230 FRANCIS HEMMING 



ID AIDES Hiibner, [1819], Verz. bekannt. Schmett. (6) : 85. Type-species by selection by 

 Scudder (1875, Proc. amer. Acad. Arts Sci,, Boston 10 : 195) : Papilio codrus Cramer, 

 [1777], Uitl. Kapellen 2 (15) : 127, pi. 179, figs A, B. 



IDATA de Lesse, 1952, Ann. Soc. ent. Fr. 121 : 72. Type-species by original designation : 

 Epinephele ida Esper, var. cecilia Vallentin, 1894, Le Naturaliste 16 : 260. 



IDEA Fabricius, 1807, Mag. f. Insektenk. (Illiger) 6 : 283. Type-species by monotypy : 

 Papilio idea Linnaeus, 1763, Amoen. acad. 6 : 405. 



Linnaeus, when describing the nominal species Papilio idea, added after his description the 

 reference " Clerk t. 38 f. 1 " ; the plate here cited was published in vol. 2 of Clerck's Icones. 

 The citation by Linnaeus of this reference has led many authors to attribute this name to 

 Clerck and to treat the plate in the Icones as the place where the specific name idea was first 

 published. This is incorrect, for the plate referred to above was not published until 1764, 

 i.e. not until a year after it was referred to in the Amoen. acad. It is no matter for surprise 

 that in 1763 Linnaeus should have cited this at that time unpublished plate, for it was at 

 Linnaeus's request that Clerck undertook the preparation of the plates which later were 

 published in the Icones. Indeed, in this matter Clerck was no more than the artist who 

 prepared the plates in that work, even the names attributed in it to the species figured having 

 been supplied to Clerck by Linnaeus. 



IDEOPSIS Horsfield, 1857, in Horsfield & Moore, Cat. lep. Ins. Mus. East India Coy (1) : 



133. Type-species by selection by Scudder (1875, Proc. amer. Acad. Arts Sci., Boston 10 : 



195) : Idea (?) gaura Horsfield, [1829], Descr. Cat. lep. Ins. Mus. East India Coy (2) : explic. 



pi. 6, fig. 1. 

 IDIOMORPHUS Doumet, 1861, Rev. Mag. Zool. (2) 13 : 174. Type-species by monotypy : 



Idiomorphus hewitsonii Doumet, 1861, ibid. (2) 13 : 175, pi. 5, fig. 2. 



The name Idiomorphus Doumet is invalid, as it is a junior homonym of Idiomorphus de 



Chaudoir, 1846 {Bull. Soc. imp. Nat. Moscou 19 (4) : 515). It has been replaced by the name 



Bicyclus Kirby, 1871. 

 IDIONEURA Felder (C.) & Felder (R.), [1867], Reise Fregatte " Novara ", Lep. Rhop. (3) : 474. 



Type-species by monotypy : Idioneura erebioides Felder (C.) & Felder (R.), [1867], ibid. (3) : 



474-475- 



The name Idioneura Felder & Felder is invalid, as it is a junior homonym of Idioneura 

 Philippi, 1865 (Verh. zool.-bot. Ges. Wien. 15 : 615). It has been replaced by the name 

 Idioneurula Strand, 1932. 



IDIONEURULA Strand, 1932, Folia zool. hydrobiol., Riga 4 (1) : 146. Type-species through 

 Section (i) (replacement names) of Article 67 : Idioneura erebioides Felder (C.) & Felder 

 (R.), [1867], Reise Fregatte " Novara " , Lep. Rhop. (3) : 474-475. 



IDMAIS Boisduval, [1836], Roret's Suite a Buffon, Hist. nat. Ins., Spec. Gen. Lepid. 1 : 584. 

 Type-species by selection by Scudder (1875, Proc. amer. Acad. Arts Sci., Boston 10 : 196) : 

 Pontia chrysonome Klug, 1829, in Ehrenberg, Symbolae phys. Ins. 1 : signature G [4], 

 pi. 7, figs 9, 10 6", 11 ?. 



IDMON de Niceville, 1895, J. Bombay nat. Hist. Soc. 9 (4) : 375. Type-species by original 

 designation : Baoris unicolor Distant, 1886, Rhop. malay. : 381, pi. 35, fig. 11. 



The name Baoris unicolor Distant, 1886, is invalid, as it is a junior homonym of Baoris 

 unicolor Moore, 1883 {Proc. zool. Soc. Lond. 1883 : 533). It has been replaced by the name 

 Iambrix distanti Shepard, 1937 (^ n Bryk's Lep. Cat. 83 : 20). 



IDRUSIA Corbet, 1943, Entomologist 76 : 206. Type-species through Section (i) (replacement 

 names) of Article 67 : Euripus halitherses Doubleday, [1848], Gen. diurn. Lep. (2) : pi. 41, fig. 2. 

 The name Idrusia was introduced as a replacement for the name Euripus Doubleday in the 

 belief that it was invalid as being a junior homonym of the name Eurypus Kirby, [1919], 

 {Trans, linn. Soc. Lond. 12 (2) : 390). At that time there was no clear rule as to what con- 

 stituted generic homonymy, but under the present revised Code (Article 56(a)) a single-letter 



