Jamides celeno - are we all wrong!

[Painted Jezebel]

Thanks. I would love to say 'Thanks for clearing this up'..... but I can't.

I am inclined to change my site to simply say Jamides celeno ssp. and give details of the confusion on my details page for that species. I'll have to think this over for a bit!

I thought Pulau Mal was wrong! It just did not sound right for this area.

[Psyche]

You can see aelianus is no longer listed as a subspecies of celeno in Lepindex.
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/research-curati...6recLimit%3d30

If this is correct it means that taxon aelianus was all along mis- IDed as a subspecies of J. celeno by later revisors.
http://www.nhm.ac.uk/research-curati...6recLimit%3d30
As stated in Wilkemedia, the holotype is lost, & what is left is the drawing.
Since Jamides & Cupido (Everes) are quite different on the underside it is hard to see how the misID can occur unless only the upperside was drawn which is quite unlikely.

However, Jamides spp. were first placed under Cupido 1801 before they were transferred to Jamides 1819.
It is possible that Lepindex staff were simply transferring data from old index cards to a computerised system .

TL Seow

[Painted Jezebel]

It is possible that Lepindex staff were simply transferring data from old index cards to a computerised system .

TL Seow

In view of the huge volume of work required, I would think this is a distinct probability.