1. Live pictures

1.1. Imago

2. Diagnosis

1-3: ♂, data see label (coll. & photos: Egbert Friedrich)

1-3: ♀, data see label (coll. & photos: Egbert Friedrich)

2.1. Original description

1-2: Guenée ([1858]: 267-268) [from copyright-free scans at www.biodiversitylibrary.org]

3. Further information

3.1. Other combinations

• Tephrosia excursaria Guenée, [1858] [original combination]

3.2. Synonyms

• Tephrosia exportaria Guenée, 1857 [synonym according to funet.fi]
• Boarmia phibalapteraria Guenée, 1857 [synonym according to funet.fi]
• Hemerophila vestita Walker, 1860 [synonym according to funet.fi]
• Boarmia attributa Walker, 1860 [synonym according to funet.fi]
• Boarmia decertaria Walker, 1860 [synonym according to funet.fi]
• Tephrosia fulgurigera Walker, 1869 [synonym according to funet.fi]

3.3. Publication date of the first description

Williams (2019: 95) dated the volume 9 after reviewing the Bibliographie de la France to the time window 2-8 January 1858.

Scoble & Pitkin (2024) come to the same conclusion that volume 9 of the "Species général des lépidoptères", i.e. volume "I" of "Uranides et Phalénites" was published between 2 and 8 January 1858, volume 10 of the "Species général des lépidoptères", i.e. volume "II" of "Uranides et Phalénites" between 13 and 19 March 1858. The printed year "1857" should therefore be corrected to "1858" for both volumes - as already stated by earlier authors and also handled accordingly in Lepiforum. As Scoble & Pitkin (2024) strongly recommend, in such cases the correct year of publication is also placed in square brackets in Lepiforum, here "[1858]" for both volumes. We are therefore deliberately deviating from the "Recommendation 22A.2.2" of the 4th version of the ICZN (1999), which no longer mentions these square brackets (unlike in the previous versions) and even more so from the completely confusing "Recommendation 22A.2 .3", which would like to place the printed date - if absolutely desired - after the unbracketed publication date in round or square brackets [here "Guenée, 1858", "Guenée, 1858 (1857)" "Guenée, 1858 ("1857")" "Guenée, 1858 [1857]" or "Guenée, 1858 ["1857"]"]. Like Scoble & Pitkin (2024) - and the vast majority of entomologists - we continue to adhere to the rule of the earlier versions of the ICZN, according to which a publication date derived directly from the paper is written without brackets, whereas a publication date derived indirectly from other sources is placed in square brackets.

(Authors: Erwin Rennwald & Jürgen Rodeland)

3.4. Literature

• Original description: Guenée, A. (“1857”) [1858]: Histoire naturelle des Insectes. Species général des lépidoptères 9. Uranides et Phalénites. Tome I: I-LVI, 1-515. Paris (Roret).
• Scoble, M.J. & L.M. Pitkin (2024): The date of publication of A. Guenée’s Geometridae et Uranides, Histoire Naturelle des Insectes. Species Général des Lépidoptères. — Nota Lepidopterologica, 47: 43-47. [zur Arbeit auf nl.pensoft.net]
• Williams, R. B. (2019): Bibliographical descriptions and dating of the original parts and consolidated volumes of H. T. Stainton’s A Manual of British Butterflies and Moths, with dating and combined order of precedence of some relevant contemporaneous literature. — Zoological Bibliography 6 (6): 55-102. [PDF auf avespress.com]