Revision of the Euthalia phemius complex (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae) based on morphology and molecular analyses
This paper was published in Volume 164, Number 2, pp. 304–327 (Yago et al., 2012).
On pages 304, 305, 306, 316, 323 and 326, ‘1896’ should read ‘1897’.
On page 319, column 2, lines 39 and 42, ‘E. ssp. seitzi’ should read ‘E. p. seitzi’.
On page 322, Figures 21–27 were incorrectly numbered in the legend.
Figures 21–27. The other synonymic names in the Euthalia phemius complex (A, upperside; B, underside). The classification followed the scientific name of each original description. 21, Adolias sancara Moore, 1858, syntype ♀ (as ♂ in the original description), N. India, labelled as ‘♂ Type Adolias sancara Moore/ Duklum, N. India Col. Sykes 60–15 E.I.C./ B.M. TYPE No. Rh10126. Adolias sancara, ♀ Moore’ (NHM) (©NHM); 22, ditto, syntype ♀, Darjeeling, labelled as ‘♀ Type Adolias sancara Moore/ Darjeeling, SukiarPokori? [undecipherable]. Sancara, Moore./ B.M. TYPE No. Rh10127. Adolias sancara, ♀ Moore.’ (NHM) (©NHM); 23, Euthalia phemius seitzi Fruhstorfer, 1913, ♂, Tai Po Kau, Hong Kong; 24, ditto, syntype ♀, Hong Kong, labelled as ‘Type/ phemius seitzi Frhst./ Hongkong Fruhstorfer/ MUSEUM PARIS 1934 COLL H. FRUHSTORFER’ (MNHN); 25, Euthalia phemius corbeti Pendlebury, 1939, ♂, Langkawi, Malaysia; 26, ditto, ♀, Langkawi, Malaysia; 27, Papilio hesperus Fabricius, 1793 [= the current Euryphura chalcis (C. & R. Felder, 1860)], figures of syntype in the Icones (OXUM).
The figures are reproduced on the following page with the correct legend.
