On Linnaeus’ (1764) butterfly type materials missing from the Museum of Evolution of Uppsala University (Section of Zoology) and the case of Papilio hermione

By

Balletto, Emilio
Barbero, Francesca
Bonelli, Simona
Casacci, Luca P.
Dapporto, Leonardo

Type

Article

Date of Publication

2024-7-31

Original Publication

Nota lepidopterologica

Volume

47

Pages

163--170

Subjects

Article 74 , ICZN , lectotype , neotype , syntype

Contributed by

Pensoft Publishers

Language

English

Published by

Bonn,

Identifiers

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3897/nl.47.127357

 

Abstract

We briefly analyse the history of Queen Ulrika’s and of Linnaeus’ butterfly collections. We show that the type materials of some species were likely moved from Queen Ulrika’s to Linnaeus’ collection before 1803. We provide evidence that Honey and Scoble (2001) correctly designated the lectotypes of 101 of the 159 species listed in Linnaeus’ (1764) publication. We likewise conclude that, although it did not respect of the prevailing concept of the species, the lectotype of Papilio hermione was validly designated by Kudrna (1977); consequently, the neotype of P. hermione designated by Russell and Vane-Wright (2024) is invalid.