Nomenclature, variation, and the biological species concept in Lamasina (Lycaenidae: Theclinae: Eumaeini)

Abstract

The correct generic name for the species that belong to Eucharia Boisduval, 1870, a homonym, is either Annamaria D'Abrera & Bálint, 2001, which has been considered to be unavailable, or Lamasina Robbins, 2002, a replacement name for Eucharia. A recent re-interpretation of the original description of Annamaria was incorrect, and Annamaria is confirmed as being unavailable under Article 13.1 of the Code. A proposed neotype for Papilio ganimedes Cramer, 1775 is invalidated, and a possible syntype is illustrated. Results of an analysis of variation in the Lamasina ganimedes complex are distinctly different from those previously published and provide insufficient evidence to support the hypothesis that L. lathyi (Bálint, 2005) is distinct under a biological species concept. Lamasina lathyi is a synonym of L. ganimedes syn. nov. Statistical evidence overwhelmingly falsifies the published hypothesis that the L. rhaptissima (Johnson, 1991) (14 males) and L. columbia (Bálint, 2005) (8 females) species complexes are distinct rather than males and females of the same complex. Lamasina columbia is endemic to western Colombia. The hypothesis that L. rhapsodia (Bálint, 2005) from Bolivia is a distinct species is not better supported than the hypotheses that the one known specimen of L. rhapsodia is a geographical variant or an aberrant specimen. Lamasina rhapsodia is a synonym of L. rhaptissima syn. nov. Superficial similarity in ventral wing patterns in genera Paiwarria Kaye, 1904 and Lamasina is noted. A nomenclatural checklist for Lamasina is presented.