GENERIC NAMES OF BUTTERFLIES 243 



KRINGANA Moore, [1895], Lep. ind. 2 (20) : 185. Type-species by original designation : 

 Thaumantis noureddin Westwood, [Jan. 1851], in Doubleday, Gen. diurn. Lep. (2) : 337 



not a. 



KUEKENTHALIELLA Reuss, April 1921, Soc. ent., Stuttgart 36 : 16. Type-species by 

 original designation : Argynnis gemmata Butler, 1881, Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. (5) 7 : 32, 

 pi. 4, figs i, 1 A. 



This was published by Reuss three times as a new name, twice in 192 1, once in 1922. The 

 first was in April 1921, as shown above ; the second was in November 1921 (Ent. Mitt., 10 : 

 189) ; the third was in 1922 {Arch. Naturgesch. 87 (1921) (A) n : 223). 



On each of the above occasions this generic name was printed in the form " Kiikenthali- 

 ella " ; in accordance with the provisions of Article 32 (c) the name is here corrected to the 

 form " Kuekenthaliella " . 



KUMOTHALES Ovcrlaet, 1940, Rev. Zool. Hot. a/r. 33 : 170. Type-species by original 

 designation : Kumothales inexpectata ( )verlaet, 1940, ibid. 33 : 171, fig. 16 (venation), 

 fig. 17 $ (holotype). 



The male of the type-species was unknown to Overlaet in 1940. Jackson published a 

 description of it in 1956 (J . E. Afr. Ug. nat. Hist. Soc. 23 : 74). 



LABRANGA Moore, [1897], Lep. ind. 3 (27) : 49. Type-species by original designation : 

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

 rg6. 



When he established this nominal genus, Moore designated its type-species but gave no 

 generic diagnosis. In the following year (in a later part of the same volume) Moore made good 

 this deficiency ([1898], loc. cit. 3 (31) : 139). 



LACHESIS Oberthur & Houlbert, 1022, C. li. Acad. Sci., Paris 174 : 192. Type-species by 

 selection by Hemming (1932, Ann. Mag. nat. Hist. (10) 10 : 572) : Lachesis ruscinonensis 

 Oberthur & Houlbert, 1922, ibid. 174 : 192. 



The name Lachesis ruscinonensis is invalid, being a totally unnecessary replacement for the 

 name Papilio lachesis Hiibner, 1790 (Beitr. Sckmett. 2 (3) : 70, pi, 3, figs P. 1, 2 o") introduced 

 by Oberthur & Houlbert through an unaccountable reversion to the idea prevalent over a 

 hundred years earlier that tautonomy between generic and specific names was not permissible. 



The generic name Lachesis Oberthur & Houlbert is invalid under the Law of Homonymy, 

 having been used as a generic name by four previous authors : (a) Lachesis Daudin, 1803, 

 Mag. encyclop. 5 (20) : 435 ; also in Sonnini's Button, (Rept. 5 : 349) ; (b) Lachesis Risso, 

 1826, Hist. nat. Europ. 4 : 211 ; (c) Lachesis Audouin, 1826, in Savigny, Descr. Egypte 1 (4) 

 (Explic. Pis, Arachn.) : m ; (d) Lachesis Saunders, 1871, Cat. Buprest. : 21 ; and, in error 

 for Lachesilla Westwood (Psocoptera) by Hagen, 1861, Ent. Ann. 1861 : 22. 



LACHNOCNEMA Trimen, 1887, South-African Butts 2 : 233. Type-species by selection by 

 Hemming (i960, Annot. lep. (1) : n) : Hesperia bibulus Fabricius, 1793, Ent. syst. 3 (1) : 

 307- 



LACHNOCNEMENEA Sharp, [1888], in Zool. Rec. 24 (year 1887) (Ins.): 224 (an Incorrect 

 Subsequent Spelling of Lachnocnema Trimen, 1887.) 



LACHNOPTERA Doubleday, [1847], Gen. diurn. Lep. (1) : pi. 22, fig. 2. Type-species by 

 monotypy : Papilio iole Fabricius, 1781, Spec. Ins. 2 : 78. 



In the text published in 1848 (loc. cit. (1) : 161) Doubleday again treated Papilio iole 

 Fabricius as the only species belonging to this genus. 



The name Papilio iole Fabricius is invalid, as it is a junior homonym of Papilio iole [Denis & 

 Schiffermuller], 1775 (Ankiindung [sic] eines syst. Werk Schmett. Wiener Gegend : 172). The 



