Talk:Deudorix doherty

All authors subsequent to Tytler, 1915: 138 have referred to Virachola doherty as dohertyi (not doherty) and this has led to much confusion with Deudoryx dohertyi of Oberthur, 1894. Bridges suggests, as far back as 1988, that the Tytler taxon is a homonym and should be replaced. I cannot find any record of this being done. D'Abrera appears to have had a chance to rectify this but just left a confusing reproduction of a note from Tite alongside his image of what might be the unique Type male of Virachola doherty. He also shows the underside of a similar, but perhaps undescribed, specimen but this is captioned "Rapala sp.v" not "Virachola sp.v".

Tytler also described Cyaniris doherty in the 1915 paper, but called it Cyaniris dohertyi on the key to plate 4. As he did not figure the new Virachola species, he did not show a specific epithet for it other than "doherty" Accassidy (talk) 12:50, 25 January 2017 (UTC)