Telegonus latimargo ( Herrich-Schäffer, 1869 ),

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 : 117

from Telegonus latimargo ( Herrich-Schäffer, 1869)

Genomic analysis of the lectotypes of Eudamus latimargo Herrich-Schäffer, 1869 (type locality in tropical America to USA, sequenced as NVG-15031C08) and Thymele grullus Mabille, 1888 (type locality in Panama: Chiriquí, sequenced as NVG-15031B12) reveals that they belong to two distinct and not even most closely related species in different clades of the genomic trees ( Fig. 61), and their COI barcodes differ by 3% (20 bp). Therefore, we propose that Telegonus grullus ( Mabille, 1888) , stat. rest. is a species distinct from Telegonus latimargo ( Herrich-Schäffer, 1869) . The latter species is closely related to Telegonus alardus (Stoll, 1790) (type locality in Surinam). Evans (1952) swapped the identities of these two species, treating T. grullus as a synonym of T. alardus , and we identify Evans’s T. latimargo as T. grullus . Godman and Salvin (1893-1899), who inspected the lectotype of T. grullus , identified this species correctly. Telegonus grullus has more prominent dark spots (partly connected into bands) on the ventral forewing, darker than pure white hindwing fringes in males, and the anal fold of the hindwing is brown beneath, but the fringe near the tornus may be paler. In contrast, ventral forewing spots are “washed out” in T. latimargo , especially towards tornus, hindwing fringes are mostly white, and the distal part of the anal fold is white beneath. Both characters are observed in the lectotypes of these two species ( Warren et al. 2024).