Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/ ZENODOarrow_drop_down
image/svg+xml art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos Open Access logo, converted into svg, designed by PLoS. This version with transparent background. http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Open_Access_logo_PLoS_white.svg art designer at PLoS, modified by Wikipedia users Nina, Beao, JakobVoss, and AnonMoos http://www.plos.org/
ZENODO
Other literature type . 2016
License: CC 0
Data sources: ZENODO
ZENODO
Other literature type . 2016
License: CC 0
Data sources: Datacite
ZENODO
Other literature type . 2016
License: CC 0
Data sources: Datacite
versions View all 2 versions
addClaim

Argyrophorus Blanchard 1852

Authors: Matz, Jess; Brower, Andrew V. Z.;

Argyrophorus Blanchard 1852

Abstract

Argyrophorus Blanchard, 1852 Type species: Argyrophorus argenteus Blanchard, 1852 Diagnosis. The monobasic Argyrophorus as defined here is distinguished from Punargentus most notably by a singly pupillated M1-M3 VFW ocellus, valvae that are are rounder and wider at the distal end than those in Punargentus, a narrower saccus, and aedeagus with medial wings. Remarks. Pyrcz & Wojtusiak (2010) redefined Argyrophorus using head morphology, wing patterning, venation, wing shape, and male genitalic characters, apparently to be inclusive of Etcheverrius, Palmaris, Pampasatyrus and Punargentus (although they neglected to provide a list of which species are included in their circumscription of the genus, and were not clear as to whether Pamperis poaoeneis is or is not included). This situation was clarified somewhat by Cerdeña et al. (2014), who reported that Pyrcz (2010) synonymized “nine” genera under Argyrophorus (they listed seven: Etcheverrius, Neomaniola, Palmaris, Pampasatyrus, Pamperis, Punargentus and Stuardosatyrus). Subsequently, Pyrcz (2012) moved Neomaniola euripides from Argyrophorus to Faunula. Cerdeña et al. (2014) also noted that Pampasatyrus is closely-related to, but distinct from Argyrophorus. They reported the latter to contain 11 species—presumably the species previously included by Lamas & Viloria (2004) in Argyrophorus (1 + 1 subsequently described by Pyrcz & Wojtusiak, 2010), Etcheverrius (2), Palmaris (4), Pamperis (1) and Punargentus (2). According to our cladogram (Fig. 1), that circumscription is polyphyletic: Argyrophorus and Pamperis are phylogenetically distinct from Punargentus (here circumscribed more broadly to include Etcheverrius and Palmaris) and its sister genus, Pampasatyrus. Pyrcz & Wojtusiak (2010) placed their new species blanchardi in Argyrophorus using their broader definition, but the similarities in the VFW M1-M3 ocelli, and the lack of medial appendages on the aedeagus suggest that it belongs in Punargentus, instead.

Published as part of Matz, Jess & Brower, Andrew V. Z., 2016, The South Temperate Pronophilina (Lepidoptera: Nymphalidae: Satyrinae): a phylogenetic hypothesis, redescriptions and revisionary notes, pp. 1-108 in Zootaxa 4125 (1) on page 17, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4125.1.1, http://zenodo.org/record/271704

Keywords

Lepidoptera, Insecta, Argyrophorus, Arthropoda, Animalia, Nymphalidae, Biodiversity, Taxonomy

  • BIP!
    Impact byBIP!
    selected citations
    These citations are derived from selected sources.
    This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    0
    popularity
    This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    influence
    This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
    Average
    impulse
    This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
    Average
    OpenAIRE UsageCounts
    Usage byUsageCounts
    visibility views 2
  • 2
    views
    Powered byOpenAIRE UsageCounts
Powered by OpenAIRE graph
Found an issue? Give us feedback
visibility
selected citations
These citations are derived from selected sources.
This is an alternative to the "Influence" indicator, which also reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Citations provided by BIP!
popularity
This indicator reflects the "current" impact/attention (the "hype") of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Popularity provided by BIP!
influence
This indicator reflects the overall/total impact of an article in the research community at large, based on the underlying citation network (diachronically).
BIP!Influence provided by BIP!
impulse
This indicator reflects the initial momentum of an article directly after its publication, based on the underlying citation network.
BIP!Impulse provided by BIP!
views
OpenAIRE UsageCountsViews provided by UsageCounts
0
Average
Average
Average
2