taxonID	type	description	language	source
03DA87B0FF858C3ABFE5D360FEA3FA0D.taxon	description	Each of these names is riddled with interpretational and nomenclatural problems principally deriving from mismatches between characters shown by the illustrated type materials and their stated type localities. As required by Art. 75.3.1 (ICZN 1999 and later updates), these problems will be resolved by designating two lectotypes and two neotypes.	en	Balletto, Emilio, Barbero, Francesca, Bonelli, Simona, Casacci, Luca P., Dapporto, Leonardo (2020): Stabilisation of some names of European butterflies (Lepidoptera: Pieridae) in their prevailing usage. Zootaxa 4780 (2): 387-395, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4780.2.11
03DA87B0FF858C3ABFE5D647FCF2FBCD.taxon	description	This taxon was listed as a synonym of either Pontia edusa (e. g. Hesselbarth et al. 1995, 1: 426) or of P. daplidice (García-Barros et al. 2013, p. 960), respectively for the fauna of Turkey and for that of Spain. Kudrna (1983: 58), Wagener (1988: 35) and Hesselbarth et al. (1995: 426) regarded “ nitida ” Verity, 1908 as an unavailable infrasubspecific name. However, Art. 45.6.4 states that [the rank denoted by a species-group name following a binomen] “ is subspecific if first published before 1961 and its author expressly used one of the terms “ variety ” or “ form ” …, unless its author also expressly gave it infrasubspecific rank, or the content of the work unambiguously reveals that the name was proposed for an infrasubspecific entity … ”. Verity wrote: “ [dans les régions] qui semblent être surtout les plus arides (telles que l’Espagne, l’Algérie et l’Asie Mineure) [Pieris daplidice] semble avoir une tendance à être plus petit, à avoir les ailes plus larges, le limbe externe plus convexe, les dessins d’un noir plus profond et à contours plus arrêtés … ”. The name Pieris daplidice race nitida Verity, 1908 is therefore available. The originally designated syntypes probably belong to two separate species, but no lectotype was validly designated by any of the preceding authors under Art. 74. Both Pontia daplidice and P. edusa may possibly co-occur in parts of Turkey (see Geiger et al. 1988, Hesselbarth et al. 1995 and John et al. 2013), while only P. daplidice is known to occur in Spain. We therefore designate the ♂ Syntype in MZUF from: [Spanien]: Andalusien: Malaga, C. Ribbe [legit], as Lec- totype of Pieris daplidice race nitida Verity, 1908 (see Fig. 1 A). Consequently, the latter name becomes fixed as a junior subjective synonym of Papilio daplidice Linnaeus, 1758.	en	Balletto, Emilio, Barbero, Francesca, Bonelli, Simona, Casacci, Luca P., Dapporto, Leonardo (2020): Stabilisation of some names of European butterflies (Lepidoptera: Pieridae) in their prevailing usage. Zootaxa 4780 (2): 387-395, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4780.2.11
03DA87B0FF858C38BFE5D137FE35FDD1.taxon	description	a) The name [Papilio] ausonia Hübner, [1804] (see Hemming 1937) was published on Pl. 113 of Papiliones, as caption to Figs 582 and 583. In the (very partial) text of the ‘ Sammlung’, which appeared only in [1805 - 6], we are informed (p. 65) that the depicted specimen came from ‘ Italien’ and was preserved under the name “ Ausonia ” in Abbot Mazzola’s collection. Together with Schiffermüller’s collection and many other materials, Ab. Vincenz Mazzola’s collection, bequeathed to the Naturhistorisches Museum (Vienna), was destroyed in the October 1848 bombardment of the centre of Vienna and ensuing fire (see Horn et al. 1990: 256). [Note. Hübner ([1806: 64 - 65]) in his text referred to Figs 416 and 582 - 583 as belonging to ausonia, Fig. 416 representing the male, Figs. 582 - 583 the female. However, only Figs 582 - 583 can be attributed to ausonia, since for Fig. 416 Hübner had previously used (in [1800]) the name “ belia ” in the caption of Pl. Pap 83. The latter specimen must be regarded as a syntype of Euchloe esperi Kirby, 1871 (see below)]. b) Since the taxonomic interpretation of Hübner’s pictures is far from being unequivocal, because differences between adults of the 1 st and 2 nd generation of both the eastern and the western ‘ dappled whites’ are strong, and since truly diagnostic species-specific differences are found only in the preimaginal stages (see Back 1979) and in DNA COI sequences (see Back et al. 2011), this name was taken to represent each of the already mentioned taxa, at various taxonomic ranks, depending on authors. More precisely, the name [Papilio] ausonia Hübner, [1804] was applied either i) to the ‘ western dappled white’ (Ochsenheimer 1808, Staudinger 1901, etc.), or ii) to the ‘ mountain dappled white’ (Kirby 1871, Rothschild 1914, Oberthür 1914, Hemming 1931, Bernardi 1945, 1947, Forster & Wohlfart 1955, Higgins 1975, 1980), or finally iii) to the ‘ eastern dappled white’ (Verity 1923, 1947). Summarising, it is exclusively on the subjective interpretation of Hübner’s figures and on the derivation of its name from the land where the ancient people of the Ausoni used to live, i. e. in central and southern Italy, that [Papilio] ausonia Hübner, [1804] is now considered the correct name to identify the butterfly colloquially known as the ‘ eastern dappled white’.	en	Balletto, Emilio, Barbero, Francesca, Bonelli, Simona, Casacci, Luca P., Dapporto, Leonardo (2020): Stabilisation of some names of European butterflies (Lepidoptera: Pieridae) in their prevailing usage. Zootaxa 4780 (2): 387-395, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4780.2.11
03DA87B0FF878C38BFE5D596FED6F90D.taxon	description	Parts of Freyer’s butterfly collection, which consists in a series of sealed glass boxes arranged in cabinet drawers, is preserved in Eichstätt (Jura-Museum — see Pfeuffer 2000, 2003, 2006). Mr. Andreas Hecker very kindly took for us a series of pictures of the relevant specimens, which had to be photographed through the glass since the boxes are sealed. These pictures, however, are fully adequate to demonstrate that no specimen of Euchloe surviving in Freyer’s collection corresponds to the original picture and declared type locality (see below). The holotype of Pontia simplonia is therefore presumably lost. a) In his original description, Freyer declared that he had received a specimen already labelled as ‘ Simplonia’, which he thought to represent just a brightly coloured individual of ‘ Pap. Ausonia ’ Hübner. Yet, he published this name in the caption to his Pl. 73, Fig. 2 to draw the attention of lepidopterists, and to leave them free to choose between either of the two names. One might argue that Pontia simplonia Freyer was originally published as a junior synonym (Art. 11.6), but the name remains valid because it was treated as an available name before 1961 and was adopted as the name of a taxon by Staudinger (1901), Oberthür (1909), Verity (1909), as well as by many other later authors. Other important problems with Freyer’s name are that i) the accompanying plate is subjectively ambiguous, and ii) in the last line of the text relating to it the author writes: “ Pap. Simplonia wurde in Croatien gefangen ”, which contrasts with the fact that the taxon currently identified as Euchloe simplonia (Freyer) occurs only in the western Alps, while only some rare, probably migratory, specimen of Euchloe ausonia might occasionally be observed in Croatia (see Lorković in Higgins 1980). b) On the basis of this type locality, Higgins (1934: 225), identified the taxon represented by this name as the ‘ eastern dappled white’, which he considered to represent the correct name for the taxon misidentified as Papilio belia by ‘ Cramer’ [recte Stoll], 1782 (from “ Smyrne ”, see below). c) Staudinger (1901), Spuler (1908), Verity (1909), Oberthür (1909), Higgins & Riley (1980), etc. considered Pontia simplonia the correct name for the ‘ mountain dappled white’, while: d) Higgins & Riley (1983) and Emmet & Heath (1990), in contrast, deemed it the correct name for the ‘ western dappled white’.	en	Balletto, Emilio, Barbero, Francesca, Bonelli, Simona, Casacci, Luca P., Dapporto, Leonardo (2020): Stabilisation of some names of European butterflies (Lepidoptera: Pieridae) in their prevailing usage. Zootaxa 4780 (2): 387-395, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4780.2.11
03DA87B0FF808C3FBFE5D596FAE1F975.taxon	description	The latter name was extensively used even in relatively recent times, Stoll declaredly did not mean to describe a new species, since he supposed that the specimen depicted was a female of Papilio belia Linnaeus. Therefore, ‘ Papilio belia Stoll’ has no nomenclatural status and is, accordingly, unavailable. No potential Stoll’s specimen identified as ‘ Papilio belia ’ survives in NHMUK (Chainey 2005: 316 and D. Lees in litt.). Stoll rather unequivocally stated that his specimen had been collected at Smyrna. However, ‘ the same species’ (i. e. Papilio belia Linnaeus, 1767) was said to occur also on the Coast of Barbaria (i. e. North Africa), in Provence and in Languedoc (“ Zy is te Smirna gevangen, doch wordt ook op de Kust van Barbaryen, als mede in het zuidelyke gedeelte van Frankryk, in Provence in Languedocq gevonden ” — and “ Elle a été prise à Smyrne, mais on la trouve pareillement sur la Côte de Barbarie & dans la partie méridionale de la France, Provence & au Languedoc ”, in the facing French text). However, several authors assumed that the type locality of Euchloe crameri Butler, 1869 is “ Smyrna ” (Hemming 1931, Bernardi 1947), viz. a site in an area of West Turkey where only the species now generally identified as Euchloe ausonia is known to occur (Hesselbarth et al. 1995). a) Accordingly, Higgins (1975) considered the name Euchloe crameri Butler the correct name for the ‘ eastern dappled white’, while this name was deemed a synonym or a subspecies of Euchloe ausonia by a number of authors (Higgins & Riley 1970, etc.). b) Butler (1869), however, had decided to select “ S. Europe (obtained by Herr J. J. Becker) ”, as type locality of his new taxon. Rothschild (1914: 302) managed to find in the ‘ British Museum’ the specimen that he thought to be Butler’s holotype of Euchloe crameri, interpreted as such a specimen collected in Spain and used this name to identify the ‘ western dappled white’. Oberthür (1914), perhaps independently, reached a similar conclusion, to which also concurred Bernardi (1945, 1947), etc. Actually, Butler’s name was based on three syntypes, i. e. Stoll’s lost specimen from “ Smyrna ”, and two specimens, declaredly collected in “ Spain ” (D. Lees, in litt.) (see Fig. 1 D), still extant in the NHMUK. Rothschild, although wrongly supposing that Butler’s name was based on a single specimen, can be deemed as having designated one of the NHMUK specimens from “ Spain ” as the lectotype, under Art. 74.6 (ICZN 1999).	en	Balletto, Emilio, Barbero, Francesca, Bonelli, Simona, Casacci, Luca P., Dapporto, Leonardo (2020): Stabilisation of some names of European butterflies (Lepidoptera: Pieridae) in their prevailing usage. Zootaxa 4780 (2): 387-395, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.4780.2.11
