A 2013 application to the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature, acting on the presumption that A. roylei and A. pernyi are the same biological species, asked to give precedence to the junior name (roylei), as it is a wild taxon and not the result of domestication.[1] However, the 2018 Opinion on this application ruled that any authors who believe that A. roylei (spelled that way rather than "roylii") and A. pernyi are the same species must use the older name, pernyi, as the valid name, despite its origin as a taxon of artificial origin, in large part because other researchers had come forward and claimed that the genetic evidence clearly showed that the two taxa were not conspecific.[4]
^ abRichard S. Peigler, Bhuban Ch. Chutia. (2013) Case 3635 - Antheraea roylei Moore, 1859 (Insecta, Lepidoptera, saturniidae): proposed conservation. The Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature, 70(4):221-228.
^Arunkumar, K.P.; Metta, Muralidhar; Nagaraju, J. (August 2006). "Molecular phylogeny of silkmoths reveals the origin of domesticated silkmoth, Bombyx mori from Chinese Bombyx mandarina and paternal inheritance of Antheraea proylei mitochondrial DNA". Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution. 40 (2): 419–427. Bibcode:2006MolPE..40..419A. doi:10.1016/j.ympev.2006.02.023. PMID16644243.
^Peigler, Richard S. "Diverse evidence that Antheraea pernyi (Lepidoptera: Saturniidae) is entirely of sericultural origin". Tropical Lepidoptera Research. 22 (2): 93–99.
^ICZN (2018) Opinion 2415 (Case 3635) – Antheraea roylei Moore, 1859 (Insecta, Lepidoptera, Saturniidae): specific name not conserved when considered synonymous with that of the supposed wild progenitor Antheraea pernyi (Guérin-Méneville, 1855). The Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature, 75(1):187-189.