460 FRANCIS HEMMING 



Doherty, in each case correspondence took place between the above authors before the name 

 in question was actually published, in each case the name was published independently by 

 each of these authors. In the present case de Niceville first placed in the genus Rhinopalpa 

 Felder (C.) & Felder (R.) what he called Rhinopalpa vasuki (Doherty MS.) de Niceville ; in a 

 footnote added presumably while his book was passing through the press he placed this 

 species in a genus which he styled " Yoma Doherty MS.", at the same time providing that 

 genus with a diagnosis and stating that the above species was its type-species. Thus, while 

 de Niceville clearly indicated that the name Yoma had first been proposed by Doherty, he 

 made it clear also that he considered that this name had not up till then been published by 

 that author and himself assumed responsibility for its publication. 



The name Yoma de Niceville is invalid, both as a junior homonym of, and as a junior 

 objective synonym of, the slightly older name Yoma Doherty. 



YPHTHIMA Scudder, 1875, Proc. amev. Acad. Arts Set., Boston 10 : 289 (an Incorrect Sub- 

 sequent Spelling of Ypthima Hubner, 1818). 



YPTHIMA Hubner, 1818, Zutr. z. Samml. exot. Schmett. 1 : 17. Type-species by designation 

 by the Commission under its Plenary Powers under Article 70(a) (misidentified type-species) : 

 Ypthima huebneri Kirby, 1871, Syn. Cat. diurn. Lep. : 95. 



The present is one of a number of names which was published both in volume 1 of the 

 Zutr age and in the Verzeichniss. In the second of these works this name was published on 

 page 63 in Signature 4. Prior to the determination (in 1937) °f the precise dates on which 

 these works were respectively published, the Verzeichniss was commonly treated as having 

 priority over the above volume of the Zutrdge. It is now known however that that volume 

 of the Zutrdge was published in 18 18 and that the relevant portion of the Verzeichniss did not 

 appear until 1819. 



In the Zutrdge Hubner placed only one species in the genus Ypthima. He described this 

 species on page 17 and figured it on plate [15] as figs 83, 84. To this species he applied the 

 name Ypthima philomela [i.e. Papilio philomela Linnaeus, Amoen. acad. 6 : 404]. Being the 

 only nominal species placed in the genus by Hubner, this became automatically its type- 

 species by monotypy. Unfortunately, the species which Hubner described and figured under 

 the specific name philomela was not the species to which Linnaeus had given the name 

 philomela. This was first realized in 1871 by Kirby who bestowed the new name Ypthima 

 huebneri upon the species figured by Hubner. Thus, the genus Ypthima, as first established 

 by Hubner in the Zutrdge is a genus based upon a misidentified type-species. In order to 

 regularize the position, the Commission has been asked to designate under Article 70(a) the 

 nominal species Ypthima huebneri Kirby to be the type-species of the genus Ypthima, thus 

 providing that genus with, as its type-species, the species figured by Hubner under the mis- 

 applied specific name philomela. Pending a decision by the Commission on this application, 

 the genus Ypthima is here treated, in accordance with the provisions of Article 80, as having 

 Ypthima huebneri Kirby as its type-species. 



YPTHIMOMORPHA van Son, 1955, Butts S. Africa (Mem. Transvaal Mus. No. 8) 2 : 158. 

 Type-species by original designation : Ypthima itonia Hewitson, 1865, Trans, ent. Soc. 

 Lond. (3) 2 : 287, pi. 18, fig. 13. 



YPTHIMORPHA Overlaet, 1955, Explor. Pare. nat. Upemba, Miss, de Witte, fasc. 27 : 23. 

 Type-species by original designation : Ypthima mashuna Trimen, 1895, Trans, ent. Soc. 

 Lond. 1895 : 181, pi. 5, fig. 1. 



This generic name was published in the same year as Mashuna van Son, of which the same 

 species is type-species. Of these names Mashuna van Son is the older, having been published 

 in July 1955, the name Ypthimorpha Overlaet not having been published until December of 

 that year. This latter date was communicated to Dr. van Son in a letter dated 26th February 

 1956 addressed by the late Dr. Overlaet to Dr. van Son, to whom I am indebted for the fore- 

 going information. The name Ypthimorpha Overlaet is therefore invalid as a junior objective 

 synonym of Mashuna van Son. 



