[Taxacom] type species of Antitrisuloides Holloway, 1985 ?

[Francisco Welter-Schultes]

Hi Markku,

Let me check if I got that correctly.

Tambana catocalina Moore, 1882 and Trisuloides catocalina Moore, 1883 
are different species. One with 3 inches, the other one with 1.5 inches.

Trisuloides Butler, 1881, type Trisuloides sericea Butler, 1881 by monotypy.
(Markku: the funet "life" pages are great, but a statement on the mode 
of type fixation would be extremely useful, because users like me always 
need to verify the type designation in such a case).

I assume that Moore 1883 knew T. sericea and because of the taxonomic 
vicinity placed his new species catocalina in the genus Trisuloides. It 
makes sense that this species still today would belong to a subfamily in 
which Trisuloides sericea is currently classified, in Dyopsinae.

Antitrisuloides Holloway, 1985, type Trisuloides catocalina Moore, 1883 
(I could not check the original, I assume by original designation?).

If this is so, and your citation suggests you verified it and it is, 
then Antitrisuloides should also belong to the subfamily Dyopsinae, not 
to Pantheinae.

I guess that Behounek & Kononenko 2011 just mixed this up. Maybe some in 
a long list of names entry said "T. catocalina Moore", or they just 
performed a search function for "catocalina Moore", and they just picked 
the wrong name without being aware of that. Picking the wrong type 
species leads quickly to incorrect conclusions.

If this helps.

Best wishes
Francisco




Am 12.11.2021 um 19:07 schrieb Markku Savela via Taxacom:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm getting confused with conflicting information
> 
> Originally, Holloway, 1985  (Moths of Borneo 14 p. 302) reads
> 
>    Trisuloides catocalina Moore, 1883, Proc. zool. Soc. Lond. 1883: 17
> 
> However, then come
> 
>    Behounek, Han & Kononenko, 2011
>        A revision of the genus Trisuloides Butler, 1881 with 
> descriptions of three new species from China (Lepidoptera, Noctuidae). 
> Revision of Pantheinae, contribution I
>        Zootaxa 3069 : 1-25
> 
> where they on p. 4 restore "Trisuloides catocalina Moore, 1883" back to 
> Trisuloides, making Antitrisuloides a syn. of Trisuloides.
> 
> and in
>     Behounek & Kononenko, 2011
>     A review of the genera Elydnodes Hampson, 1913 and Antitrisuloides 
> Holloway, 1985 with description of two new species (Lepidoptera, 
> Noctuidae). Revision of Pantheinae, contribution III
>     Zootaxa 3108 : 41-52
> 
> where they on p. 45 claim the type of Antitrisuloides to be
> 
>    Tambana catocalina Moore, 1882, Descriptions of new Indian 
> Lepidopterous Insects from the Collection of the Late Mr. W.S.
> Atkinson: 156
> 
> So, which is it, and if not "Trisuloides catocalina Moore, 1883", then 
> why it is not?
> 
> regards,
> -- Markku Savela
> _______________________________________________
> Taxacom Mailing List
> 
> Send Taxacom mailing list submissions to: taxacom at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> For list information; to subscribe or unsubscribe, visit: 
> http://mailman.nhm.ku.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/taxacom
> You can reach the person managing the list at: 
> taxacom-owner at mailman.nhm.ku.edu
> The Taxacom email archive back to 1992 can be searched at: 
> http://taxacom.markmail.org
> 
> Nurturing nuance while assailing ambiguity for about 34 years, 1987-2021.