identifier	taxonID	type	CVterm	format	language	title	description	additionalInformationURL	UsageTerms	rights	Owner	contributor	creator	bibliographicCitation
6F2187FBFFC5FFB329829928FF6CFEE7.text	6F2187FBFFC5FFB329829928FF6CFEE7.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Anopheles	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Subgenus  Anopheles</p>
            <p> bancroftii subspecies  barbiventris (  var. barbiventris Brug, 1938 ). Syntypes (Ψ, %):  Kalawara , Palow, res. Menado, Sulawesi, Indonesia (BM). </p>
            <p> Brug (1938) described and named  An. bancroftii var. barbiventris from specimens that he distinguished from the nominotypical form and  An. pseudobarbirostris Ludlow (as  An. bancroftii var. pseudobarbirostris ). It is only known from the type locality in Sulawesi whereas the nominotypical form occurs in Irian Jaya, Papua New Guinea, including the Admiralty Islands, and northern Australia (Lee et al., 1987). Based on its distribution and features of the adults, larva and male genitalia that easily distinguish it from both the nominotypical form and  An. pseudobarbirostris , it is probably a distinct biological species. However, until further data are available to support this,  barbiventris must be treated as a subspecies of  An. bancroftii from its original publication in accordance with Article 45.6.4 of the Code. </p>
            <p> eiseni subspecies  geometricus Corrêa, 1944 . Syntypes (%, L, P, E): Guarujá, Ilha de Santo Amaro, São Paulo, Brazil (NE). </p>
            <p> Corrêa (1944) originally described and named  geometricus as a subspecies of  An. eiseni Coquillett. Curiously , there is no mention of this taxon in the literature until Stone et al. (1959), followed by Belkin et al. (1971) and Knight &amp; Stone (1977), listed it as a variety without explanation. In the absence of supporting evidence,  geometricus should retain subspecific rank as originally proposed. </p>
            <p> gigas subspecies  formosus (  Anopheles formosus Ludlow, 1909 ). Holotype Ψ: Camp John Hay, Benguet Province, Luzon, Philippines (USNM). </p>
            <p> Knight &amp; Stone (1977) listed 10 forms of  An. gigas Giles : the nominotypical form, eight varieties and one subspecies. Harrison et al. (1991) subsequently elevated  var. baileyi Edwards to species status, thus leaving the seven formally designated varieties that are dealt with here, i.e.  formosus and the following six nominal forms. Although all of these nominal forms were treated as subspecies at one time or another in various publications, it appears that Stone et al. (1959) and Knight &amp; Stone (1977) elected to regard them as varieties as originally proposed. </p>
            <p> Ludlow (1909) described and named  Anopheles formosus from a female collected in the mountains of Benguet Province in northern Luzon. It retained specific rank until Christophers (1924a) considered it to be a variety of  An. gigas . Dyar &amp; Shannon (1925) listed it as a synonym of  An. gigas noting that “The synonymy previously made seems confirmed”, but no earlier record of the synonymy could be found in the literature. All later authors treated  formosus as either a variety or a subspecies, notably, e.g., as a variety by Edwards (1932), Christophers (1933) and Bonne-Wepster &amp; Swellengrebel (1953); as a subspecies by Simmons &amp; Aitken (1942), Russell et al. (1943), Puri (1949) and Baisas (1963). In accordance with ICZN Article 45.6.4.1,  formosus has subspecific rank from its original publication because it was used (originally) as the valid name of a species before 1985. This taxon is known only from the Philippine Islands and is likely to be a distinct biological species. </p>
            <p> gigas subspecies  simlensis (  Patagiamyia simlensis James, 1911 , in James &amp; Liston, 1911). Syntype Ψ: Murree, Pakistan;? syntypes (f, m): [Simla Hills and Simla, respectively], India (BM); see Townsend et al. (1990). </p>
            <p> James (1911, in James &amp; Liston, 1911) described and named  Patagiamyia simlensis for a taxon that apparently occurs in the Himalayas and eastward to northern Myanmar. The original description is based on specimens collected from “Mahasu near Simla at a height of 8,000 feet above sea-level… Rathlighat in Garhwal (6,000 feet) (collected by A. D. Imms) and at Murree (collected by Major F. Smith, H.A.M.C.)”. Christophers (1916) synonymized  simlensis with  An. gigas and Christophers (1924b) raised it to varietal status, stating that it should be “considered a variety of the former in the sense of a true variety or sub-species”. This nominal form differs from the nominotypical form in having poorly developed or no pale wing spots at the apices of veins R4+5, M1 and rarely M2, a large yellow spot or band at the apex of the midfemur and two dark areas on the distal half of the costa. Larvae usually have a simple seta 2-C. Available data indicate that  simlensis and the nominotypical form occur in sympatry, which suggests that the former may be a distinct biological species. However, because  simlensis was adopted (originally) as the valid name of a species, and treated as a subspecies (e.g. Russell et al., 1943; Puri, 1949; and Wattal, 1963) before 1985, it must be treated as a subspecific name (Article 45.6.4.1) with availability from its original publication as a species of Patagiamyia until further research reveals otherwise. Incidentally, a number of Chinese workers treated  An. gigas simlensis as a subspecies after 1985, most notably Lu Baolin et al. (1997). </p>
            <p> gigas subspecies  refutans (  var. refutans Alcock, 1913 ). Syntypes? (Ψ): [Maskeliya], Sri Lanka (BM). </p>
            <p> Alcock (1913) described and named  An. gigas var. refutans based on specimens from Sri Lanka (as Ceylon) that differ “from the typical form only in having 3 or 4 very narrow white bands on the palpi, one of them usually being terminal”. According to Edwards (1929), this form lacks the pale fringe spots at the apices of veins R4+5, M1, M2 and M3+4 that characterize the nominotypical form. Christophers (1933) pointed out that the “type-form” only occurs, as far as known, in the Nilgiri and other hills of southern India, and that the  refutans form has only been recorded from Sri Lanka. Consequently, the allopatric distributions of the two forms support the subspecific status of  refutans that is required by Article 45.6.4 of the Code. Previous treatment of  refutans as a subspecies prior to 1985, e.g. Russell et al. (1943), Puri (1949) and Wattal (1963), also requires this nominal taxon to be recognized as a subspecific form (Article 45.6.4.1). </p>
            <p> gigas subspecies  sumatrana (  var. sumatrana Swellengrebel &amp; Rodenwaldt, 1932 ). Syntypes (Ψ, L): Karoo- Hochebene and Kotaradja, Sumatra, Indonesia (LU). </p>
            <p> This and the next three nominal forms were described as varieties of  An. gigas based on specimens collected in Sumatra. Swellengrebel &amp; Rodenwaldt (1932) described and named  var. sumatrana based on specimens collected in northeastern Sumatra that differ markedly from the type form of  An. gigas (type locality: Nilgiri Hills, India) in having a large pale fringe spot between wing veins M3+4 and CuP (rather than between veins 1A and CuP) and lacking narrow pale fringe spots at the apices of veins R4+5, M1, M2 and M3+4. Based on these differences, and the short seta 2-C on the head of the presumed larva (Bonne-Wepster &amp; Swellengrebel, 1953), this taxon would appear to be a distinct biological species; however, pending further study it must be regarded as a subspecies of  An. gigas from its original publication because it was expressly used as a variety before 1961 (Article 45.6.4) and treated as a subspecies several times before 1985 (e.g. Russell et al., 1943; Puri, 1949; and Bonne-Wepster,1963). Certain later workers, e.g. Scanlon et al. (1968), also adopted  An. gigas sumatrana as a valid subspecies. </p>
            <p> gigas subspecies  danaubento (  var. danaubento Mochtar &amp; Walandouw, 1934 ). Syntypes (Ψ, ♂): Danau Bento, North Kerintji [or Kerinci], Sumatra, Indonesia (?GLB). </p>
            <p> Mochtar &amp; Walandouw (1934) explicitly gave the name  An. gigas var. danaubento to a morphological form that differed from the allopatric  var. sumatrana that was described two years earlier. This nominal variety was also treated as a subspecies prior to 1985 (e.g. Stoker &amp; R. Wakoedi, 1949; Bonne-Wepster, 1963).Accordingly,  danaubento is deemed to have subspecific rank from the date of its original publication. </p>
            <p> gigas subspecies  oedjalikalah (  var. oedjalikalah Nainggolan, 1939 ). Syntypes (Ψ, ♂, L): Oedjali Kalah, Mount Kerintji [or Kerinci], Sumatra, Indonesia (LU). </p>
            <p> Nainggolan (1939) described and named  An. gigas var. oedjalikalah from morphologically variable specimens that mainly differ from  var. danaubento , which was also described from specimens collected in the realm of Mount Kerintji, in having the apex of vein CuP dark-scaled rather than narrowly pale-scaled. Although available data suggest that  oedjalikalah is probably a sympatric variant of  danaubento , the name must be afforded subspecific rank in accordance with Article 45.6.4 of the Code because Nainggolan (1939) specifically indicated that it was proposed for a variety rather than an infrasubspecific form. Furthermore, this nominal variety was treated as a subspecies before 1985 (e.g. Stoker &amp; R. Wakoedi, 1949; Bonne-Wepster, 1963, as oedjalikalahensis). </p>
            <p> gigas subspecies  pantjarbatu (  var. pantjarbatu R. Waktoedi, 1954 ). Syntypes (L): Sumatra, Indonesia (LU). </p>
            <p> R. Waktoedi (1954) named  var. pantjarbatu based on larvae collected at one or more undisclosed localities in Sumatra and provided characters in a key to distinguish the larvae from those of other nominal varieties of  An. gigas , including  danaubento and  oedjalikalah which also occur in Sumatra. In the absence of collection data, it is not possible to surmise whether  pantjarbatu may be sympatric with either  danaubento or  oedjalikalah or both of these nominal forms. Because the information provided by R. Waktoedi does not reveal that he may have considered  pantjarbatu to be an infrasubspecific form, and also because it has been treated as a subspecies before 1985 (e.g. Stoker &amp; R. Wakoedi, 1949; Bonne-Wepster, 1963), it must be afforded subspecific rank from its original publication in accordance with Articles 45.6.4 and 45.6.4.1 of the Code. </p>
            <p> pseudopunctipennis infrasubspecies  bifoliata (  var. bifoliata Osorno-Mesa &amp; Munoz-Sarmiento, 1948 ). Holotype ♂: Florida, Valle del Cauca, Colombia (DMB). </p>
            <p> Osorno-Mesa &amp; Munoz-Sarmiento (1948) published the name  bifoliata as an addition to a binomen but expressly gave it varietal rank: “  Anopheles pseudopunctipennis bifoliata ,  n. var. ”. The authors compared the egg, larva and male genitalia of  bifoliata and the nominotypical form, and noted the presence of both forms and an extreme range of intermediate forms (“extensa gama de formas intermedias”) among specimens collected one kilometre from the type locality. Because this clearly indicates that Osorno-Mesa &amp; Munoz- Sarmiento proposed the name  bifoliata for a non-genetic variant of a single species, it is infrasubspecific under Article 45.6.4; and since it was not adopted for a species or subspecies before 1985 (Article 45.6.4.1), it is unavailable as a species-group name (Article 45.4) and excluded from the provisions of the Code (Article 1.3.4). </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/6F2187FBFFC5FFB329829928FF6CFEE7	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Harbach, Ralph E.;Howard, Theresa M.	Harbach, Ralph E., Howard, Theresa M. (2007): Corrections in the status and rank of names used to denote varietal forms of mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae). Zootaxa 1542: 35-48, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.177892
6F2187FBFFC2FFB029829BD0FD6FFEE7.text	6F2187FBFFC2FFB029829BD0FD6FFEE7.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Cellia Theobald	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Subgenus  Cellia Theobald</p>
            <p> ludlowae subspecies  torakala (  var. torakala Stoker &amp; R. Waktoedi, 1949 ). Syntypes? (Ψ, ♂):  Torakala , Sulawesi, Indonesia (LU) (for information regarding the type locality see Kitzmiller, 1982). </p>
            <p> The availability of the name  torakala is attributed to Stoker &amp; R. Waktoedi (1949) who listed it, along with illustrations and brief descriptions of the wing, palpus of both sexes and hindleg of the nominal variety, without indicating that it was proposed as new. A note in the introduction to their “Illustrated map of the anopheline imagines of Indonesia ” states that this publication “is a corrected and supplemented edition … of the ‘Kaart en determinatietabel de Anophelinen in Ned. Oost Indië’ (edition Pubic Health Service, section malariacontrol [sic] 1938)”. Because it has not been possible to obtain a copy of the earlier publication, it is not known whether or not the name was originally introduced in 1938. Assuming that the name was not introduced earlier, it must be deemed to have subspecific rank because there is no indication that it may have been intended for an infrasubspecific entity. </p>
            <p> tessellatus subspecies  kalawara (  var. kalawara Stoker &amp; R. Waktoedi, 1949 ). Syntypes? (Ψ, ♂):  Kalawara , Sulawesi, Indonesia (LU) (for information regarding the type locality see Kitzmiller, 1982). </p>
            <p> The availability of the name  kalawara is also attributed to Stoker &amp; R. Waktoedi (1949) despite the possibility that it may have been introduced in the 1938 edition of their publication. In the absence of any indication that this name may have been intended for an infrasubspecific form, it has subspecific rank in agreement with Article 45.6.4 of the Code. </p>
            <p> tessellatus subspecies  orientalis (  Neomyzomyia punctulata var. orientalis Swellengrebel &amp; Swellengrebel de Graaf, 1920). Syntypes (L): Paleleh, Sulawesi, Indonesia (NE). </p>
            <p> Swellengrebel &amp; Swellengrebel de Graaf (1920) established  Neomyzomyia punctulata var. orientalis based on “larval characters only”. Edwards (1932) listed this nominal variety as a questionable synonym of  An. tessellatus . Later authors, e.g. Lee &amp; Woodhill (1944) and Bonne-Wepster &amp; Swellengrebel (1953), considered it to be a variety of  An. tessellatus , with the exception of Bonne-Wepster (1963) who treated it as a subspecies. Because  orientalis was proposed expressly for a varietal entity, it has subspecific rank from its original publication (Article 45.6.4). </p>
            <p> turkhudi subspecies  telamali (  var. telamali Saliternik &amp; Theodor, 1942 ). Syntypes (Ψ, ♂, L): Tel Amal, Plain of Esdraelon, Israel (DPHU). </p>
            <p> Saliternik &amp; Theodor (1942) described and named  Anopheles turkhudi var. telamali from two females, one male and four larvae. They stated that this form “is more closely related to  A. turkhudi than to any other species of the Myzomyia group with dark-tipped palpi. It differs, however, in several characters that are constant in our small series. These differences are very marked in the wing venation; but as we have not sufficient material for comparison and the wing venation is notoriously variable in this group, it is difficult to establish the status of our insect exactly before more material for comparison is available. However, the differences mentioned seem to justify the creation of a separate variety, and we propose the name  Anopheles turkhudi var. telamali var. nov
.
 ”. Since the name  telamali was proposed expressly for a varietal entity, it has subspecific rank from its original publication (Article 45.6.4). </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/6F2187FBFFC2FFB029829BD0FD6FFEE7	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Harbach, Ralph E.;Howard, Theresa M.	Harbach, Ralph E., Howard, Theresa M. (2007): Corrections in the status and rank of names used to denote varietal forms of mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae). Zootaxa 1542: 35-48, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.177892
6F2187FBFFC1FFB029829BF8FC1BFB2A.text	6F2187FBFFC1FFB029829BF8FC1BFB2A.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Armigeres	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Subgenus  Armigeres</p>
            <p> subalbatus subspecies  chrysocorporis (  Armigeres obturbans var. chrysocorporis Hsieh &amp; Liao, 1956 . Syntypes (Ψ, ♂, L): Amoy, China (LU). </p>
            <p> Hsieh &amp; Liao (1956) described and named  Armigeres obturbans var. chrysocorporis from an undisclosed number of males, females and larvae, or perhaps associated larval exuviae. Although  obturbans (originally  Culex obturbans Walker, 1860 ) is the logotype of genus  Armigeres, Thurman (1959) treated the name as a nomen dubium and relegated  Ar. obturbans sensu auctorum to synonymy with the common Oriental  Ar. subalbatus (Coquillett) because “the type is lost and the diagnosis of the species differs among specialists”. Consequently, Stone et al. (1959) and Knight &amp; Stone (1977) listed  obturbans as a nomen dubium and  chrysocorporis as a variety of  Ar. subalbatus . As noted by Lee et al. (1988), however, the holotype female of  Ar. obturbans from Makassar, Sulawesi is in the National Museum of Victoria (NMM) in Melbourne, Australia. In as much as the specimen “differs from all available descriptions of species of the subgenus  Armigeres ” (Lee et al., 1988),  Ar. obturbans is should be recognized as a valid species. Based on provenance, however, there is little doubt that Hsieh &amp; Liao (1956) described  chrysocorporis as a variety of  Ar. subalbatus . Because  chrysocorporis was introduced explicitly for a varietal entity, it has subspecific rank (Article 45.6.4) with availability from its original publication by Hsieh &amp; Liao (1956). </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/6F2187FBFFC1FFB029829BF8FC1BFB2A	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Harbach, Ralph E.;Howard, Theresa M.	Harbach, Ralph E., Howard, Theresa M. (2007): Corrections in the status and rank of names used to denote varietal forms of mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae). Zootaxa 1542: 35-48, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.177892
6F2187FBFFC1FFB129829F35FA1DFD7F.text	6F2187FBFFC1FFB129829F35FA1DFD7F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Culex	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Subgenus  Culex</p>
            <p> aurantapex subspecies  jinjaensis (  var. jinjaensis Edwards, 1941 ). Lectotype ♂: Jinja, Uganda (BM); designation by Mattingly, 1956. </p>
            <p> Edwards (1941) described and named  Culex aurantapex var. jinjaensis from specimens that are darker and exhibit different abdominal ornamentation than the nominotypical form. The brief description indicates that Edwards expressly used the name for a variety rather than an infrasubspecific form, and consequently  jinjaensis has subspecific rank with availability from the date of the original publication. </p>
            <p> grahamii subspecies  farakoensis (  var. farakoensis Hamon, 1955 ). Syntypes (Ψ, ♂, L): Farako, Sikasso, Mali (IERT, BM). </p>
            <p> Hamon (1955) described and named  Culex grahamii var. farakoensis from three males and two females reared from pupae, a larval exuviae and 21 larvae, but the name is based principally on characters that distinguish the larvae from those of the nominotypical form. Since the name  farakoensis was proposed expressly for a varietal entity, it has subspecific rank from its original publication (Article 45.6.4). </p>
            <p> guiarti subspecies  sudanicus (  var. sudanicus Edwards, 1941 ). Lectotype ♂: Bole, [Northern Territories], Ghana (BM); designation by Mattingly, 1956. </p>
            <p> Edwards (1941) described and named  Culex guiarti var. sudanicus for mosquitoes that he considered to be morphologically “Intermediate between  C. guiarti and  C. weschei ”; however, he expressly proposed the name for a variety rather than an infrasubspecific form. Accordingly,  sudanicus is deemed to have subgeneric rank with availability from Edwards (1941). </p>
            <p> invidiosus subspecies  vexillatus (  var. vexillatus Edwards, 1941 ). Lectotype ♂: Kampala, Uganda (BM); designation by Mattingly, 1956. </p>
            <p> Culex invidiosus var. vexillatus was described and named from a series of five males and a female (Mattingly, 1956) that closely resemble  Cx. invidiosus in all respects except for the shape of seta f of the male gonocoxite (Edwards, 1941). Despite this seemingly  minor difference, Edwards unquestionably introduced the name  vexillatus for an entity he deemed to be a variety, and hence it has subspecific rank from its original publication. </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/6F2187FBFFC1FFB129829F35FA1DFD7F	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Harbach, Ralph E.;Howard, Theresa M.	Harbach, Ralph E., Howard, Theresa M. (2007): Corrections in the status and rank of names used to denote varietal forms of mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae). Zootaxa 1542: 35-48, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.177892
6F2187FBFFC0FFB129829960FBFAFB42.text	6F2187FBFFC0FFB129829960FBFAFB42.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Eumelanomyia Theobald	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Subgenus  Eumelanomyia Theobald</p>
            <p> horridus subspecies  rageaui (  Neoculex horridus var. rageaui Hamon &amp; Rickenbach, 1955 ). Holotype ♂: Nkolbisson, Yaoundé Region, Cameroon (IRD). </p>
            <p> Hamon &amp; Rickenbach (1955) described and named  Neoculex horridus var. rageaui from six males which have differently developed setae on the subapical lobe of the gonocoxite that distinguish them from males of the nominotypical form. Since the name was proposed expressly for a varietal entity, it is deemed to be subspecific with availability from Hamon &amp; Rickenbach (1955). Stone et al. (1959) listed  horridus as a species of  Culex (Neoculex) and Sirivanakarn (1971) transferred it to subgenus  Eumelanomyia . </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/6F2187FBFFC0FFB129829960FBFAFB42	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Harbach, Ralph E.;Howard, Theresa M.	Harbach, Ralph E., Howard, Theresa M. (2007): Corrections in the status and rank of names used to denote varietal forms of mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae). Zootaxa 1542: 35-48, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.177892
6F2187FBFFC0FFB129829F5DFAF6F8B1.text	6F2187FBFFC0FFB129829F5DFAF6F8B1.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Mansonioides Theobald	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Subgenus  Mansonioides Theobald</p>
            <p> africana subspecies  nigerrima (  Mansonia nigerrima Theobald, 1910 ). Holotype Ψ: Mpumu, Uganda (BM). </p>
            <p> Theobald (1910) described and named  Mansonia nigerrima from a single female. Three years later, Edwards (1913) listed it both as a synonym and a doubtful variety of  M. africanus (as  Mansonioides africanus ), pointing out that it “may perhaps rank as a good variety; it is much darker than the type: the thorax is darker, with hardly a trace of pale markings; the dark scales of the wings are much more numerous than the light, and the white rings at the bases of the hind tarsal joints are much narrower than in typical  M. africanus . The male genitalia, however, do not differ in any way”. Despite Edwards’ (1913) apparent reluctance to treat  nigerrima as a variety, implying that it should perhaps be regarded as an infrasubspecific entity, it is deemed to have subspecific rank because it was adopted (originally) as the valid name of a species before 1985 (Article 45.6.4.1). </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/6F2187FBFFC0FFB129829F5DFAF6F8B1	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Harbach, Ralph E.;Howard, Theresa M.	Harbach, Ralph E., Howard, Theresa M. (2007): Corrections in the status and rank of names used to denote varietal forms of mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae). Zootaxa 1542: 35-48, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.177892
6F2187FBFFCFFFBE298298B5FAF0FBA9.text	6F2187FBFFCFFFBE298298B5FAF0FBA9.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Ochlerotatus	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Subgenus “  Ochlerotatus ” sensu auctorum </p>
            <p> caspius subspecies  hargreavesi (  Aedes caspius var. hargreavesi Edwards, 1920 ). Syntypes (Ψ): Taranto, Puglia, Italy (BM). </p>
            <p> Edwards (1920) described and named  var. hargreavesi based on six females that differed from the type form in having the central area of the scutum covered with whitish scales. He explicitly stated that “Nothing approaching this variation has been seen from elsewhere, and it therefore seems justifiable to distinguish them under a separate name”. Since it is clear that Edwards did not consider the specimens to be an infrasubspecific variant,  hargreavesi is a valid name of a subspecies (Article 45.6.4) with availability from Edwards (1920). </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/6F2187FBFFCFFFBE298298B5FAF0FBA9	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Harbach, Ralph E.;Howard, Theresa M.	Harbach, Ralph E., Howard, Theresa M. (2007): Corrections in the status and rank of names used to denote varietal forms of mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae). Zootaxa 1542: 35-48, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.177892
6F2187FBFFCFFFBE29829E90FACCF992.text	6F2187FBFFCFFFBE29829E90FACCF992.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Phagomyia Edwards	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Genus  Phagomyia Edwards [=  Aedes (Finlaya) ] </p>
            <p> gubernatoris subspecies  kotiensis (  Aedes gubernatoris var. kotiensis Barraud, 1934 ). Syntypes (Ψ, ♂): Koti, near Kalka, [Himachal Pradesh], western Himalayas, India (BM). </p>
            <p> Barraud (1934) described and named  Aedes gubernatoris var. kotiensis based on larvae that differ from the nominotypical form in having shorter antennae and lateral palatal brush filaments with “comparatively very large teeth”. Information provided by Barraud indicates that the two forms may be allopatric. In any case, there is no indication in the original description that Barraud considered  kotiensis to be an infrasubspecific entity; hence, it is accordingly deemed to be subspecific in agreement with Article 45.6.4 of the Code. </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/6F2187FBFFCFFFBE29829E90FACCF992	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Harbach, Ralph E.;Howard, Theresa M.	Harbach, Ralph E., Howard, Theresa M. (2007): Corrections in the status and rank of names used to denote varietal forms of mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae). Zootaxa 1542: 35-48, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.177892
6F2187FBFFCFFFBF29829C6FFA8AFD7F.text	6F2187FBFFCFFFBF29829C6FFA8AFD7F.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Stegomyia Theobald	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Genus  Stegomyia Theobald [=  Aedes (Stegomyia) ] </p>
            <p> annandalei subspecies quadricincta (  var. quadricincta Barraud, 1923 ). Holotype Ψ: Nongpoh, Meghalaya, India (BM). </p>
            <p> Barraud (1923) noted that  Stegomyia annandalei Theobald is “subject to variation in the leg markings”, and described variety quadricincta as follows: “Differs from the typical form in having four basal white rings on all the tarsi. The third and fourth rings on the fore and mid legs are very small and incomplete, those on the hind legs wider and complete. In the type form there are usually two rings on the fore and mid tarsi, at the bases of the first and second segments, and three on the hind tarsi, on the first, second, and fourth segments, the last occupying nearly the whole segment”. Barraud based his concept of variety quadricincta on a single female (holotype) from Nongpoh, Assam, and noted that “There is another female specimen from the same place which agrees with the above in the markings of the hind tarsi, but the fore and mid legs have only two rings, as in the type form”. Although it is likely that the name quadricincta applies to an infrasubspecific form, it officially has subspecific rank from its original publication because Barraud (1923) explicitly named it as a variety (Article 45.6.4). </p>
            <p> mediopunctata subspecies  sureilensis (  var. sureilensis Barraud, 1934 ). Holotype Ψ: Sureil, Darjiling, West Bengal, India (BM). </p>
            <p> Barraud (1934) described and named  sureilensis as a variety of  Aedes mediopunctatus from a single female that is “very similar to the type-form, but differs in the scaling of the scutellum and in marking of hind femur”. He also noted that “The specimen may be an unusual variation only, or there is a possibility that it may belong to a distinct species”. Since Barraud did not unambiguously reveal that the name was proposed for an infrasubspecific entity, it therefore has subspecific rank from the original publication (Article 45.6.4). </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/6F2187FBFFCFFFBF29829C6FFA8AFD7F	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Harbach, Ralph E.;Howard, Theresa M.	Harbach, Ralph E., Howard, Theresa M. (2007): Corrections in the status and rank of names used to denote varietal forms of mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae). Zootaxa 1542: 35-48, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.177892
6F2187FBFFCEFFBF2982993DFAF0FA49.text	6F2187FBFFCEFFBF2982993DFAF0FA49.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Trichoprosopon Theobald	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Genus  Trichoprosopon Theobald</p>
            <p> compressum subspecies  mogilasium (  Joblotia mogilasia Dyar &amp; Knab, 1907 ) Lectotype Ψ: Tabernilla, Canal Zone, Panama (USNM); designated by Stone (1944). </p>
            <p> Knight &amp; Stone (1977) indicated that  Joblotia mogilasia was formally recognized as a subspecies of  Tr. compressum by Stone (1944) and later afforded varietal status by Stone et al. (1959). This is incorrect as Stone (1944) unambiguously treated this nominal species as a variety of  Tr. compressum . Because  mogilasium was adopted (originally) as the valid name of a species prior to 1985, it is deemed to be subspecific with availability from its original publication (Article 45.6.4.1). </p>
            <p> digitatum subspecies  townsendi (  var. townsendi Stone, 1944 ). Holotype ♂: Boa Vista [previously in Fordlandia, currently Belterra], Rio Tapajós, Pará, Brazil (USNM). </p>
            <p> Stone (1944) named and described  townsendi as a variety of  Tr. digitatum (Rondani) based on differential characters observed in four males and 14 females that comprise the type series. Because the name was proposed expressly for a varietal entity, it is deemed to be subspecific in accordance with ICZN Article 45.6.4. </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/6F2187FBFFCEFFBF2982993DFAF0FA49	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Harbach, Ralph E.;Howard, Theresa M.	Harbach, Ralph E., Howard, Theresa M. (2007): Corrections in the status and rank of names used to denote varietal forms of mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae). Zootaxa 1542: 35-48, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.177892
6F2187FBFFCEFFBF29829C57FD28F837.text	6F2187FBFFCEFFBF29829C57FD28F837.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Uranotaenia	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Subgenus  Uranotaenia</p>
            <p> pulcherrima subspecies  elnora (  Uranotaenia pulcherrima elnora Paterson &amp; Shannon, 1927 ). Holotype Ψ: Tres Pozos, Embarcación, Salta, Argentina (USNM). </p>
            <p> Paterson &amp; Shannon (1927) published the name  elnora as an addition to a binomen denoting subspecific rank, but labelled it as a new variety: “  Uranotaenia pulcherrima Elnora nueva variedad”. In as much as the authors did not unambiguously indicate that the name was proposed for an infrasubspecific entity, it has subspecific rank from the date of its original publication. </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/6F2187FBFFCEFFBF29829C57FD28F837	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Harbach, Ralph E.;Howard, Theresa M.	Harbach, Ralph E., Howard, Theresa M. (2007): Corrections in the status and rank of names used to denote varietal forms of mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae). Zootaxa 1542: 35-48, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.177892
6F2187FBFFCDFFBC29829AB8FEDBFD1A.text	6F2187FBFFCDFFBC29829AB8FEDBFD1A.taxon	http://purl.org/dc/dcmitype/Text	http://rs.tdwg.org/ontology/voc/SPMInfoItems#GeneralDescription	text/html	en	Wyeomyia	<html xmlns:mods="http://www.loc.gov/mods/v3">
    <body>
        <div>
            <p> Subgenus  Wyeomyia</p>
            <p> hosautos subspecies  leucotarsis (  var. leucotarsis Lane, 1936 ). Syntypes (Ψ): Boa Esperança and Pocinho, Mato Grosso, Brazil (LU). </p>
            <p> Lane (1936) described and named  Wy. hosautos var. leucotarsis from eight females that differed from the nominotypical form in having much more extensive white scaling on the hindtarsi. Based on this, he inferred that the specimens either represented a new species or a variety of  Wy. hosautos . He adopted the latter option because no other differences distinguished the specimens from the nominotypical form, and additional information was needed to prove that they were members of a different species. Because Lane clearly did not propose the name for an infrasubspecific entity, it is deemed to have subspecific rank from its original publication (Article 45.6.4). </p>
        </div>
    </body>
</html>
	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/6F2187FBFFCDFFBC29829AB8FEDBFD1A	Public Domain	No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.		MagnoliaPress via Plazi	Harbach, Ralph E.;Howard, Theresa M.	Harbach, Ralph E., Howard, Theresa M. (2007): Corrections in the status and rank of names used to denote varietal forms of mosquitoes (Diptera: Culicidae). Zootaxa 1542: 35-48, DOI: 10.5281/zenodo.177892
