Coenonympha tullia elko W. H. Edwards, 1881
(Common Ringlet)

Pinned Specimens photo collection Page 1:

Pinned Specimens photo collection Page 2:

Distribution and Larval Foodplants:
 

Synonymy

(From: A Catalogue of the Butterflies of the United States and Canada, Jonathan P. Pelham)

Genus Coenonympha Hübner, [1819]

Verz. bekannt. Schmett. (5): 65. Type-species: Papilio geticus Esper, 1789, Die Schmett. 1(Suppl.)(1)(3/4): 51-52; (5/6): pl. 102 (Cont. 57), fig. 2 (= Papilio oedippus Fabricius, 1787, Mantissa Ins. 2: 31, no. 335), by designation of Butler (1868), Entomol. Mon. Mag. 4(45): 194.

=    Chortobius [Dunning & Pickard], [1859]

Accentuated List Brit. Lepid.: 5. Type-species: Papilio pamphilus Linnaeus, 1758, Syst. Nat. (ed 10) 1: 472, no. 86, by designation of Hemming (1934), Gen. Names Holarct. Butts. 1: 44.

      =    ‡Chortobius H. Doubleday, 1859

Zool. syn. List Brit. Butts. (ed. 2): 2. Type-species: Papilio pamphilus Linnaeus, 1758, Syst. Nat. (ed 10) 1: 472, no. 86, by designation of Moore [1893], Lepid. Ind. 2(14): 51, 52. Preoccupied by Chortobius [Dunning & Pickard], [1859].

=    Sicca Verity, 1953

Farfalle diurn. Ital. 5: 83. Type-species: Papilio dorus Esper, 1782, Die Schmett. 1(2)(5): 130-131, pl. 78 (Cont. 63), fig. 1, by original designation.

Coenonympha tullia (Müller, 1764)

Fauna Ins. Fridrichsdal.: 36, no. 332.

Original Combination: Pap[ilio]. Nymphalis Tullia

Type Locality: “In agris.”; “Fridrichsdal” implied from the title of the work. [Zeeland, Denmark]

Types: Location of types not known, possibly lost.

The division of this complex in North America into multiple species-level taxa (e.g., T. Emmel (1975), in: Howe, 1975, Butts. N. Am.: 101-105, L. Miller and F. Brown (1981), Mem. Lepid. Soc. 2: 193-194, and C. Guppy and J. Shepard (2001), Butts. B. C.: 320-323) is untenable at this time (see Porter & Geiger (1988), Can. J. Zool. 66: 2752-2765, Porter & Matoon, (1989), J. Lepid. Soc. 43(3): 229-238, and Austin & R. Gray (1998), Syst. W. N. Am. Butts. (47): 587-612.). However, the arrangement of taxa under C. tullia should be considered tentative.

            =    tiphon (Rottemburg, 1775)

Naturforscher 6: 15-16, no. 1.

Original Combination: Pap[ilio]. Tiphon

Type Locality: Not stated.

Types: Location of type(s) not known.

             =    davus Fabricius, [1777]

Gen. Ins.: 259.

Original Combination: Papilio D[anaus]. F[estivus]. Davus

Type Locality: “Hamburgi...Kilonii”

Types: Location of type(s) not known.

= philoxenus Esper, 1780

Die Schmett. 1(2)(1): 25-26, pl. 54 (Cont. 4), fig. 3 ♀ D&V)’

Original Combination: P[apilio]. Pl[ebejus]. Rur[alis]. Philoxenus

Type Locality: “Schweden...Deutschland...von Bayreuth..von Frankfurth...Oesterreich”

Types: Location of type(s) not known.

            =    timanica Sedykh, 1977

Geogr. Aspect. Conserv. Flora Faun. NE Europ. USSR: 102, no. 70.

Original Combination: C[oenonympha tullia]. timanica

Type Locality: “environs of Ukhta” [Komi Autonomous Republic, Russia]

Types: Syntypes in ZIN.

Coenonympha tullia elko W. H. Edwards, 1881

Can. Entomol. 13(3): 57-58.

Original Combination: Coenonympha Elko

Type Locality: “Elko, Nev.” [Elko County, Nevada]

Types: Lectotype in CMNH, designated by F. Brown (1964), Trans. Am. Entomol. Soc. 90(4): 345, fig. 6 ♂ D&V; “syntypes” figured by W. Holland (1898), Butt. Book: pl. 25, figs. 25 ♀ V, 26 ♂ D.

Bibliography

Top of Page ● Main Page ● Reference Library ● Literature List ● Citation ● Interactive Listing