GENERA OF AFRICAN LYCAENIDAE 265 



he chose when he divided the Lycaenidae into sub-families (1914, in Seitz, 13: 297). 



A. Fore wing nearly always with 12 veins, of which veins 7 and 9 arise from 



vein 8 behind the apex of the cell.* Rarely as in (Eresina and 

 Iridana), vein 7 is wanting, so that only 11 veins are present, in which 

 case either vein 10 arises from the stalk of vein 8 and 9, or vein 8 is 

 semicircularly bent before its end. Eyes naked. Hind wing always 

 rounded, without tail appendages, anal lobe or hairs tufts LIPTEN1NAE 



B. Fore wing nearly always with 10 or n veins, vein 7 and sometimes also 



vein 9 being absent ; vein 10 always free from the anterior margin of 

 the cell. Rarely (e.g. in Aphnaeus, Phasis, Erikssonia' and the male 

 of some species of Iolans) 12 veins are present, in which case however, 

 the hind wing is tailed, lobed or angled . LYCAENINAE 



Note the vagueness of the criteria : The Lipteninae have " nearly always " 12 

 veins, the Lycaenidae " nearly always " ioorn veins. For additional distinguish- 

 ing characters, Aurivillius has recourse to the pilosity of the eyes, and the shape of 

 the hind wings. However, although it is true that all the Lipteninae have smooth 

 eyes, this character reappears in many genera of Lycaeninae, and especially in 

 certain Theclinae ; further, many species of Lycaeninae (sensu Aurivillius) have 

 rounded hind wings devoid of tails, lobes and hair tufts. 



Aurivillius subdivided his two subfamilies into genera, usually on venational 

 characters, sometimes on shape of wings, or the palpi or the antennae. It is un- 

 deniable that these characters are easily seen and so are convenient for the rapid 

 determination of specimens, but in my opinion there are serious objections to the 

 employment of venational characters as basic criteria, for example : — 



(1) At the species level, venational aberrations that are certainly of little 

 importance occur fairly frequently in different individuals. I have given examples 

 in Anlhene, Neurellipes and Triclema (1944, Revue fr. Ent. 10 : 63) and I feel sure 

 that the examination of long series of specimens would reveal their occurrence in 

 other genera. 



(2) If we classify species into genera solely on minor venational differences we 

 shall have to split up certain natural groups (e.g. Iolaus, Phasis and Anthene), of 

 which the homogeneity on other grounds is evident. 



(3) In many cases, genera characterized by a uniform venation will include 

 species whose male genitalia are completely dissimilar, indicating a very distant 

 phylogenetic origin. The most striking example of such an artificial genus is 

 Cupido (sensu Aurivillius) which includes species belonging to several distinct sub- 

 families, e.g. to Lampidinae, Plebeiinae, Zizeerinae, etc., but not a single true 

 Cupido. 



I agree with Warren (1947, Entomologist 80 : 208 et seq.,) that we shall arrive at a 

 more accurate classification by adopting as our basic characters (1) the shape of the 

 legs, (2) the structure of the male genitalia. Warren makes use of the structure of 

 the prothoracic legs to subdivide the superfamily Papilionoidea into three groups 

 of families : — 



* An error of observation : It should read : veins 8 and 9 arise from vein 7. 



