | |
| Memo Links: | ['http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/search?searchTerm=ALCIDIS', 'http://www.biodiversitylibrary.org/item/127039', 'http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uraniidae'] | |
| Memo: | Hemming (1967) stated:- This is a ghost name, the appearance of which in print is due to a series of incomprehensible errors on the part of Scudder, which are all the more surprising, coming from an author normally so meticulously careful in his work. The facts are set out below. The first of the mistakes involved arose from a misreading of a paper by Felder (C.) & Felder (R.), published in 1860 (Wien. ent. Monats. 4 : 250), in which those authors described a new species under the name Nyctalemon (Alcidis) Iris. Scudder was mistaken in believing that this taxon was a butterfly, whereas, in fact it was described as a moth. Second, he overlooked altogether the fact that the Felders had treated their new species as belonging to the moth genus Nyctalemon Dalman, 1825 (K. svenska VetenskAkad. Hands., Stockholm 1824 (2) : 407) and had employed the name Alcidis only as a denomination for a subgenus of the genus Nyctalemon. Third, Scudder regarded the name Alcidis as a new genus-group name proposed by the Felders, who however gave no sign of looking upon themselves as proposing a new name. Possibly, they considered that they were using the name Alcidis Hübner, [1823], (Verz. bekannt. Schmett. (19) : 289). Scudder stated in the introduction to his paper that specific names were used by him in the sense in which they had been accepted by Kirby in his Syn. Cat. of 1871. If this is what Scudder did in the present case he must have interpreted the name liris as being the specific component of the name Papilio liris Godart, [1819] (Ency. me'th. 9 (1) (Ins.) : 72), the name of an Indo-Oriental Papilionid butterfly. It will be seen from the foregoing particulars that neither the Felders in 1860 nor Scudder in 1875 proposed or accepted Alcidis as the name for a genus or subgenus of butterflies. Cowan (1970: 41) stated:- ALCIDIS Scudder, 1875" should be deleted. Scudder fully explained the matter on the final corrigenda page of his paper, so the name was cancelled simultaneously with publication. Fletcher (1979) stated:- Included in Neave, 1939, Nomencl. zool. 1: 105 as Lepid. Papilionidae. Scudder was citing Felder, 1860, who was in turn citing * Alcidis Hübner. Neither Scudder nor Felder was proposing a new generic name. See: ALCIDES Hübner, [1822] 1806. |
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.
Version Permanent URL for this version of the record data:
https://data.nhm.ac.uk/record/c1727662-2d1e-426f-818c-d144552a747c/917/1677508006952
Retrieved: 05 Oct 2024 02:24:22 (UTC)
Latest Permanent URL for the most up to date record data:
https://data.nhm.ac.uk/record/c1727662-2d1e-426f-818c-d144552a747c/917
Retrieved: 05 Oct 2024 02:24:22 (UTC)
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 |