Celastrina echo
species of insect
Celastrina echo, the echo azure or western azure, is a species of blue in the butterfly family Lycaenidae. Celastrina echo have been observed in mostly western regions of the United States, including California, Oregon, Arizona, New Mexico, and Montana.
The taxonomic division of Celastrina butterflies has been a very complicated issue. Some scientists like Layberry et al. once recognized C. echo as a subspecies of C.ladon (Cramer, 1780) in western Canada. In 2001, Guppy and Shepard nominated C. echo to the species level. Currently, many scientists agree that C.echo is a distinguished species.
Subspecies
These five subspecies belong to the species Celastrina echo:
Celastrina echo cinerea (W. H. Edwards, 1883) (Southwestern azure)
Celastrina echo echo (W. H. Edwards, 1864) (Pacific azure)
Celastrina echo nigrescens (J. Fletcher, 1903) (Northwestern azure)
Celastrina echo sidara (Clench, 1944) (Rocky Mountain azure)
Celastrina echo gozora (Boisduval, 1870)(Mexican Azure)
Physical identification and relationship with ants
The butterflies in the Lycaenidae family in general are usually flat as larvae. The adult individuals are usually small and have hairy, ringed antenna-like tails. Their wings are mostly bright glowing blue and green.
The public source identifies “Celastrina echo” as species of insect. This brief keeps that definition visible, then builds a research path around Celastrina, echo and species.
Why this record matters
A short description can identify a subject without explaining its stakes. For “Celastrina echo”, the useful work is to connect “species of insect” to the records capable of establishing context and consequence.
Datasets, specimens, observations and peer-reviewed methods provide the appropriate test for the technical claims summarized here. The source revision retrieved here is dated Aug 17, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q15779554. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference. The first chronological checks are 1780, 2001, 1883 and 1864.
Scientific names, classifications and consensus can change while older terminology persists in catalogues and historical literature. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Check terminology, classification and the date of the cited evidence. Scientific names and technical consensus can change while older records retain historical value.
- Current terminology
- Classification context
- Finding cited technical literature
Primary datasets, specimen catalogues, standards bodies and the most recent peer-reviewed literature.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Celastrina echo”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Celastrina echo primary sources, Celastrina echo archive and Celastrina research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Celastrina echo”?
- Which observation, specimen, dataset or publication supports the account?
- Has classification or technical consensus changed since the cited source?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Celastrina echo” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.