Augiades bouddha niitakana Sonan, 1936, Sonan, 1936

Chiba, Hideyuki, Hsu, Yu-Feng, Tsukiyama, Hiroshi, Lo, Philip Yik-Fui, Chen, Chien-Ren & Wang, Shou-Ming, 2009, Jinhaku Sonan’s skipper type collection deposited at Taiwan Agricultural Research Institute (Lepidoptera: Hesperiidae), Zootaxa 2202, pp. 48-58: 53

publication ID

http://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.189654

persistent identifier

http://treatment.plazi.org/id/03CC500D-F301-342D-FF2C-F6903B1EBE30

treatment provided by

Plazi

scientific name

Augiades bouddha niitakana Sonan, 1936
status

 

Augiades bouddha niitakana Sonan, 1936  

Zephyrus 6: 213.

Labels: “ Augiades   / bouddha   / niitakana Sonan/ DET. J. SONAN,” “ 800 - SUIGEN/ 24 VII 1930 / Col. J. Sonan,” “ No. 60,” “ Type [in red].”

A male specimen was designated as the holotype by Sonan (1936), and this holotype was retrieved in TARI ( Fig. 16–18 View FIGURES 1 – 18 ). Evans (1949) treated this taxon as a subspecies of Ochlodes siva Moore, 1878   , and this treatment was followed by Bridges (1983). Shirôzu (1960), however, considered this taxon a synonym of Augiades sylvanus   var. formosana Matsumura, 1919   , which was recognized to represent a valid subspecies of Ochlodes subhyalina (Bremer & Grey, 1853)   by Evans (1949). Based on the characteristics of male genitalia, Chiba and Tsukiyama (1996) subsequently raised formosana to species status, and considered it a species endemic to Taiwan. Hsu et al. (2006), however, found that formosana Matsumura, 1919 is actually a junior subjective synonym of Ochlodes venata (Bremer & Grey, 1853)   , so niitakana Sonan, 1936 should be resurrected in the combination Ochlodes niitakanus   . Shirôzu (1960) claimed that the allotype female of niitakana was probably a different species. His statement seems to be groundless. We examined the female paratype of niitakana ( Fig. 19–21 View FIGURES 19 – 39 ) and confirmed that it was conspecific with the male holotype.

TARI

Taiwan Agricultural Research Institute