39,579 research outputs found
Cong Cao, China's Scientific Elite
No full textMerle Aurore. Cong Cao, China's Scientific Elite. In: Perspectives chinoises, n°88, 2005. pp. 72-73
Perus parvus Zhang & Cong & Shen & Grishin 2022, new combination
No full textPerus parvus (Steinhauser and Austin, 1993), new combination Staphylus parvus Steinhauser and Austin, 1993 (type locality Costa Rica) is not monophyletic with Staphylus Godman and Salvin, 1896 (type species Helias ascalaphus Staudinger, 1876) and instead originates within Perus Grishin, 2019 (type species Pholisora cordillerae Lindsey, 1925) (Fig. 5), where we transfer it to form Perus parvus (Steinhauser and Austin, 1993), new combination.Published as part of Zhang, Jing, Cong, Qian, Shen, Jinhui & Grishin, Nick V., 2022, Taxonomic changes suggested by the genomic analysis of Hesperiidae (Lepidoptera), pp. 1-135 in Insecta Mundi 2022 (921) on page 28, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.639205
Alychna gota Zhang & Cong & Shen & Grishin 2022, new combination
No full textAlychna gota (Evans, 1955), new combination Psoralis gota Evans, 1955 (type locality Venezuela) is not monophyletic with Psoralis Mabille, 1904 (type species Psoralis sabaeus Mabille, 1904, which is a junior subjective synonym of Pamphila idee Weeks, 1901), but instead originates within Alychna Grishin, 2019 (type species Pamphila exclamationis Mabille, 1898) (Fig. 13) and therefore we propose Alychna gota (Evans, 1955), new combination.Published as part of Zhang, Jing, Cong, Qian, Shen, Jinhui & Grishin, Nick V., 2022, Taxonomic changes suggested by the genomic analysis of Hesperiidae (Lepidoptera), pp. 1-135 in Insecta Mundi 2022 (921) on page 52, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.639205
Eantis pallida Cong & Zhang & Shen & Grishin 2019, new combination
No full textEantis pallida (R. Felder, 1869), new combination In all trees, Helias pallida R. Felder, 1869 is not monophyletic with Papilio busirus Cramer, [1779], the type species of Achlyodes Hübner, [1819], but originates within Eantis Boisduval, [1836] (type species Urbanus thraso Hübner, [1807]) (Fig. 5). Therefore, H. pallida is placed in this genus to form a new combination: Eantis pallida.Published as part of Cong, Qian, Zhang, Jing, Shen, Jinhui & Grishin, Nick V., 2019, Fifty new genera of Hesperiidae (Lepidoptera), pp. 1-56 in Insecta Mundi 731 (731) on page 12, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.367723
Nervia wallengrenii Zhang & Cong & Shen & Grishin 2022, new combination
No full textNervia wallengrenii (Trimen, 1883), new combination Thymelicus wallengrenii Trimen, 1883 (type locality in South Africa) is not monophyletic with Kedestes Watson, 1893 (type species Hesperia lepenula Wallengren, 1857), where it is currently placed and instead groups closely with Nervia Grishin, 2019 (type species Hesperia nerva Fabricius, 1793) (Fig. 10). Therefore, we propose Nervia wallengrenii (Trimen, 1883), new combination.Published as part of Zhang, Jing, Cong, Qian, Shen, Jinhui & Grishin, Nick V., 2022, Taxonomic changes suggested by the genomic analysis of Hesperiidae (Lepidoptera), pp. 1-135 in Insecta Mundi 2022 (921) on page 41, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.639205
Isoteinon abjecta Cong & Zhang & Shen & Grishin 2019, new combination
No full textIsoteinon abjecta (Snellen, 1872), new combination Phylogenetic analysis shows (Fig. 9) that Pamphila abjecta Snellen, 1872 is not monophyletic with Astictopterus jama C. and R. Felder, 1860, the type species of the genus Astictopterus C. and R. Felder, 1860, where Isoteinon abjecta was previously placed, and instead forms a clade with Isoteinon lamprospilus C. and R. Felder, 1862, the type and the only species of Isoteinon C. and R. Felder, 1862. Therefore, we reinstate the combination Isoteinon abjecta.Published as part of Cong, Qian, Zhang, Jing, Shen, Jinhui & Grishin, Nick V., 2019, Fifty new genera of Hesperiidae (Lepidoptera), pp. 1-56 in Insecta Mundi 731 (731) on page 22, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.367723
Neoxeniades parna Zhang & Cong & Shen & Grishin 2022, new combination
No full textNeoxeniades parna (Evans, 1955), new combination Niconiades parna (Evans, 1955 (type locality Brazil: Para) is not monophyletic with Niconiades Hübner, [1821] (type species Niconiades xanthaphes Hübner, [1821]), in Moncina A. Warren, 2008, but instead is within Neoxeniades Hayward, 1938 (type species Neoxeniades musarion Hayward, 1938), in Carystina Mabille, 1878 (Fig. 17). The shape of valva and extended slightly bilobed uncus agree with this placement. Therefore we propose Neoxeniades parna (Evans, 1955), new combination.Published as part of Zhang, Jing, Cong, Qian, Shen, Jinhui & Grishin, Nick V., 2022, Taxonomic changes suggested by the genomic analysis of Hesperiidae (Lepidoptera), pp. 1-135 in Insecta Mundi 2022 (921) on page 97, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.639205
Vistigma (Vistigma) opus Zhang & Cong & Shen & Grishin 2022, new combination
No full textVistigma (Vistigma) opus (Steinhauser, 2008), new combination Thoon opus Steinhauser, 2008 originates within Vistigma Hayward, 1939 (type species Vistigma xanthobasis Hayward, 1939) and is sister to species placed in the subgenus Vistigma (Fig. 15), but is in a clade different from the subgenus Penicula Evans, 1955, hence Vistigma (Vistigma) opus (Steinhauser, 2008), new combination.Published as part of Zhang, Jing, Cong, Qian, Shen, Jinhui & Grishin, Nick V., 2022, Taxonomic changes suggested by the genomic analysis of Hesperiidae (Lepidoptera), pp. 1-135 in Insecta Mundi 2022 (921) on page 84, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.639205
Testia mammaea Zhang & Cong & Shen & Grishin 2022, new combination
No full textTestia mammaea (Hewitson, 1876), new combination Hesperia mammaea Hewitson, 1876 placed in Decinea Evans, 1955 (type species Hesperia decinea Hewitson, 1876) by Evans (1955) is in a clade away from Decinea (Fig. 11) and is instead sister to Testia potesta (Bell, 1941), the type and the only species in its genus. The two species are similar in having long uncus arms, terminally expanded penis, a small pale spot near the end of the discal cell and a postdiscal row of such spots on hindwing below (sometimes vestigial) and a prominent ivory-colored area in the middle of cell CuA 2 -1A+2A on ventral forewing. Therefore, we propose Testia mammaea (Hewitson, 1876), new combination, making Testia Grishin, 2019 no longer monotypic.Published as part of Zhang, Jing, Cong, Qian, Shen, Jinhui & Grishin, Nick V., 2022, Taxonomic changes suggested by the genomic analysis of Hesperiidae (Lepidoptera), pp. 1-135 in Insecta Mundi 2022 (921) on page 43, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.639205
Clytius shola Zhang & Cong & Shen & Grishin 2022, new combination
No full textClytius shola (Evans, 1953), new combination Staphylus shola Evans, 1953 (type locality unknown, sequenced specimen is from Venezuela) is not monophyletic with Staphylus Godman and Salvin, 1896 (type species Helias ascalaphus Staudinger, 1876), and instead is sister to Clytius clytius (Godman and Salvin, 1897) (Fig. 5). Male genitalia of the two species share similarly convex costa and bulging ampulla, but a triangular harpe is more extended caudad in S. shola. Thus, it is placed in the genus Clytius Grishin, 2019 (type species Pholisora clytius Godman and Salvin, 1897) as Clytius shola (Evans, 1953), new combination.Published as part of Zhang, Jing, Cong, Qian, Shen, Jinhui & Grishin, Nick V., 2022, Taxonomic changes suggested by the genomic analysis of Hesperiidae (Lepidoptera), pp. 1-135 in Insecta Mundi 2022 (921) on page 28, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.639205
- …
