Dythemis sterilis Hagen, 1861 : 317

Meurgey, François & Poiron, Celine, 2011, The true Dythemis multipunctata Kirby, 1894, from the West Indies and proposed new taxonomic status (Odonata: Anisoptera: Libellulidae), Zootaxa 3019, pp. 51-62 : 55-56

Dythemis sterilis Hagen, 1861: 317

This widespread species, first described by Rambur (1842) nec Burmeister (1839) as Libellula tessellata , was a composite description of two species not conspecific with what is now known as Macrothemis tessellata (Burmeister) . Hagen’s (1861) application of the name Dythemis sterilis was based on two males with a largely pale, nonmetallic frons and vertex from Cayenne ( French Guiana) and on a female with a dark metallic frons and vertex from Buenos Aires (Ris 1919). In his monograph of the family, Ris (1910) restricted the name sterilis to the two males from Cayenne and assigned the female to D. multipunctata Kirby. Earlier , Dythemis sterilis had been considered a species doubtfully distinct from D. velox Hagen (Calvert 1995) or as a variety of D. velox ( Calvert 1898, 1899, 1906; Ris 1913). Various synonyms and association of the name D. sterilis with other taxa broadened its distribution to include most of South America, based primarily on perceived ontogenetic and chromatic differences until Ris (1919) restricted the name to populations inhabiting Mexico south through Colombia, Venezuela, Trinidad, and Martinique. His restriction of the name has subsequently been followed by all future authors.

Kirby (1894) described D. multipunctata from St. Vincent, Lesser Antilles, and considered others from Grenada as possible varieties of D. multipunctata based primarily on the overall darker coloration and metallic condition of the frons and vertex. The darkened condition of the frons and vertex and darker body coloration as described by Kirby lead Ris (1919) to apply the name to largely mainland neotropical material from Panama, Trinidad, and south into Argentina. Our examination of D. multipunctata from the type locality ( St. Vincent) shows it to be the only member of the genus there and not to be conspecific with the mainland taxa going under this name. These populations from the Lesser Antilles represent, in our opinion, D. sterilis .