Telegonus galesus, Mabille, 1888

Zhang, Jing, Cong, Qian, Shen, Jinhui & Grishin, Nick V., 2022, Taxonomic changes suggested by the genomic analysis of Hesperiidae (Lepidoptera), Insecta Mundi 2022 (921), pp. 1-135 : 21

Telegonus galesus form subflavus R. Williams, 1927 is an infrasubspecific name

Genomic sequencing and comparison of the holotype of Telegonus galesus form subflavus Williams, 1927 (type locality Ecuador: Riobamba, NVG-15096B05) in the CMNH and a syntype of Telegonus galesus Mabille, 1888 (type locality Peru: Chanchamayo, NVG-15031B07) in the ZMHB reveals that they represent two distinct species ( Fig. 1 ). The COI barcodes of these type specimens differ by 4.3% (28 bp), which in the presence of phenotypic differences is suggestive of species-level status of these taxa. Because the name subflavus was proposed for a “form”, it may not be necessarily available, and we studied it further. Williams (1927b) used the term “race” to indicate geographic variants (i.e., subspecies) in the same publication where he described “form subflavus ”. Therefore his term “form” applies to an infrasubspecific entity rendering the name subflavus unavailable according to the Article 45.6.1. of the ICZN Code. The condition of the Article 45.6.4.1. to “rescue” the name does not apply, because the name subflavus has not been used as valid and is not a homonym.

The situation is more complex, however, because Williams uses the word “form” in several meanings in both of his papers ( Williams 1927b; Williams 1927a). First, is its general meaning for any phenotypic difference, be it geographically induced or individual, for example, for “a remarkable aberration”, he writes “attention is now being called to these occasional forms by assigning them names” ( Williams 1927b: 262), using “form” for an aberration. Then he writes “ race socus … The prevailing form in the following localities” ( Williams 1927b: 263), “racial form” ( Williams 1927b: 279), or “a racial name for the Insular form” ( Williams 1927a: 70) using “form” for wing patterns characteristic of a race. Second, is the specific meaning of “form” to denote distinct wing pattern across geographic localities, which can be deduced from phrases like “presents itself in two forms almost wherever it is found” ( Williams 1927a: 72), “chiriquensis form grullus (Mabille) … I believe them to be only a varietal form” ( Williams 1927b: 285), or “creteus form hopfferi (Plotz) … it does not seem to be a racial character” ( Williams 1927b: 286). A particularly revealing phrase is “the South Eastern race, in which these larger markings seem to be the prevailing form” ( Williams 1927b: 263), that indicates Williams’ thinking that species may be divided into geographic “races”, and there are wing pattern “forms” within (and possibly across) these races. It is apparent that Williams distinguishes between “racial form” (=subspecies) and “varietal form” (=non-geographic variation). This second meaning is assigned to the names preceded by the word “form” and in particular those followed by “new form” notation added by Williams to the new names he proposed, because he used “new species” (for species), “new race” (for subspecies). Hence, we conclude that all “new form” names proposed by Williams (1927a,b) are infrasubspecific, unless the conditions of the ICZN Article 45.6.4.1. apply. Our conclusion here is the same as that of Steinhauser (1987) who considered subflavus “an invalid form name”.

Figures

Figure 1. Genomic tree of Eudaminae. The tree is constructed from protein-coding regions. The tree is rooted with Pterourus glaucus (Linnaeus, 1758) (NVG-1670), not shown. Statistical support values are shown on nodes. For each specimen, its name adopted in this work is given first, and a previously used name is listed in square brackets (if different), supplemented with the DNA sample number, type status (see Table 2 caption for abbreviations) and general locality. See Table S1 in the Supplemental file for additional data about these specimens. Synonyms are given in parentheses preceded by “=”, and in addition by “‡” for unavailable names. The type status refers to this synonym, if the synonym name is provided. Clades corresponding to new genera, subgenera and species are colored in red, orange and green, respectively, and the names of new taxa are highlighted accordingly. Names of selected tribes, subtribes, genera, and subgenera are labeled at their clades. Clades corresponding to some genera are highlighted in yellow to compare their genetic diversifications (length of the highlight in horizontal dimension) with each other. Groups of similar genetic diversification would ideally correspond to genera. The