386 FRANCIS HEMMING 



PSEUDOSTEROMA Weymer, [1912], in Seitz, Grossschmett. Erde 5 : 241. Type-species by 

 selection by Hemming (1943, Proc. R. ent. Soc. Lond. (B) 12 : 25) : Steroma pronophila 

 Felder (C.) & Felder (R.), [1867], Reise Fregatte " Novara ", Lep. Rhop. (3) : 475. 



PSEUDOTERGUMIA Agenjo, 1947, Graellsia 5 (3) : [septuages. secund. Fam. 1]. Type- 

 species by monotypy : Papilio fidia Linnaeus, 1767, Syst. Nat. (ed. 12) 1 (2) : 770. 



PSEUDOTHECLA Strand, 1910, Ent. Rundsch. 27 : 162. Type-species through Section (i) 

 (replacement names) of Article 67 : Thecla lunulata Erschoff, 1874, Mdm. Soc. Amis Set. 

 nat. Moscou 11 (No. 2) : 7, pi. 1, fig. 5 § [commonly cited under the name of Erschoff's paper 

 as " Fedschenko, Reise Turkestan "). 



This name was introduced as a replacement for Erschoffia Tutt, [1907], which is invalid 

 under the Law of Homonymy. 



PSEUDOTHECLA Nabokov, 1945, Psyche 52 : 11. Type-species by original designation : 

 Thecla faga Dognin, 1895, Ann. Soc. ent. Belg. 39 : 105. 



The name Pseudothecla Nabokov is invalid, as it is a junior homonym of Pseudothecla 

 Strand, 1910 (see above). It has been replaced by the name A' 'abokovia Hemming, i960. 



PSEUDOZIZEERIA Beuret, 1955, Mitt. ent. Ges. Basel (n.f.) 5 : 125. Type-species by 

 original designation : Lycaena malia Kollar, [1844], in Hiigel's Kashmir 4 (2) : 422. 



PSOLOS Staudinger, 1889, Iris 2 : 147 (a manuscript name published in a synonymy and 

 therefore invalid under Article 11(d)). 



When publishing the name Astictopterus ulunda in 1889 (loc. cit. 2 : 147) Staudinger 

 remarked that he had received some males of this species under the name " Psolos pulligo " 

 and some females under the name ulunda, the latter name being attributed by Mabille (as 

 reported by Staudinger) to Plotz. The generic name Psolos and the two specific names cited 

 above were at that time unpublished manuscript names. Staudinger adopted the specific 

 name ulunda (still attributed to Plotz, though actually here published by himself for the first 

 time) and placed the species in question in Astictopterus Felder (C.) & Felder (R.), i860. He 

 did not adopt either of the other names mentioned in the note of Mabille 's but he adopted 

 the unfortunate course of citing each in the cross-heading bearing the name of this species, 

 the generic name Psolos appearing in brackets — parentheses — after the name Astictopterus 

 and the name pulligo — also in brackets (parentheses) — after the name ulunda. The name 

 which Staudinger adopted for this species, namely Astictopterus ulunda, appeared in this 

 heading in heavy black type, while the rejected manuscript names there cited — that is, the 

 names Psolos and pulligo, appeared in italics. 



Writing at a time when there was no provision in the Code regarding the status to be 

 accorded to names published in synonymies and when it was commonly held permissible to 

 bring such names into use, Evans in 1949 (Cat. Hesp. Eur. Asia Australia : 278) brought 

 forward the name Psolos Staudinger, 1889 (of which he treated [Astictopterus] ulunda 

 Staudinger as type-species by monotypy), employing it in place of the name Sancus de 

 Niceville, 1891, till then employed for this genus. The resuscitation of names published in 

 synonymies has since been prohibited in the Code (Article 11 (d)) and accordingly Evans's 

 action is now seen to have been invalid, the name Sancus becoming once more the oldest 

 (and the sole) name applicable to this genus. 



PSOLOS Semper (G.), 1892, in Semper (C. G.), Reis. Archipel. Philipp. II, 5 (Schmett). 1 (7) : 

 319 (a manuscript name published in a synonymy and therefore invalid under Article 11(d)). 

 Semper stated (correctly) that this was a name proposed by Mabille in manuscript ; he 

 was clearly not aware that it had been published (though invalidly) by Staudinger in 1889. 

 Semper did not himself adopt the name Psolos, doing no more than place that name in the 

 synonymy of Sancus de Niceville. The only nominal species cited by Semper for Sancus 

 and therefore for Psolos as interpreted by himself was Tagiades pulligo Mabille, 1876 (Ann. 

 Soc. ent. Fr. (5) 2 : 272 et Bull. : xxvi). This species would therefore have been the type- 

 species of Psolos Semper, if that name had been available for zoological nomenclature. The 



