GENERIC NAMES OF BUTTERFLIES 133 



(portion " D " of fascicule 17) he drew attention in the " Errata " (: 210) to the two spellings 

 used and gave preference to the spelling Cycloglypha used on page 45. This spelling becomes 

 therefore the Correct Original Spelling of this name under Article 32(b) of the Code. 



CYCLOGRAMMA Doubleday, [1847], Gen. dinrn. Lep. (1) : pi. 27, fig. 5. Type-species by 

 monotypy : Cyclogramma pandama Doubleday, [1847], ibid. : pi. 27, fig. 5 (text published 

 in April 1849, ibid. (1) : 219). 



As shown above, the name Cyclogramma first appeared in 1847 on plate 27, where the above 

 species alone was cited and is therefore the type-species by monotypy. In the text published 

 two years later Doubleday cited two further nominal species (of which one was a manuscript 

 species) as belonging to this genus, but this has no bearing on the question of the type-species 

 of this genus which, as shown above, had already been settled by monotypy in 1847. 



CYCLOGYPHA Mabille, 1903, in Wystman's Gen. Ins. 17 (A) : 70 (an Incorrect Original 

 Spelling of Cycloglypha Mabille, 1903). 



The circumstances in which Cyclogypha became under Article 32(b) an Incorrect Original 

 Spelling and the spelling Cycloglypha became the Correct Original Spelling have been explained 

 in the note on Cycloglypha. 



CYCLOPIDES Hubner, [1819], Verz. bekannt. Schnictt. (7) : in. Type-species by selection by 

 Butler (1870, lint. mon. Mag. 7 : 96) : Papilio steropes [Denis & Schillermuller], 1775, 

 Ankiindung eines syst. Werkes Schmett. Wiener Gegend : 160. 



The taxon represented by the nominal species Papilio steropes is currently treated sub- 

 jectively on taxonomic grounds as representing at the species-level the same taxon as that 

 represented by the nominal species Papilio morpheas Pallas, 1771 (Reise durch versch. Prov. 

 Puss. Reichs 1 : 471). At the subspecies level, however, these nominal species are considered 

 to represent distinct subspecies of the collective species Heteroplerus morpheas (Pallas), the 

 nominate subspecies, morphens Pallas, occurring in Southern Russia (type-locality : " in 

 fruticetis circa Samaram "), and the subspecies steropes [Denis & Schiffermuller] in Western 

 Europe (type-locality : Vienna) (see Hemming, i960, Annot. lep. (2) : 66-67). 



Si udder (1875, I'roc. amrr. Annl Irts Sri., Boston 10 : 150-151) caused some confusion in 

 the use of the generic name Cyclopides by rejecting the type-selection of Papilio steropes 

 [Denis & Schiffermuller] made by Butler in 1870 on the ground that another nominal species 

 considered subjectively to represent the same species had already been made the type-species 

 of a different genus, namely Heteroplerus Dumeril, 1806. Basing himself on these erroneous 

 premises Scudder went on to select as the type-species of Cyclopides the nominal species 

 Papilio metis Linnaeus, 1764 (Mas. Lud. Ulr. : 325). The taxon represented by this nominal 

 species occurs in South Africa and belongs to an entirely different group in the family Hes- 

 periidac. This mistake of Scudder's led a number of authors into a similar error. In con- 

 sequence, the " metis-Group " remained without a name until in 1906 Tutt established the 

 nominal genus Watsonia with Papilio metis as type-species. Unluckily, that name was 

 invalid under the Law of Homonymy, and this group remained without a valid name of its own 

 until in 1934 I established the nominal genus Metisella with the above species as type-species. 



CYCLOSEMIA Mabille, 15th May, 1878, Petites Nouvelles ent. 2 (196) : 229. Type-species by 

 original designation : Papilio herennius Stoll, [1782], in Cramer, Uill. Kapellen 4 (33) : 

 213, pi. 392, figs E, F. 



Mabille published the name Cyclosemia twice in the year 1878. In the Pet. Nouv. ent., 

 of which the exact date of publication is known, Mabille gave a generic diagnosis and designa- 

 ted the above species as type-species. On the other occasion on which he published this name 

 in 1878 (Ann. Soc. ent. Belg. 21 : 41) no type-species was cited and the name occurred with 

 many others in a catalogue of the Hesperiids in the collection of the Musee Royal d'Histoire 

 Naturelle at Brussels. In view of the difference in the treatment accorded to this name in 

 these two papers, it cannot be doubted that Mabille looked upon his paper in the Pet. Nouv. 

 ent. as being the place where this name was first published. Luckily, it ranks for nomencla- 

 torial purposes as having priority over the paper in the Annates, because its exact date of 



