World Elfin classification (The West)

[Richard Worth]

Ron,
Shouldn't his paper be "Holarctic" Elfins?  It sounds like it is a 
new and old world treatment.  Palearctic implies a mostly 
European/Asian coverage, doesn't it?  And then you mention:

>  Here are his groupings for the new world as of 1992.
If it's a new world treatment then Nearctic seems the better choice.
Cheers, Rich ;-)


>     In 1992 Dr. Kurt Johnson published and extensive taxonomic review of
>"The Palaearctic 'Elfin' Butterflies" in Neue Entomologische Nachrichten.
>Unfortunately, this paper is little know among the rank and file of North
>American butterfliers - and the few New World specialists who are aware of
>it have basically just ignored its taxonomy.
>
>     Here are his groupings for the new world as of 1992. (I've added the
>new taxa I am aware of to his list.)
>
>     Genus Incisalia Scudder
>         1. I. niphon
>                 a I. n. niphon
>                 b.I. n. clarki
>         2. I. eryphon
>                 a. I. e. eryphon
>                 b. I. e. sheltonensis
>(The following have been added since 1992
>                 c. I. e. fusca
>                 d. I. e. pallescens
>                 e. I. e. purpurascens )
>         3. I. lanoraieensis
>
>     Genus Deciduphagus Johnson
>         1. D. augustinus (Westwood)
>                 a. D. a. augustinus
>                 b. D. a. helenae
>                 c. D. a. croesoides
>                 d. D. a. iroides
>                 e. D. a. annetteae
>(The following has been added since 1992
>                 f. D. a. concava )
>          2. D. fotis
>                 a.D. f. fotis
>(the following has been aded since 1992
>                 b. D. f. mojavensis )
>          3. D. mossi
>                 a. D. m. mossi
>                 b. D. m. schryveri
>                 c. D. m. bayensis
>                 d. D. m. dudoroffi
>                 e. D. m. windi
>(The following have been added since 1992
>                 f. D. m. hidakupa
>                 g. D. m. marinensis )
>         4. D. polios
>                 a. D. p. polios
>                 b. D. p. obscurus
>                 c. D. p. maritima
>         5. D. irus
>                 a. D. i. irus
>                 b. D. i. arsace
>                 c. D. i. hadros
>         6. D. henrici
>                 a. D. h. henrici
>                 b. D. h. margaretae
>                 c. D. h. solatus
>                 d. D. h. turneri
>(The following have been added since 1992
>                 e. D. h. viridissima
>                 f. D. h. yahwehus )
>
>     Genus Cisincisalia Johnson
>         1. C. guatemalena
>         2. C. moecki
>
>This is the most recent revision of this group. Now, we either base our
>designations on published scientific papers (like Johnson's) or on Dr.
>so-n-so's opinion in his lay-level book or personal conversations.  If
>someone wants to base their taxonomy on some other _published taxonomic
>reseach_ ( than  Dr. Johnson's in this case) that is their priorgritive.
>The problem is that published research does not seem to hold much weight
>anymore by the time taxonomy gets filtered down to the average person.
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------------------------------------
>
>    For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:
>
>    http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl
>

Richard A. Worth
Oregon Department of Agriculture
Plant Division
rworth at oda.state.or.us
(503) 986-6461

 
 ------------------------------------------------------------ 

   For subscription and related information about LEPS-L visit:

   http://www.peabody.yale.edu/other/lepsl