Entheus dius Mabille, 1898

Zhang, Jing, Cong, Qian, Shen, Jinhui, Song, Leina & Grishin, Nick V., 2025, Advancing butterfly systematics through genomic analysis, The Taxonomic Report of the International Lepidoptera Survey 12 (5), pp. 1-201 : 56

Entheus dius Mabille, 1898 , Entheus aequatorius Mabille & Boullet, 1919 , Entheus latifascius M. Hering, 1925 , and Entheus marmato Salazar & Vargas, [2017], are species distinct from Entheus matho Godman & Salvin, 1879

Genomic analysis of the Entheus matho group reveals that Entheus dius Mabille, 1898 (type locality in Brazil), Entheus aequatorius Mabille & Boullet, 1919 (type locality given in the original description as “ Bolivia ” likely by mistake, and may be in Ecuador: Bolivar), Entheus latifascius M. Hering, 1925 (type locality Colombia, Chocó, Rio Micay), and Entheus matho marmato Salazar & Vargas, [2017] (type locality in Colombia: Caldas, Marmato-vereda Echandía) are not monophyletic and are genetically differentiated from Entheus matho Godman & Salvin, 1879 (type locality in Nicaragua: Chontales) and among each other at the species level ( Figs. 44, 50): e.g., COI barcodes in the pairs of closest taxa differ by 1.5% (10 bp, E. aequatorius and E. matho ), 1.7% (11 bp, E. matho marmato and E. matho ), 2.3% (15 bp, E. aequatorius and E. matho marmato ), but more distant from each other, E. latifascius and E. dius differ by 5.3% (35 bp). Therefore, instead of being subspecies of E. matho as currently considered, these four are species-level taxa: Entheus dius Mabille, 1898 , stat. rest., Entheus aequatorius Mabille & Boullet, 1919 , stat. rest., Entheus latifascius M. Hering, 1925 , stat. rest., and Entheus marmato Salazar & Vargas, [2017], stat. nov.