Flag for Taxon: Eighty-eights and Allies (Tribe Callicorini)
| Flagger | Content Author | Content | Reason | Flag Created | Resolved by | Resolution |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| loarie | Eighty-eights and Allies (Tribe Callicorini) |
bring in line with Warren et al.? |
Mar. 12, 2020 17:30:24 +0000 | loarie |
swapped |
Comments
Yes, please bring in line with https://www.butterfliesofamerica.com/L/Neotropical.htm
I agree with @belgianbirding
I think we all agreed that we would like to follow butterfliesofamerica.com. If the names are demonstrably incorrect or outdated there, we need to get them updated there first before updating in inaturalist.
I agree with that single source of updated information.
Ok to be clear getting in line with BoA will require these swaps:
Callicore hystaspes -> Catagramma hystaspes
Callicore tolima -> Catagramma tolima
Paulogramma -> Catagramma
Paulogramma pyracmon -> Catagramma pyracmon
Catacore -> Diaethria
Catacore kolyma -> Diaethria kolyma
Unless anyone speaks up I'll make these over the weekend
Yes, all those changes make sense, thanks!
@loarie @kwillmott Catacore kolyma is in Butterflies of America
http://butterfliesofamerica.com/L/t/Catacore_a.htm
That is an outdated link; the updated page http://butterfliesofamerica.com/L/Nymphalidae.htm shows it as Diaethria.
Isn't butterfliesofamerica.com a little outdated?
I can't find any reliable source, but according to Wikipedia, the Catagramma genus is obsolete.
Catagramma has been restored, see: http://www.nymphalidae.net/Nymphalidae/Classification/Bib_Callicorini.htm
@kwillmott Nymphalidae.net cites as reference this paper (Freitas, A. V. L., Kaminski, L. A., Iserhard, C. A., Magaldi, L. M., Wahlberg, N., Silva-Brandão, K. L. & Marini-Filho, O. J. 2014: Catagramma hydarnis (n. comb.) (Nymphalidae: Biblidinae): distribution, systematic position, and conservation status of a rare and endangered butterfly. Neotropical Entomology 43: 218-226. doi:10.1007/s13744-014-0200-6) as one of the sources for restoring Catagramma, but is actually the opposite: the work cites Catagramma only once when saying "In the only comprehensive study of this group, Dillon (1948) organized all species of Callicore (= Catagramma) into eight groups, based on wing patterns and external morphology of adults." and then proceeds to call all species in the article either Callicore or Paulogramma. I also couldn't find other works post 2014 that mention Catagramma, unless they are talking about species that were once considered in the genus and were being moved to Callicore or Paulogramma.
Still, I understand that we need to have a starting point, and that point is the Butterfly of America Database. Is there any direct channel of communication with them to update these information? With Phasmatodea we usually are able to contact the database and have taxonomic updates in a matter of days, but I know this is not feasible to many taxa. But if that is an option, it would be interesting to try, since I usually get contacted by many colleagues that work with Neotropical Lepidoptera and that vent their frustrations regarding the taxonomic arrangement of many genera and species.
It's a slightly complex story. Freitas et al (2014) established that former Callicore should be split, and called the two resulting genera Callicore and Paulogramma. The type species of Catagramma is "Catagramma hydaspes", and since the species hydaspes is currently in Callicore, those authors regarded Catagramma as a synonym of Callicore. However, the C. hydaspes that is the type species of Catagramma is actually Catagramma hydaspes Boisduval [1836], which is a synonym of the species pygas, which was placed by Freitas et al. (2014) in Paulogramma. Thus, Catagramma is the oldest name for the group of species placed in Paulogramma, and Paulogramma is its synonym. The species currently known as Callicore hydaspes was described by Drury in 1782, and that really is a Callicore. Hence the use of the names Callicore and Catagramma in Nymphalidae.net and Butterflies of America.
The Butterflies of America webpage was just updated, although many more updates are still needed. I am working with Nick Grishin and other BoA authors to make updates, so please let me know any comments. Hopefully, updates will be much more frequent in future.
@kwillmott thank you very much for the clarification! Seems a lot like the hairy taxonomic problems we find with older species in Phasmatodea. I do have a list of things that they sent me, so I'll list as follows:
Papilionidae:
Mimoides is a subgenus of Eurytides
Nymphalidae:
Agraulis is a subgenus of Dione
Polygrapha and Fountainea are subgenera of Anaea
Siderone is a subgenus of Zaretis
Catacore is a synonym of Diaethria
Paulogramma is a synonym of Catagramma
Diaethria is a subgenus of Callicore
Asterope and Nica are a subgenus of Temenis
Panacea is a synonym of Batesia
Napeocles is a synonym of Siproeta
Anthanassa and Telenassa are subgenera of Eresia
Notilia is a new genus encompassing Ortilia orticas, sejona, velica, dicoma and polinella
Ithra is a new subgenus for Ortilia ithra
Ithra a subgenus of Eresia
Episcada is a synonym of Ceratinia
Pieridae:
Cunizza is a synonym of Hesperocharis
Tatochila and Theochila are synonyms of Phulia
Catasticta is a synonym of Archonias
Riodinidae:
Semomesia, Mesophthalma, Perophthalma and Leucochimona are synonyms of Mesosemia
Ionotus and Voltinia are subgenera of Cremna
Mesenopsis and Xenandra are subgenera of Symmachia
Stichelia is a synonym of Symmachia
Chadia is a new genus for Charis
Based on this list, and of course if is something that is a consensus among those that work in the group and that is going to be added in BoA, I can make individual flags to the taxa listed and update them as soon as these information are incorporated in the BoA database.
Thanks, there is some discussion among BoA authors about the proposed subgeneric status of some of these names, and whether to keep them as genera. For the moment, I suggest following the status in BoA, and some updates still need to be made there for newly described genera/subgenera. This should be a topic for discussion in the next BoA update.
Commenting on an old thread in hopes that many of you knowledgable key people might give informed opinion.
Some days ago, i'd noticed several misduplicates of species within Lep: Nymphalidae: Biblidina: Callicorini that had been unattended for an age, most notably within Callicore and Catagramma. My intention was to remove the plentiful duplicates, as i thought i had understood the modern revised generic boundaries - especially for some which became redefined later as "Paulogramma". However, then I made a [mistaken] swap FROM Catagramma hydarnis 1371024 TO Callicore hydarnis 1483776. That 'mis-swap' was highlighted to me in another flag by @belgianbirding, for which i apologise - plus he'd directed me to this closed flag. I'd seen my swap as wrong myself, so i'd already paused and emailed with BoA. My main uncertainty was about validity of Catagramma, which seemed an old defunct genus with a complex history - other sources that had been switching all to Paulogramma seemed the most current ones to follow, but no..
Anyway, sorry for long ramble - what i've done therefore is update a bunch of stuff on the "Catagramma" wiki page so others do not get likewise misled to think "Catagramma" is a completely outdated concept. I'd appreciate expert review of that, especially the top section (above species) where i just adapted the old text, anything lower down (below species) is newly written by me - and for sure needs some adjustments and readability fixes!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catagramma
One thing which absolutely threw me into confusion as i started looking into it was about the species name 'hydaspes' which kept cropping up in various sources under different combinations - and one of those attributed to Boisduval is the crux of what's to be done about the genus name Catagramma.
Anyway, that's all an aside - after looking into this one, unless anyone has any objections, what i think we must do here on iNaturalist then is:
Callicore eunomia 36 obs ---> Catagramma
Callicore hydarnis 7 obs ---> Catagramma [so reversing the swap i'd made]
These two transfers will then generate Catagramma to be equivalent to how Paulogramma was recently defined, and using the naming scheme inline with current BoA.
Please notice the second is a reversal of my swap that i now see as a mistake - but there's no way to just reverse or "undo" a taxon swap is there?
Since this brings iNat in line with BOA, I agree unless @loarie has some way of 'undoing' your recent hydarnis swap without having to reswap it in the opposite direction.
There are currently a few differences between the current taxonomy on iNat and whats on https://www.butterfliesofamerica.com/L/Neotropical.htm
Any objection to bringing things in line with Warren et al.? Or are we intentionally curating in a different direction? @mzamoner @thebirdnerd @belgianbirding @aleturkmen @kwillmott @nlblock @birdernaturalist ?