Choroterpes picteti ( Eaton, 1871 )

Sartori, Michel & Bauernfeind, Ernst, 2020, Mayfly types and additional material (Insecta: Ephemeroptera) examined by F. - J. Pictet and A. - E. Pictet, housed in the Museums of Natural History of Geneva and Vienna, Revue suisse de Zoologie 127 (2), pp. 315-339 : 331-332

Choroterpes picteti ( Eaton, 1871)

Potamanthus marginatus . – F.-J. Pictet, 1843 -1845: 208-211, pl. 55, figs 4-5 (nec Ephemera marginata Linné, 1767 ; misidentification).

Leptophlebia Picteti Eaton, 1871: 87 (original description).

Habrophlebia Picteti. – Eaton, 1881: 195 (transfer).

Choroterpes picteti . – Eaton, 1884: 105 (transfer).

Locus typicus: “… aux environs de Genève …”.

Type material: Syntypes (male and female imago, female subimago), not traced and probably lost .

Remarks: From F.-J. Pictet’s text and illustrations it is clear that he based his descriptions on material from the surroundings of Geneva. Obviously Eaton (1871) based his description of Leptophlebia picteti only on F.-J. Pictet’s description of P. marginatus , which he literally translated into Latin, and according to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (1999: article 72.4.2) the type series consists of the material originally examined by F.-J. Pictet. When Eaton erected the genus Choroterpes Eaton, 1881 , he based it exclusively on his new species C. lusitanica Eaton, 1881 . It was only later (Eaton, 1884: 105) that he considered C. lusitanica a junior subjective synonym of C. picteti and consequently used this name for the type species of Choroterpes .

In the MHNG exists at least one specimen which had been examined by Eaton: male / 620 48 Espagne coll. Pictet / 66 / 31 / M. 2 Selys Longchamps / Chloroterpes [sic] Picteti Eaton Eaton type. The material is in alcohol and in poor condition, in several pieces, and it is completely faded, as are the labels. The origin of the specimen ( Spain) indicates that it came from A.-E. Pictet’s collection and was seen and labelled by Eaton himself, but obviously at a later time than the original description in 1871. The specimen is most probably not part of the original type series and therefore not available for lectotype fixation ( International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, 1999: article 74.1) and Eaton’s remark on the label (“type”) cannot be understood as a valid neotype designation ( International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, 1999: article 75.3).

There is also a pinned specimen in the MHNG placed under the name Leptophlebia marginata L. It is a male subimago with the following labels: 620 Burgdorf 48 Suisse coll. Pictet / Pot. Marginatus. This specimen (probably collected by Meyer-Dür) also belongs to C. picteti but can also not be considered to represent type material.