Butterflies and Moths of the World Generic Names and their Type-species

Genus details

Search again

Cyane Felder, 1861 . Nova Acta Acad. Caesar. Leop. Carol. 28(3) : 22.

Available Name

Homonyms: 2

Higher classification:

Callithea leprieuri Feisthamel, 1835. Magasin Zool. Paris : pl.222 et explic.    [BHLBHL]

Type-species designation:
by monotypy .

Type specimens:
See BHL scanned Type-species page: .

Hemming (1967: 132) stated:-

The name Cyane Felder is invalid, as it is a junior objective synonym of Callithea Feisthamel, 1835. [However, this statement should be ignored - see Cowan (1970) below.

Cowan (1968: 8, 9) stated:-

Through no fault of theirs, errors have been made over some of the genera erected by C. and R. Felder. They fall under two heads : -

1. TWO papers published in 1861

1861a. C. Felder (22 April) (!), Nov. Act. Cais, Leop. Car. 28 (3) : 50 pp., 1 pl.

1861b. C. & R. Felder, 30 April, Wien. ent. Mon. 5 (4) : 97-111.

Paper 1861a dealt with the family Nymphalidae. On the front wrapper is a note "Eingegangen bei der Akademie 29 Feb. 1860" (leap year!), and, in bold face below, "JENA 1861". On the back wrapper is the note "Geschlossen 22 April 1861". It is evident that the last gives the publication date, and that there was a delay for some reason of 14 months, which accounts for several of the new names having already appeared as new in 1860 (Doleschallia, Helcyra, Rhinopalpa).

Hemming dates the 1861a paper at "some unknown date in 1861" in his entry for Callitaenia (List [Hemming, 1967] : 91), but as "June 1861, as established by Kirby in 1871, Syn. Cat. diurn. Lep. : 45" in his entry for Zethera (List [Hemming, 1967] : 466). Kirby, however, merely quoted the bare date, giving no reasons. I can find none; did he misread "JENA".

The 1861b paper discussed a small American collection in the April number of Wien. ent. Mont., but there is no evidence to date it exactly. Pending such evidence it must, under Article 21 (b) of the Code, date from 30 April. Only Callitaenia (l.c. : 107) is involved.

The genera introduced in the 1861a (22 April) paper are as follows. The exact date is critical only for Callitaenia and Zethera, so these two only are cross-referenced in my "Corrigenda-Index".

Amphidema (1861a : 27)
Antigonis ( : 21)
Callitaenia ( : 50)
Canopus ( : 33)
Cyane ( : 24)
Doleschallia ( : 14)
Helcyra ( : 37, 44, pl. 1)
Lebadea ( : 28)
Libythina ( : 49)
Nymphalis ( : 41)
Phaedyma ( : 31)
Rhinopalpa ( : 49)
Zethera ( : 26)".

Cowan (1970: 17) stated:-


Callithea Feisthamel, 1835 was tautonymic with Vanessa callithea Godart, 1819, not monotypic for C. leprieuri Feisthamel, 1835.

Cyane Felder, 1861 is consequently valid. The circumstances were as follows.

Mag. Zool 5 (livr. 1 ?) : pl. (IX, Ins.) 122, & text. [31 March 1835 ?.]
Bull. soc. ent. France 3 (4) : lxvii [31 March 1835].
Bull. soc. ent. France] 4 (1) : [xxxi] (erratum) [July 1835].

At the meeting of the Société Entomologique de la France on 19 November 1834, Feisthamel read a paper on the new genus which was reported in the second of the three references above. He said; "The genus Callithea has been formed on callithea Godart (Encyclopédie p. 324) [i.e. Vanessa callithea Godart, 1819] . . . Vanessa callithea, another species published by Niebuhr under the name sapphira, and Callithea leprieuri [a new third species not here described] are all the species yet known of this new genus." The erratum emphasised that these three were distinct species, and explained that "Niebuhr" should have read Hü bner. It also proposed the replacement name godarti for C. callithea to avoid tautonymy.

At about the same time, in Guérin-Méneville's Magazin at the first reference above, Feisthamel published exactly the same particulars without errors or omissions, and in addition gave his full description and pleasing plate for C. leprieuri.

It is quite clear that in both original descriptions the type-species of Callithea Feisthamel, 1835 was Vanessa callithea Godart, 1819 (Enc. Méth. 9 (1) : 324) by tautonymy as well as by original designation. The problem is to know which was the earlier "original" description. An extensive search has not solved it, the nearest estimates placing both at or just before 31 March 1835. Hemming's reference is therefore left standing, while the necessary corrections to the generic data are made in the Corrigenda chapter below."

Cowan (1970: 45) stated:-

CYANE Felder is valid; delete lines 3, 4. See List B (Feisthamel). [line 3, 4 read - The name Cyane Felder is invalid, as it is a junior objective synonym of Callithea Feisthamel, 1835]

The higher classification used here follows Lamas (2008).

Learn more about Nymphalidae in Wikipedia

Search the Biodiversity Heritage Library (BHL) for references to CYANE and included species.

Submit correction/addition