Talk:Matanga rubicunda

Another one to check

@Dyanega: Here's another taxon to check. NHM's Lepidoptera index says this is valid and in Larentiinae (with no species?), as does CoL and iNat (with one species). GBIF says this taxon is doubtful. IRMNG has it in the family, but its status is "uncertain". Our List of Larentiinae genera doesn't have it. - UtherSRG (talk) 21:27, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

This one is a little tricky because the online resources are not easy to search. Holloway published a few new genera in 1997, and GBIF/IRMNG (which are closely linked sources) treat 9 of his 10 new genera from 1997 as accepted, with only Matanga being uncertain. Odd that the NHM wouldn't indicate the included species. The iNat entries give "rubicunda" as the species, and there are only 3 Larentiine geometrids originally with this epithet: Cidaria rubicunda Swinhoe, 1902, Triphosa rubicunda Feichtenberger, 1962, and Cambogia rubicunda Dognin, 1912. The latter is listed in iNat as a valid taxon in the genus Eois. The middle one is a junior synonym of Triphosa dubitata. The first one appears is the Matanga; it was in the genus Martindoelloia for a while, until Holloway moved it in 1997. See here. I can see no evidence that it has been synonymized, however, so suspect that it is still considered valid. Dyanega (talk) 23:33, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

So to be clear, this is valid, and monotypic? - UtherSRG (talk) 23:47, 23 March 2026 (UTC)

And this looks like it is being synonymized to my eyes... - UtherSRG (talk) 23:51, 23 March 2026 (UTC)