A review of the genus Insigniocastnia J. Y. Miller, 2007 (Lepidoptera: Castniidae) with notes on Castnia amalthaea H. Druce, 1890 Author Worthy, Robert Author González, Jorge M. Author Ríos, Sergio D. text Zootaxa 2019 2019-01-24 4550 2 277 288 journal article 27486 10.11646/zootaxa.4550.2.8 1d427a64-f8f0-48b6-a963-a652a5af4d2e 1175-5326 2625369 F75EFE23-9ED5-4125-A2BC-653E648E8C9E bogota (Strand, 1912) “ Castnia bogota n. sp. ” Strand, 1912: Archiv fur Naturgeschichte 77 ( I.4 ): 99. Type material: Strand (1912) described the taxon from a single male in Niepelt’s collection; the specimen is the holotype by monotypy. It is now in NHMW ( Lamas 1995a ) ( Figs. 17, 18 ). . Type locality: Given by Strand (1912) as “ Bogota ”. The specimen has no labels which could illuminate this further. Unfortunately, during the 19 th and early 20 th centuries it was customary for collectors to be sent material of flora and fauna with a collecting locality of only “ Nueva Granada ”, “ Colombia ” or “ Bogota ”, even though they could have been collected over a wide area of Colombia ; they invariably used this as the collecting locality without question. Bogota was the city where most plant or animal specimens were gathered before being sent to other parts of the world; thus it was a very frequently used collecting locality ( Freile & Córdoba 2008 ; González et al. 2013a ). The specimen came from the collection of Friedrich Wilhelm Niepelt ( 1862–1936 ) (Strand 1912, 1914), an entomologist and insect dealer, who collected insects in the “interior" of Ecuador (1906) and in Colombia (probably the same year) ( González et al . 2013b ; Strand 1932; Strand 1938; G. Lamas, pers. comm.) He also received, traded or bought insects from those South American countries from other dealers and collectors. Lamas (1995b) mentions that the type specimen was not collected from “ Bogota ” but from a place at a lower altitude. The locality label is therefore unreliable. Several taxa have recently been found in Esmeraldas Department, Ecuador , that were previously known only from the western slopes of the Western Cordillera in southern Colombia , e.g. Amauta angusta ( H. Druce, 1907 ) and A. hodeei kruegeri ( Niepelt, 1927 ) ; this suggests that the bogota holotype was probably collected somewhere in that region. Taxonomic status: Currently the only valid species of Insigniocastnia J.Y. Miller, 2007 , I. bogota comb. nov. It was included by Houlbert (1918) in his new genus Aciloa , which included most of the species now considered to be in Athis Hübner , [1819]. Miller included the taxon, although incorrectly spelled and with the wrong year of publication, as Athis bogata Strand, 1914 in both her 1986 dissertation and her 1995 checklist. Lamas (1995b) included it in Athis . The taxon is a senior subjective synonym of Insigniocastnia taisae J. Y. Miller, 2007 . We accept Miller’s assignment of the species to a new genus. Male genitalia : The genitalia of the holotype are not available to us, but see I. taisae . Distribution: Southern Colombia , although exactly where is unknown, and Esmeraldas Department, Ecuador , where all specimens of Insigniocastnia taisae have been found. Discussion: As far as we are aware no other specimens of I. bogota were known apart from the holotype . A recent examination of the holotype shows clearly that it is the same as I. taisae . On closer examination of the types of C. bogota and I. taisae , it can be noticed that the antennal club in the former appears pale fulvous. The palpi are also fulvous as opposed to cream in I. taisae . Material examined: 1♂ Holotype , 99, Colombia , Bogota , Holotype , Niepelt collection ( NHMW ) .