Cowan (1970: 48) stated:-
HYPOLYCAENA - The long second paragraph should be deleted; it is more at fault than Scudder was.
The Felders recalled that they had already, two years earlier, noted that the three Myrina species erylus Godart, sipylus Felder, and [thecloides Felder which they here called] aetolus Fabricius were aberrant. They now diagnosed for them the new genus Hypolycaena, went on to mention certain doubtful species, and finally described three new species in the genus; tmolus, tharrytas (probably a subspecies of sipylus), and astyla. They thus originally included by name six species in the new genus.
Although Scudder did not mention that erylus and "aetolus" were included, his designation of sipylus was perfectly valid.
[The following paragraph should be deleted according to Cowan]
The authors of this generic name cited three nominal species as belonging to it ; of these, the second was a new species, Hypolycaena tharytas (: 294), the name applied to which having, it was stated, been originally proposed by Boisduval in manuscript. The authors went on to say that the taxon represented by this nominal species was, in their view, a forma geographica of the taxon represented by the nominal species Myrina sipylus which (as shown above had been established by Cajetan Felder in 1860). Scudder, when dealing with this generic name, overlooked the above reference to Myrina sipylus, yet proceeded to designate it as the type-species of this genus, justifying this action on the ground that, although (according to his belief) that nominal species had not been cited by the authors of this generic name, it was eligible for selection as type-species, because the taxon represented by it was the same as that represented by the nominal species Hypolycaena tharytas which (as shown above) was one of the originally included species. Scudder's argument was defective, but luckily his selection of Myrina sipylus as type-species is perfectly valid, because, contrary to Scudder's belief, that nominal species was (as shown above) cited by Cajetan & Rudolph Felder as belonging to this genus.
HYPOLYCAENA was included within the subfamily LYCAENIDAE: LYCAENINAE by Ackery et al., in Kristensen (1999).
The higher classification used here follows Lamas (2008).
Learn more about Lycaenidae in Wikipedia
Search the Biodiversity Heritage Library (BHL) for references to HYPOLYCAENA and included species.