THE AUSTRALIAN ENTOMOLOGIST

АВМ: 15 875 103 670. :

The Australian Entomologist is a non-profit journal published in four parts annually

by the Entomological Society of Queensland and is devoted to entomology of the

Australian Region, including New Zealand, Papua New Guinea and islands of the

south-western Pacific. Articles are accepted from amateur and professional

entomologists. The journal is produced independently and subscription to the

journal is not included with membership of the society.

The Publications Committee

Editor: Dr D.L. Hancock Editorial Co-ordinator

Assistant Editors: Dr C.J. Burwell Dr F. Turco

Queensland Museum Business Manager

Dr F. Turco Dr G.B. Monteith

Queensland Museum (geoff.monteith@bigpond.com)

Subscriptions

Subscriptions are payable in advance to the Business Manager, The Australian

Entomologist, P.O. Box 537, Indooroopilly, Qld, Australia, 4068.

For individuals: A$33.00 per annum in Australia.

A$40.00 per annum in Asia-Pacific Region.

A$45.00 per annum elsewhere.

For institutions A$37.00 per annum in Australia.

A$45.00 per annum in Asia-Pacific Region.

A$50.00 per annum elsewhere.

Please forward all overseas cheques/bank drafts in Australian currency.

GST is not payable on our publication.

ENTOMOLOGICAL SOCIETY OF QUEENSLAND

Membership is open to anyone interested in Entomology. Meetings are normally

held at the Ecosciences Precinct, Dutton Park, at 1.00pm on the second Monday of

March-June and August-December each year. Meetings are announced in the

Society's News Bulletin which also contains reports of meetings, entomological

notes, notices of other Society events and information on Members' activities.

Enquiries relating to the Society should be sent to the Honorary Secretary,

Entomological Society of Queensland, P.O. Box 537, Indooroopilly, Qld, 4068.

Cover: A male of Canungrantmictis morindana Brailovsky 2002 (Heteroptera:

Coreidae). This large (25-30mm) coreid bug is spectacular in appearance but

extremely cryptic in the field. Adults hang ventral side upwards among foliage of its

food plant, the twining vine Morinda jasminoides (RUBIACEAE). It was known

from a single old specimen labelled "northern NSW" in the British Museum until the

1980s when discovery of its food plant allowed it to be reliably collected and

described. It is now known to occur from Taree to Brisbane with an isolated

population at Carnarvon Gorge.

Illustration by Geoff Thompson, Queensland Museum.

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1): 1-20 1

THE BENEFITS OF USING BOTH АР)

STONEFLIES (PLECOPTERA) IN ENVIR

AN EXAMPLE FROM NEW SOUTH WA]

OF THE AUSTRALIAN STO

WMENTAL SURVEYS:

3 ү

!NSW Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water, РО Box 29, Lidcombe,

NSW 1825

?Snowy Hydro Limited, PO Box 332, Cooma, NSW 2630

Abstract

Freshwater environmental assessment and monitoring studies rely heavily on aquatic insect

larvae because larvae are seen to directly reflect the aquatic environment they inhabit. However,

the species-level taxonomy of most aquatic insects is based on the diagnostic characters found in

adults. The uncertainty of correlating adult-based species with aquatic larvae means that aquatic

life stages are rarely identified further than generic level, especially where there are sympatric

congeners. However, Plecoptera adults are poor dispersers and generally remain near their site of

emergence. Therefore, stonefly adults have the potential to provide more finely resolved species-

level information about their nearby aquatic larval sites. Both adult and larval Plecoptera were

collected during sampling for macroinvertebrates in a monitoring project in the Snowy

Mountains, New South Wales. The results show that the collection and identification of adult

stoneflies has potential for finer scale delimitation of riverine ecosystems than information

provided by larvae alone. Also, adult stoneflies collected can provide information in related

studies of taxonomy, ecology, biogeography, biodiversity, conservation and climate change. An

updated check-list and an outline of taxonomic studies of Australian stoneflies, including all

primary literature, are also presented.

Introduction

There has been a long standing division in the study of aquatic insects by

ecologists and taxonomists. Whereas environmental and ecological studies

are based almost exclusively on larvae, partially because larvae are seen to

reflect directly the aquatic environment they inhabit, species-level taxonomy

of aquatic insects is based on adults, because they present diagnostic

characters such as wing venation and male genitalia. Aquatic entomologists

would ideally like to identify larvae collected in surveys to species-level and

thereby maximize biological and environmental information. However, in

reality they frequently must settle for coarse level generic identifications,

especially if the aquatic site hosts a number of sympatric, congeneric species.

Of all the entirely aquatic insect orders (Ephemeroptera, Odonata, Plecoptera,

Megaloptera and Trichoptera), plecopteran adults are the poorest flyers,

generally staying close to the emergence/breeding habitat and sometimes

even occurring in aquatic kick-net samples. Numerous stonefly species are

brachypterous, some even apterous, and adults of one North American

species never emerge from the water. Adult stoneflies may be collected in the

morning and during dull days as they emerge onto rocks protruding from the

streams, or at other times by beating foliage along the stream margin

(Theischinger 1991). Also, in winged species running, not flying is

2 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

commonly used to find food and mates. Since adults are often found in

association with congeneric and probably conspecific larvae, it is likely that

adults collected from vegetation, rocks and logs adjacent to a stream at a

particular site have emerged from that water body.

In spite of the availability of several comprehensive keys to the larvae of the

Victorian and New South Wales species (Hynes 1978, Yule 1997), species

level identifications of larvae are difficult because of a lack of diagnostic

characters, often made more uncertain because of the involvement of

different larval instars. Moreover, the larvae of many species are still

unknown.

The following study was based on surveys during 2009 for the program

‘Snowy Hydro Cloud Seeding Trial: Further Studies on Aquatic

Macroinvertebrates’, in the Snowy Mountains of New South Wales,

Australia. The monitoring team (the authors of this paper) were transported to

sites mainly by helicopter. A decision was made to collect stonefly adults in

addition to the normal aquatic samples, and thereby test if adults could

provide significant additional information for such projects in the region.

I. The Snowy Hydro Cloud Seeding Trial Monitoring Program

— Results for Plecoptera

Methods

Site locations

The sites were selected in 2007 for the Snowy Hydro Cloud Seeding Trial

Monitoring Program, and aquatic larvae at the sites have been sampled

annually since then. All sites are located within Kosciuszko National Park

and include sites of varying altitude that are within the cloud seeding areas,

plus control sites to the south of the seeding areas. The location of these sites

is shown in Fig. 1.

Sampling

In November 2009, kick-net samples were taken using the standard protocol

AusRivas (edge/riffle) (Turak and Wadell 2001). Subsequent to this up to 10

minutes per site were spent walking in the water and sweeping emergent and

trailing vegetation around the site for adult stoneflies, using an aerial insect

net (diameter 18"). All the collected stonefly material was emptied into small

plastic jars containing 70% ethanol, sorted in the lab and then identified using

the guide of Theischinger and Cardale (1987). A list was prepared including,

for each site, geographical coordinates (latitude and longitude in decimal

degrees) and altitude, numbers of males and females of adults collected by

adult sampling as well as adults and larvae collected by AusRivas kick-net

sampling in both edge and riffle habitats. The results were compared with the

2008 sampling results obtained from identification (by consultants) of larvae

only.

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

Macroinvertebrate Sampling Sites

EUCUMBENE RIVER

€ Sampling sites

— — Roads

Rivers

| 0 5,000 10,000 20,000 30,00

C SE ree Meters

Fig.1. Location of the study sites. Source: Snowy Hydro Limited.

A Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

Analyses

The stonefly data were analysed to investigate whether they could provide

information on species distribution, dispersal and habitat constraints. The

location of specific stoneflies was compared with elevation and with known

distribution and habitat requirements by the senior author, based on personal

field experience and existing literature.

Stonefly assemblage data were also compared using the statistical software

PrimerE. Multidimensional scaling (MDS) using the Bray-Curtis measure of

similarity and presence/absence transformation was applied to the data.

Species that were responsible for dissimilarities between sites were

investigated using a simple ExcelO spreadsheet and the sites were ordered by

height above sea level to look for differences in species associations and

elevation (shown in Table 2).

Results

Sampling

Stoneflies (adults and larvae) that were collected at 16 sites for ‘Snowy

Hydro Cloud Seeding Trial; Further Studies on Aquatic Macroinvertebrates'

in November 2009 are shown in Table 1 below.

The following list provides the mostly confidently identified taxa that were

collected in the 2009 sample:

Austroperlidae

Acruroperla atra (Samal)

Austroheptura illiesi Hynes

Austroheptura sp.

Leptoperla / Riekoperla sp.

Newmanoperla thoreyi (Banks)

Riekoperla alpina McLellan

Riekoperla hynesorum Theischinger

Riekoperla karki McLellan

Eustheniidae Riekoperla reticulata (Kimmins)

Cosmioperla kuna (Theischinger)

Gripopterygidae

Gripopterygidae sp.

Dinotoperla brevipennis Kimmins

Dinotoperla christine McLellan

Dinotoperla eucumbene McLellan

Dinotoperla fontana Kimmins

Dinotoperla hirsuta McLellan

Dinotoperla thwaitesi Kimmins

Dinotoperla subserricauda Theischinger

Dinotoperla uniformis Kimmins

Dinotoperla sp.

Illiesoperla sp.

Leptoperla sp.

Riekoperla rugosa (Kimmins)

Riekoperla tuberculata McLellan

Riekoperla sp.

Trinotoperla montana (Riek)

Trinotoperla nivata Kimmins

Trinotoperla sp.

Notonemouridae

Notonemouridae sp.

Austrocerca tasmanica (Tillyard)

?Austrocerca ?tasmanica

Austrocercella hynesi Шіеѕ

?Austrocercella ?hynesi

Austrocercella ?tillyardi

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1) 5

Table 1. Plecoptera collected at sites for the Snowy Hydro Cloud Seeding Trial in

November 2009. Legend: @ = male adults, 9 = female adults; L = larvae; Au =

Austroperlidae, Eu = Eustheniidae, Gri = Gripopterygidae, No = Notonemouridae.

Edge/Riffle N

Coll: G. Theischinger

?Austrocerca ?tasmanica

o Austrocercella hynesi

Location data Family Species é 9 L

| Eu [Cosmipelakma ^ | [|]

SNO2 24/11/2009 | Gri | Dimotperlahirsua | if

Snowy River aboveBlue — | бі | Riekoperlahynesorums | | n |

D Gri

36420668 14833132E [ст — p Riekoperlasp. | M T

Biest Gi | Trinotperlasp. E

| 2Austrocerca tasmanica | | 1 |

| Austrocercellahynesi 12 | 3 |

ELIT. c ud

“к. ësst — — | J]

SNOS 241102009 Gri — | Riekoperla mesom — — | 16

Snowy River above

Spencers Creek Ori | Riekoperlasp. ||

36400608 14834314E | Gi | Trimorperap — ||

Eley. 1650 m asl, [— Ne _[?Ашшосетейа?уы | |

SE [No | Ansrocercela zallari — | — — |

Scis cca ata e a md)

| 18 |

| 10 |

шыг

SNO4 2311200 | Eu | Cosmiopelakna | TI

Kosciusko Creek above | Gi | героретар — | — | 1 |

Snowy River

3644278 5 148.30067 E

Elev. 1830 m asl. | Gi [Ж Ший» _ = | —]| 3 [| 24

Edge/Riffle Austrocercella hynesi Liew]

Coll:G.Theischinger — | No [s TE

== — tma =

SNO7 2311209 | Eu [| Cosmioperlakma | [ [ү

Snowy River above Ee aoa db dE |

Club Lake Creek [ Gi | Riekoperlahynesorum LI 5 | 4 | |

36.43138 S 14831946E | — Gri — | Riekoperlareticulata | 3 | 3 | |]

Elev. 1730 m asl. pu 1л» ee umasa: [ura cl

Edge/Riffle | No | Austrocercellahynesi | 1 | 4 | |

Coll: С. Theischinger | No | Austrocercella?iilyard | | 1 | |

ELILIEERENUEEIENM 7 01 UT T U T тын ООШ ANI

| Au | Austrohepturasp |] | [з |

| Eu [|Cosiopelakwa | | | 4 |

GEEL 24/11/2009 | Gri | Dimoperlafomama — | 7 | 10 | |

Gechi River above Gri — | Dimotoperlatwaitesi — | u | s | |

DG: | Gi | Dinotoperlasp, — | — | Tv"

E AERE | Gri | Trinotoperlanivaa | — | 1 | |

Se o бй | Trinotoperlasp,§ [| | ^ | 1 |

кылыр ell

Eltre анаа а |ә |

6 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

Location data Family Species á

Austroheptura illiesi

Е]

Austroheptura sp. E=

DCK) 25/11/2009 Eu Cosmioperla kuna

Dicky Cooper Creek near Gri Dinotoperla hirsuta 3

Schlinks Hut ri Dinotoperla sp. sz

36.27524S 148.38231Е тї Riekoperla hynesorum

Elev. 1770 masl. ri Riekoperla karki

Edge/Rifle ri Riekoperla reticulata 20

Coll: G. Theischinger

e: IB.

Austrocerca tasmanica

N Austrocercella ?tillyardi

° Kä ЕЈ =

Austroheptura sp.

Cosmioperla kuna

Dinotoperla eucumbene

DCK2 25/11/2009 Dinotoperla fontana 3 3

Dicky Cooper Creek [он | Dinotoperla тае | 20 | 8 |

SE шн ПАТО ОП EE

SEA KOC | Gi | LeptoperlaRiekoperlasp | | | 1 |

UNO ox | Gri [Rikoeraapin — | 7 | 7 | — |

C reds EE acram mss [m

=. [zi

[ Ea Tëscht | J T s]

[Gi | Dinotoperta brevipennis | 3 | 8 | |

ТОМ. 2999 [Gd | Dinovepertafomana TE — | 16 | m | |

E Dinotoperla hirsuta Г Sy | 2a | . 1

Semis Lagun EE Dinotopertatmeaiesi — | 9 | 9 |

ERU TENET он | Dinotopertasp. ра

Edge/Ri [ Gi meas. LL

ge/Riffle

Coll: G. Theischinger | O | Trinovoperlanivara | |||

[Gi e | — | IT]

Ee 35

Cosmioperla kuna

inotoperla brevipennis

inotoperla Fontana

Gri Dinotoperla hirsute

inotoperla thwaitesi

TUM2 23/11/2009

Tumut River below

SE 8107Е бп E uniformis

Dinotoperla sp.

Elev. 1360 m asl. бп SE

Edge/Riffle ri iekoperla tuberculata

Trinotoperla montana

Coll: G.Theischinger

Trinotoperla nivata

Trinotoperla sp.

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1) 7

Location data Family Species 3 9 L

| Eu | Cosmioperlakuna | J J è|

| Gri | Dinotoperla brevipennis | | 2 | |

AUS oes IL a | бт j 1

Tumut RiveratRound ` [ Gi | Dinoroperta gene — — | 4 | ü | __

Mountain mn ri | Dinorperla tman — —| 8 | 8 | —]

ЕЗДЕ [ oi [Dimog а

ZE en 98 [ Trinoroperlanivaa — — | 1 | 1 | _|

| Gd [Trmooperlasp. —— LL | s |

p Г ЛГ 10356]

| Aw | Austrohepturasp | | | 2 |

| Еш [|Comipelakma —— LL [о |

DBI 23/11/2009 | Gi | Dinotoperla Fontana | | 1 | |

Doubtful Creek at | Gri | Dinotoperlahirswe | 2 | 22 | |

McCallister | Gi jDimtoperlasp. — — LL [| 4 |

36.16371 S 14843515 E Gi [Жошы ` JL 13 | |

Elev. 1676 m asl. | Gi |Riekoperlahymsorum — — | 4 | 4 | |

Edge/Riffle Gri___| Riekoperlakarki | 2 | 2 | — |

Coll: G. Theischinger Gi — [Rikpelasp — — | — | — [| 53 |

Мо | Austrocercatasmanica —— | 1 | LI |

Ee РСА | TN | WNT [ШЕЛ ОЛЫ

DB2 23/11/2009 [ Eu [| Cosmioperlakuna | J |

Doubtful Creek at Cesjacks Gri | Dinotoperla Man | 4 | 6 |

36.14505 S 148.44429 Gri | Dinotoperla thwaitesi | | 1 |

Elev. 1650 m asl. Gri

Edge/Riffle Riekoperla sp.

Coll: G. Theischinger w е

—

š.

DB3 23/11/2009

Doubtful Creek at Grey

Mares Trail

36.11081S 148.43168 E

Elev. 1540 m asl.

Edge/Riffle

Coll: G. Theischinger

БЫ

m omas O | GE EE

Tin Mine Creek at Hut Gri Dinotoperla brevipennis PWH J 2 J |

š Kee o 559Е агі Dinotoperla sp. EE

Se i

SE оп [ Rekpera s. Fes EUER Ense]

Coll: G. Theischinger

8 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

Location data Family Species á 9 L

| Eu [| Cosmioperlakuna | |

MURR 24112009 | Gri | Dinotoperla subserricauda | 1 |

Upper Murray at Cowambat

36.79249 S 148.16801E | бп | Dimooperlasp. | |

Elev. 1160 m asl. ой | Ийехоретаѕр УШЕШ

Edge/Riffle | Gi | Newmanoperlathoreyi | 1 |

Coll: G. Theischinger | Gri | Riekoperlakarki | 1 |

| Gri ]Rikoelargoa | 1 | 1 | |

[ Gi | Dinotoperla brevipennis | 3 | J |

[ Gi | Dinotoperlachristinae | | [| |

[ Gi | Dinoroperlafontana | — | 1 [| |

| Gri a — — — | — [| — [| 1 |

L Gr — [Rikpelargoa | 2 | — [| — |

EECH

ee Eee Ee)

ING 24/11/2009

Ingeegoodbee River above

access road

36.73327 S 148.26489 E

Elev. 1140 m asl.

Edge/Riffle

Coll: G. Theischinger

Analyses

The MDS plots of site Stonefly assemblage similarities indicated that site

differences were better defined using species level adult stonefly data (shown

in Fig. 3) rather than the genus/family level larval data (Fig. 2). The plot of

stonefly larvae could not differentiate between sites TUM2 and TUM3,

SNO2 and SNO3, and DB2, TIN and ING.

Transform: Presence/absence

Resemblance: S17 Bray Curtis similari

2D Stress: 0.06

DB3

5025 ж dicky cooper

TUMI A doubtful

T TUM2 y tin mine

2 + TUM3 MURR с ingeegoodbee

DB2 *

SNO7 ING & Оо

° SNO4 TIN GEE1

DB1

DCK1

Fig. 2. MDS plot of Stonefly larvae assemblages for the study sites.

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

Transform: Presence/absence -

Resemblance: $17 Bray Curtis similarity

MURR

DCK2

ct) 082

O A

TUM2 + gn

TUMI

ING

TIN

Fig. 3. MDS plot of Stonefly adult assemblages for the study sites.

20 Stress: 0.1 || river

О geehi

|+ tumut

||x murray

|| Ж. dicky cooper

1А. doubtful

у їп mine

* [D Ingeegoodbee

Transform: Presence/absence

Resemblance: S17 Bray Curtis similari

GEE1 pon

vui

TUM3 A

MURR DB1

x А

TIN

ING

2D Stress: 0.09

SNO3

SNO2

° SNO7

їп ingeegoodbee

DCK1

ME SNO4

Fig. 4. MDS plot of aquatic larvae, identified to species level where possible, for the

study sites riffle habitats.

The stonefly adults plot, however, identified all sites to be different and

differences between rivers to be generally greater than differences between

sites within each river. The exception to this was Dicky Cooper Creek, where

10 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

the two sites were dissimilar. Note that there was only one site in the Murray

River, Geehi River, Ingeegoodbee River and Tin Mine Creek.

MDS plots of the aquatic larval assemblages collected from the riffle and

edge habitats showed a similar general site pattern to the stonefly adult plot.

The plot of the riffle larval fauna is presented in Fig. 4. The plots of the full

larval assemblages were able to differentiate all sites.

Discussion

Previously, when the same Snowy Mountain sites were sampled for the

monitoring program in 2008, the study only included the collection of larvae.

Without adult stoneflies, only three stonefly taxa were able to be identified

(by consultants) beyond family level: Acruroperla atra, Cosmioperla (? as

Sternoperla) sp. and Austroheptura (? as Tasmanoperla) sp. By comparison,

the 2009 study identified 23 different Stonefly species at the Snowy Hydro

monitoring sites using adults, thus allowing analysis of differences between

sites and, more importantly to the study, identification of change over time.

It appears that the geographical and habitat information from the 2009 Snowy

Cloud Seeding trials, paired with confident identities for many stonefly

species (see Tables 1 and 2), more than make up for the extra effort of

collecting and identifying stonefly adults. The use of adult insect

identifications where larvae identifications are not feasible could well prove

to be an invaluable tool for the assessment of river health, biodiversity,

conservation and climate change projects.

Outcomes of the study of adult stoneflies from the Snowy Hydro monitoring

sites are:

Five Dinotoperla species were found coexisting simultaneously at the same

site (TUM2) and finding diagnostic characters of these species, not only

apparent in the structure of the male genitalia but also in colour and pattern of

the forewings of both sexes, provides information on their ecology and may

help future taxonomic and behavioural studies. Species, and particularly

species assemblages, have greater indicator value for river health than family

or generic-level data.

The presence in numbers of Riekoperla alpina in DCK2 (Dicky Cooper

Creek at 1504 m), its absence in DCK1 (same creek at 1770 m) where its

likely sister species Riekoperla hynesorum was collected in numbers, and the

presence of Riekoperla hynesorum again in all sampled Snowy River sites

(SNO2, SNO3, SNO4, SNOWO7), all different in size, flow and substrate

from Dicky Cooper Ck at both elevations, provides more than just very

interesting ecological information. Table 2 shows clear species changes with

elevation. It probably also enables taxonomists to make the first promising

step to help distinguish the larvae of the Riekoperla alpina group

morphologically without the need for expensive DNA analysis. The

altitudinal detail may become significant for studies of climate change.

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1) 11

Table 2. Distribution of Stonefly species from the Snowy Hydro Cloud Seeding Trial.

The sites are arranged with increasing elevation from left to right. The shaded boxes

with crosses indicate the presence of the species at the site.

Stonefly adults

Acruroperla atra x

Austroheptura illiesi x

Cosmioperla kuna

Dinotoperla brevipennis x x

Dinotoperla hirsute

Dinotoperla еиситЬепе x

Dinotoperla christinae x

Dinotoperla fontana x x HO S Xe» X

Dinotoperla subserricauda x

Dinotoperla thwaitesi XD o D ея x

Dinotoperla uniformis

Riekoperla alpine

Riekoperla karki x o AN

Riekoperla hynesorum x o ow zi

Riekoperla reticulate x x x

Riekoperla rugosa ХХ х

Riekoperla tuberculata x x

Trinotoperla montana x x x x x

Trinotoperla nivata x CHE

Austrocercella hynesi

Austrocercella ?tillyardi x XS

Austrocerca tasmanica XIX x

Stonefly larvae

Austroheptura sp. x х

Dinotoperla sp. XB EX Mee XX XX XX Уа x

Leptoperla sp. x

Riekoperla sp. x x Rio x» OX äist Kë 23

Gripopterygidae sp. x

Trinotoperla sp.

Illiesoperla sp. x

Notonemouridae sp x

Cosmioperla kuna

elevation m asl.

1140

1160 | *

1230]х x * x

1290

1310 |х >

1360 | х ж

1400 |x х

1504 |х х

1540 | х

1650 [х >

1650 |х х

1670 |х х

1676 | * х

1730 | *

1770 |х х

1830 |х х

12 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

Changes in species assemblages and dominance situations may be indicative

of any sort of pollution and may be sensitive enough to show changes relating

to climatic conditions. For the family Gripopterygidae, our lists show

dominance of Riekoperla species of the alpina group in high alpine sites,

together with dominance of Dinotoperla species and the presence of some

species of the Riekoperla tuberculata and rugosa groups in lower altitude

sites. The existence of the Riekoperla alpina group in high altitude sites

probably results from warm periods making available formerly glaciated

areas. On the other hand, the presence of Dinotoperla species and species of

the Riekoperla tuberculata and rugosa groups in the cooler uplands of

northern New South Wales and Queensland is probably an outcome of cooler

periods in the past, facilitating dispersal northward to suitable habitats.

Similar cases of speciation were discussed by Peters and Theischinger (2007)

for dragonflies and by Watson and Theischinger (1984) for dragonflies,

stoneflies and other aquatic groups.

The fact that the appearance of adults of certain stoneflies in some regions is

highly seasonal, as found in the genus Austrocercella in the Snowy

Mountains (Theischinger 1982), is worth investigating in more detail. More

than one survey a year may significantly increase the number of species per

habitat (biodiversity). Changes in altitudinal and seasonal occurrence over

time of these seasonal species may prove indicative for monitoring pollutants

and ecological and climatic change.

The distribution of the species across the sampled sites generally supports the

existing information on the poor dispersal abilities of stoneflies. The sites that

have the most similar faunal assemblages are geographically close on a river

continuum (e.g. the four Snowy River sites: Tables 1 and 2). The Geehi River

site GEEI is close to, and connected by water to, the Dicky Cooper site

DCK2. The two sites on Dicky Cooper Creek, DCK1 and DCK2, are close

geographically and connected by water but have dissimilar assemblages; a

possible cause could be a barrier to migration created by the waterfall

between the two sites. Further sampling of these sites into the future is

expected to add information on stonefly dispersal in the Snowy Mountains

region.

By sampling adult stoneflies at sites, a clear picture of the diversity of species

at individual sites can be formed. As such, a plea is made for the inclusion of

adult stonefly collecting together with standard AusRivas sampling wherever

stoneflies make up a significant part of the aquatic fauna, in particular

Australian alpine and montane sites.

II. Summary of the Australian Plecoptera Fauna

This could also lead to a renaissance of taxonomic and ecological stonefly

studies that, after a boom in the early 1980s, have been rather stagnant for the

past two decades. In order to stimulate taxonomic research, an updated

check-list of the Australian Plecoptera, with state distribution data, is

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1) 13

presented below (Table 3). Currently, the Australian Plecoptera fauna

comprises 198 valid species (and subspecies) in 26 genera and 4 families.

This list is followed by an outline of taxonomic research on the group

(including the primary taxonomic literature) from its beginning to the present.

Table 3. Check-list of the Australian stonefly species and their known distributions.

Legend: W = Western Australia, S = South Australia, T = Tasmania, V = Victoria,

N = New South Wales (including ACT), Q = Queensland.

Species Distribution

Acruroperla atra (Samal. 1921) +

Austroheptura campbelli Theischinger, 1993 +

Austroheptura illiesi Hynes, 1974

Austroheptura neboissi Illies, 1969

Austroheptura picta (Riek, 1973) Ee x

Austropentura hynesorum Theischinger, 1988 +

Austropentura victoria lllies, 1969 + +

Crypturoperla paradoxa Illies, 1969

Tasmanoperla larvalis (Illies, 1969)

Tasmanoperla thalia (Newman, 1839)

Cosmioperla australis (Tillyard, 1921)

Cosmioperla denise (Theischinger, 1983)

Cosmioperla kuna (Theischinger, 1983) +

Cosmioperla macrops (Theischinger, 1983)

Cosmioperla w. wongoonoo (Theischinger, 1983) +

Cosmioperla wongoonoo tropica (Theischinger, 1983)

Eusthenia costalis Banks, 1913 +

Eusthenia lacustris Tillyard, 1921 +

Eusthenia nothofagi Zwick, 1979 +

Eusthenia reticulata (Tillyard, 1921)

Eusthenia spectabilis Gray, 1832

Eusthenia v. venosa (Tillyard, 1921) +

Eusthenia venosa brachyptera (Tillyard, 1924) +

Thaumatoperla alpina Burns & Neboiss, 1957

Thaumatoperla flaveola Burns & Neboiss, 1957

Thaumatoperla robusta Tillyard, 1921

Thaumatoperla timmsi Zwick, 1979

Cardioperla diversa McLellan, 1971

Cardioperla edita Hynes, 1982

Cardioperla falsa Hynes, 1982

Cardioperla flindersi Hynes, 1982

Cardioperla incerta Hynes, 1982

Cardioperla lobata McLellan, 1971

Cardioperla media Hynes, 1982

Cardioperla nigrifrons (Kimmins, 1951)

Cardioperla spinosa Hynes, 1982

Dinotoperla arcuata Theischinger, 1982

Dinotoperla bassae Hynes, 1982 +

Dinotoperla brevipennis Kimmins, 1951 + +

Dinotoperla bunya Theischinger, 1982

Dinotoperla cardaleae Theischinger, 1982

Dinotoperla carnarvonensis Theischinger, 1982

Dinotoperla carpenteri Tillyard, 1921 +

Dinotoperla christinae McLellan, 1971 + +

Dinotoperla cobra Theischinger, 1982

+++

+++++ +++ +++ ++

+++

+++ +++

14 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

Species EST

Dinotoperla dalrymple Theischinger. 1993 +

Dinotoperla dolichoprocta Theischinger, 1982

Dinotoperla duplex Theischinger, 1982

Dinotoperla eucumbene McLellan, 1971 +

Dinotoperla eungella Theischinger, 1982 +

Dinotoperla evansi Kimmins, 1951 +

Dinotoperla fasciata Tillyard, 1921 +

Dinotoperla fontana Kimmins, 1951 + +

Dinotoperla hirsuta McLellan, 1971 + +

Dinotoperla hybrida Theischinger, 1984 +

Dinotoperla inermis Theischinger, 1988 +

Dinotoperla kirrama Theischinger, 1982 +

Dinotoperla leonardi Theischinger, 1982 + +

Dinotoperla marmorata Hynes, 1976 +

Dinotoperla opposita (Walker, 1852) +

Dinotoperla parabrevipennis Theischinger, 1982 +

Dinotoperla pseudodolichoprocta Theischinger, 1982 +

Dinotoperla schneiderae Theischinger, 1982 +

Dinotoperla serricauda Kimmins, 1951 r

Dinotoperla spinosa Theischinger, 1982 +

Dinotoperla subserricauda Theischinger, 1988 +

Dinotoperla thwaitesi Kimmins 1951 + +

Dinotoperla uniformis Kimmins, 1951 ? P

Dinotoperla vulcanica Theischinger, 1982 Ki

Dinotoperla walkeri Dean & St Clair, 2006 +

Dundundra wanungra (Theischinger, 1982). s

Eunotoperla kershawi Tillyard, 1924 +

Illiesoperla australis (Tillyard, 1924) a» TE

Illiesoperla austrosimplex Theischinger, 1984 +

Illiesoperla barbara Theischinger, 1984 E

Illiesoperla brevicauda Theischinger, 1984 dr. x

Illiesoperla carnarvonensis Theischinger, 1984

Illiesoperla cerberus Theischinger.1984

Illiesoperla echidna Theischinger, 1984

Illiesoperla franzeni (Perkins, 1958)

Illiesoperla frazieri Theischinger, 1984

Illiesoperla mayi (Perkins, 1958) + + +

Illiesoperla tropica Theischinger, 1984

Kirrama abolos Theischinger, 1981

Kirrama naumanni Theischinger, 1993

Leptoperla alata Theischinger, 1984

Leptoperla albicincta Theischinger, 1981 +

Leptoperla angularis Theischinger, 1981

Leptoperla australica (Enderlein, 1909) d

Leptoperla beroe Newman, 1839 +

Leptoperla bifida Mclellan, 1971 +

Leptoperla bubalus Theischinger, 1980

Leptoperla cacuminis Hynes, 1974

Leptoperla collessi Theischinger, 1981 1

Leptoperla commoni Theischinger, 1981 +

Leptoperla curvata Theischinger, 1980 deo

Leptoperla dahmsi Theischinger, 1984 +

Leptoperla kalliste Hynes, 1974 +

Leptoperla kimminsi McLellan, 1971 +

+++

++++

+о+++++

+++

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

Species

Leptoperla longicauda Theischinger. 1988

Leptoperla magnicauda Theischinger, 1981

Leptoperla membranosa Theischinger, 1988

Leptoperla neboissi McLellan, 1971

Leptoperla primitiva McLellan, 1971

Leptoperla rieki Theischinger, 1981

Leptoperla rotunda Theischinger, 1984

Leptoperla rubiconis Theischinger, 1984

Leptoperla smithersi Theischinger, 1981

Leptoperla tasmanica Kimmins, 1951

Leptoperla thompsoni Theischinger, 1988

Leptoperla truncata Theischinger, 1980

Leptoperla uptoni Theischinger, 1981

Leptoperla varia Kimmins, 1951

Neboissoperla alpina McLellan, 1971

Neboissoperla monteithi Theischinger, 1982

Neboissoperla spinulata Theischinger, 2002

Nescioperla curtisae Theischinger, 1982

Newmanoperla exigua (Kimmins, 1951)

Newmanoperla hackeri McLellan, 1971

Newmanoperla prona Hynes, 1982

Newmanoperla thoreyi (Banks, 1920)

Riekoperla alpina McLellan, 1971

Riekoperla angusta Theischinger, 1985

Riekoperla barringtonensis Theischinger, 1985

Riekoperla citrea Theischinger, 1985

Riekoperla compressa Theischinger, 1985

Riekoperla cornuta Theischinger, 1985

Riekoperla darlingtoni (Illies, 1968)

Riekoperla elongata Theischinger, 1985

Riekoperla hynesorum Theischinger, 1985

Riekoperla intermedia Theischinger, 1985

Riekoperla isosceles Theischinger, 1985

Riekoperla karki McLellan, 1971

Riekoperla montana Theischinger, 1985

Riekoperla naso Theischinger, 1981

Riekoperla occidentalis Hynes & Bunn, 1984

Riekoperla perkinsi Theischinger, 1985

Riekoperla pulchra Hynes, 1982

Riekoperla reticulata (Kimmins, 1951)

Riekoperla rugosa (Kimmins, 1951)

Riekoperla serrata Theischinger, 1985

Riekoperla tillyardi McLellan, 1971

Riekoperla trapeza Theischinger, 1985

Riekoperla t. triloba McLellan, 1971

Riekoperla triloba regalis Hynes, 1982

Riekoperla tuberculata McLellan, 1985

Riekoperla williamsi McLellan, 1971

Riekoperla zwicki Theischinger, 1985

Trinotoperla comprimata Hynes, 1982

Trinotoperla groomi Perkins, 1958

Trinotoperla hardyi Perkins, 1958

Trinotoperla inopinata Hynes, 1982

Trinotoperla irrorata Tillyard, 1924

+++

+++++

+ ++++ + + ++

Trinotoperla maior Theischinger, 1982

16 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

Species —— STEE

Trinotoperla minima Theischinger. 1982

Trinotoperla minor Kimmins, 1951 + +

Trinotoperla montana (Riek, 1962) + +

Trinotoperla mouldsi Theischinger, 1982 +

Trinotoperla nivata Kimmins, 1951 + +

Trinotoperla sinuosa Theischinger, 1982 +

Trinotoperla tasmanica (McLellan, 1971) +

Trinotoperla woodwardi Perkins, 1958 +

Trinotoperla yeoi Perkins, 1958 + +

Trinotoperla zwicki McLellan, 1971

Austrocerca rieki Шіеѕ, 1975

Austrocerca tasmanica (Tillyard, 1924) +

Austrocercella alpina Theischinger, 1984

Austrocercella autumnalis Theischinger, 1984

Austrocercella christinae Illies, 1975 +

Austrocercella columbae Hynes, 1981 +

Austrocercella c. communis Theischinger, 1984 + +

Austrocercella communis obtusa Theischinger, 1984

Austrocercella distans Theischinger, 1984

Austrocercella elevata Theischinger, 1984

Austrocercella forcipula Theischinger, 1984

Austrocercella hynesi Illies, 1975

Austrocercella i. illiesi Theischinger, 1984 +

Austrocercella illiesi tarraensis Theischinger, 1984 +

Austrocercella mariannae Illies, 1975 +

+++

Austrocercella nivalis Theischinger, 1984

Austrocercella tillyardi (Kimmins, 1951)

Austrocercella verna Theischinger, 1984

Austrocercella weiri Theischinger, 1984

Austrocercoides bullata (Kimmins, 1951)

Austrocercoides kondu Theischinger, 1993

Austrocercoides neboissi Illies, 1975 +

Austrocercoides tunta Theischinger, 1993

Austrocercoides zwicki Illies, 1975

Kimminsoperla albomacula (Kimmins, 1951)

Kimminsoperla biloba Illies, 1975

Kimminsoperla hystrix ЇШез, 1975

Kimminsoperla kaputaris Theischinger. 1980

Kimminsoperla mcalpinei Theischinger, 1981

Kimminsiperla neboissi Theischinger, 1988 d

Kimminsoperla williamsi Шіеѕ, 1975 +

Notonemoura lynchi Illies, 1975 +

Notonemoura maculata (Weir, 1967) cme cur

Tasmanocerca bifasciata (Kimmins, 1951) +

Total number of species group taxa = 198 з 9 Sg 3D Ut G

+ +++++

++++

+++

Historical perspectives

The taxonomic history of Australian Plecoptera started with the description

of Eusthenia spectabilis from Tasmania (Gray 1832). Additions of new

species mostly came from contributions of one or two species each by

Newman (1839), Walker (1852), Enderlein (1909), Banks (1913, 1920),

Samal (1921), Burns and Neboiss (1957), Riek (1962, 1973), Weir (1967)

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1) 17

and Hynes and Bunn (1984). Early family/genus revisions allowed Tillyard

1921, 1924) to add twelve, Perkins (1957) to add six and Kimmins (1951) to

establish 18 more species. Revisions of all families, undertaken by eminent

overseas plecopterists between 1968 and 1982, provided 15 additional

species described by Illies (1968, 1969, 1975), 19 by McLellan (1971), two

by Zwick (1979) and 17 by Hynes (1974-1982). Theischinger (1980-2002)

added a further 94 species, mainly in generic revisions based on personal

collecting in the field (mainly New South Wales and Queensland) and from

museum holdings. The concluding 198th Australian species (Dinotoperla

walkeri) resulted from river health studies and was added by Dean and St

Clair (2006), suggesting a closer synergy between taxonomy and

environmental studies might be established. As recently as 1996, McLellan

established the genus Cosmioperla for the Australian species previously

included in Stenoperla McLachlan.

Theischinger (94)

Hynes (18)

number of species

McLellan (19)

Wes (15)

Kimmins (18)

Tillyard (12)

1830 1850 1870 1890 1910 E 1950 1970 1990 2010

year

Fig. 5. Historical record of establishment of species-group taxa in Australian

Plecoptera. In the above historical outline, taxa regarded as synonyms are not

included. Vertical lines mark the year of single publications, horizontal lines indicate

the time span between first and last publications of the author and numbers in brackets

indicate the number of new species added to the fauna.

Larval taxonomy was seldom extensively covered in revisions or descriptive

papers. There are, however, two comprehensive treatments by Hynes (1978)

and Yule (1997) of the larvae from Victoria, and New South Wales and

northern Victoria, respectively, and a more specialised publication (Tsyrlin

2001) which included only a key to the Australian stonefly genera and to the

species of Leptoperla from Victoria. An ‘Illustrated Guide to the Adults of

the Australian Stoneflies (Plecopteray, including brief descriptions and

18 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

illustrations of the adults of all Australian species, was presented by

Theischinger and Cardale (1987). Based largely on this publication, the then

known Australian stonefly fauna was catalogued by Michaelis and Yule

(1988).

Acknowledgements

Access to the remote sites was made possible by Snowy Hydro. Specifically,

John Denholm arranged for helicopter access to sites and accomodation for

the field team. The helicopter pilot, Colin De Pagter, assisted with sampling

at the sites. Theresa Dye of Cardno Pty Ltd provided information on site

locations and previous samplings. Klaus Koop of DECCW facilitated the

sampling program. The manuscript benefited greatly from critical comments

from Dr D.J. Bickel (Sydney), Dr К. Marchant (Melbourne), Dr A.L. Sheldon

(Crawfordville, Florida, USA) and last but not least from the editorial input

of Dr A.G. Orr. The contributions of these people are gratefully

acknowledged.

References

BANKS, N. 1913. Synopses and descriptions of exotic Neuroptera. Transactions of the

American Entomological Society 39: 201-242.

BANKS, N. 1920. New neuropteroid insects. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology

64: 297-362.

BURNS, A.N. and NEBOISS, A. 1957. Two new species of Plecoptera from Victoria. Memoirs

of the National Museum of Victoria 212: 91-242.

ENDERLEIN, P.W. 1909. Klassifikation der Plecopteren sowie Diagnosen neuer Gattungen und

Arten. Zoologischer Anzeiger (Jena) 34: 385-419.

HYNES, H.B.N. 1974. Comments on the taxonomy of Australian Austroperlidae and

Gripopterygidae (Plecoptera). Australian Journal of Zoology, Supplementary Series 19: 1-36.

HYNES, H.B.N. 1976. Tasmanian Antarctoperlaria (Plecoptera). Australian Journal of Zoology

24: 115-143.

HYNES, H.B.N. 1978. An annotated key to the nymphs of the stoneflies (Plecoptera) of the

State of Victoria. Australian Society of Limnology, Special Publication No 2: 64 pp.

HYNES, H.B.N. 1981. Taxonomical notes on Australian Notonemouridae (Plecoptera) and a

new species from Tasmania. Aquatic Insects 3: 147-166.

HYNES, H.B.N. 1982. New and poorly known Gripopterygidae (Plecoptera) from Australia,

especially Tasmania. Australian Journal of Zoology 30: 115-158.

HYNES, H.B.N. and BUNN, S.E. 1984. The stoneflies (Plecoptera) of Western Australia.

Australian Journal of Zoology 32: 97-107.

ILLIES, J. 1968. The first wingless stonefly from Australia. Psyche (Camb.) 75: 328-333.

ILLIES, J. 1969. Revision der Plecopterenfamilie Austroperlidae. Entomologisk Tidskrift 90: 19-

51.

ILLIES, J. 1975. Notonemouridae of Australia (Plecoptera: Ins.). Int. Rev. Ges. Hydrobiol. 60:

221-249.

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1) 19

KIMMINS, D.E. 1951. A revision of the Australian and Tasmanian Gripopterygidae and

Nemouridae (Plecoptera). Bulletin of the British Museum of Natural History (Entomology) 2: 45-

93.

McLELLAN, LD. 1971. A revision of Australian Gripopterygidae (Insecta: Plecoptera).

Australian Journal of Zoology, Supplementary Series 2: 1-79.

McLELLAN, LD. 1996. A revision of Stenoperla (Plecoptera: Eustheniidae) and removal of

Australian species to Cosmioperla new genus. New Zealand Journal of Zoology 23: 165-182.

MICHAELIS, F.B. and YULE, C. 1988. Plecoptera. Pp 133-176, 300-304, in: Houston, W.W.K.

(ed.), Zoological Catalogue of Australia, Vol. 6. CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne.

NEWMAN, E. 1839. On the synonymy of the Perlites, together with brief characters of the old,

and of a few new species. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, London (n.s.) 3: 32-37,

84-90.

PERKINS, F.A. 1958. Australian Plecoptera. Part 1. Genus Trinotoperla Tillyard. University of

Queensland Papers, Department of Entomology 1: 100.

PETERS, G. and THEISCHINGER, G. 2007. Die gondwanischen Aeshniden Australiens

(Odonata: Telephlebiidae und Brachytronidae). Denisia 20: 517-574.

RIEK, E.F. 1962. A new genus of Australian stoneflies (Plecoptera: Gripopterygidae).

Proceedings of the Linnean Society of New South Wales 87: 96- 98.

RIEK, E.F. 1973. The genera of Australian Austroperlidae (Insecta: Plecoptera). Journal of the

Australian Entomological Society 12: 289-295.

THEISCHINGER, G. 1980. New stoneflies (Plecoptera) from New South Wales, Australia.

Aquatic Insects 2: 249-256.

THEISCHINGER, G. 1981. New and little known stoneflies from Australia (Insecta:

Plecoptera). Aquatic Insects 3: 103-127.

THEISCHINGER, G. 1983. The genus Stenoperla McLachlan in Australia (Insecta: Plecoptera:

Eustheniidae). Australian Journal of Zoology 31: 541-556.

THEISCHINGER, G. 1984a. New and little known stoneflies (Plecoptera: Gripopterygidae)

from Queensland and Victoria. Australian Entomological Magazine 10: 93-98.

THEISCHINGER, G. 1984b. The species of the genus Jlliesoperla McLellan (Insecta:

Plecoptera: Gripopterygidae). Australian Journal of Zoology 32: 573-602.

THEISCHINGER, С. 1984c. A revision of the Australian stonefly genus Austrocercella Illies

(Insecta: Plecoptera: Notonemouridae). Australian Journal of Zoology 32: 691-718.

THEISCHINGER, G. 1985. The species of the Australian stonefly genus Riekoperla McLellan

(Insecta: Plecoptera: Gripopterygidae). Australian Journal of Zoology 33: 785-830.

THEISCHINGER, G. 1988. New and little known species of stoneflies from Australia (Insecta:

Plecoptera). Stapfia 17: 147-157.

THEISCHINGER, G. 1993. New species of Australian stoneflies (Insecta: Plecoptera). Linzer

biologische Beitrdge 25: 821-832.

THEISCHINGER, G. 2002. A new species of Neboissoperla McLellan from alpine New South

Wales, Australia (Plecoptera: Gripopterygidae). Linzer biologische Beitrdge 34: 1507-1510.

THEISCHINGER, G. and CARDALE, J.C. 1987. An illustrated guide to the adults of the

Australian stoneflies (Plecoptera). Division of Entomology Technical Paper No. 26. CSIRO,

Australia; 83 pp.

20 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

TILLYARD, R.J. 1921a. The wing venation of the Leptoperlidae (Order Perlaria), with

description of a new species of the genus Dinotoperla, from Australia. Transactions of the Royal

Society of South Australia 45: 270-274.

TILLYARD, R.J. 1921b. Revision of the family Eustheniidae (order Perlaria), with descriptions

of new genera. Proceedings of the Linnean Society of New South Wales 46: 221-236.

TILLYARD, R.J. 1924. New genera and species of Australian stoneflies (Order Perlaria).

Transactions of the Royal Society of South Australia 48: 192-195.

TSYRLIN, E. 2001. А key to the Victorian nymphs of Leptoperla (Plecoptera: Gripopterygidae).

Cooperative Research Centre for Freshwater Ecology, Thurgoona (NSW); iv + 28 pp.

TURAK, E. and WADDELL, N. 2001. New South Wales (NSW) Australian river system

(AusRivas) sampling and processing manual July 2001. Environment Protection Authority,

Sydney (NSW).

WALKER, F. 1852. Catalogue of the specimens of neuropterous insects in the collection of the

British Museum. Part 1 (Phryganides-Perlides). British Museum, London; 192 pp.

WATSON, J.A.L. and THEISCHINGER, G. 1984. Regions of taxonomic disjunctions in

Australian Odonata and other freshwater insects. Odonatologica 13: 147-157.

WEIR, T.A. 1967. A new genus of Notonemourinae (Plecoptera: Capniidae) from Australia.

Journal of the Australian Entomological Society 6: 65-68.

YULE, C. 1997. Identification guide to the stonefly nymphs of New South Wales & northern

Victoria. Australian Water Technologies Pty Ltd, West Ryde (NSW); vii + 35 pp.

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1): 21-28 21

A NEW SPECIES OF FORESTER MOTH FROM VICTORIA

(LEPIDOPTERA: ZYGAENIDAE: PROCRIDINAE)

AXEL KALLIES! and BERNARD MOLLET?

!The Walter and Eliza Hall Institute, 1G Royal Parade, Parkville; Vic 3050

(Email: kallies@wehi.edu.au)

216, Parc Vatonne, 91190, Gif-sur-Yvette, France

(Email: molleth@wanadoo fr)

Abstract

A new species of forester moth, Pollanisus marriotti sp. n., is described from Victoria. It is

similar to Pollanisus angustifrons Tarmann, 2004 and several closely related species from

northern Queensland but distinguishable by its size, the breadth of its head and by the structure

of the antennae. Pollanisus marriotti sp. n. is currently known from a single locality in the

vicinity of Gembrook, east of Melbourne, where it occurs together with Pollanisus lithopastus

Turner, 1926, from which it can be readily distinguished by the coloration of the abdomen and

the size of the head and compound eyes.

Introduction

The Zygaenidae of Australia were revised recently by Tarmann (2004). The

most speciose genus is the Australian endemic Pollanisus Walker, with

currently 20 species described. Pollanisus species are distributed mainly

along the eastern and south-eastern coast of Australia and Tasmania, with

relatively few species occurring in South and Western Australia.

Despite Tarmann’s (2004) revision, a relatively large number of species

remain unnamed due to the lack of sufficient material. This is especially true

in the case of Pollanisus from the northern part of the genus’ range. The

species from south-eastern Australia, in particular from Victoria and southern

New South Wales, however, have been collected extensively and can be

considered well-known; the discovery of a previously unknown species of

Pollanisus in the vicinity of Melbourne therefore came as a surprise. This

new species belongs to a group of species known previously only from the

tropical and sub-tropical north-east of Australia, and is clearly distinct from

all other species that occur in Victoria or New South Wales.

Methods

The terminology of the setal combination of the first abdominal segment of

the first instar larvae follows Efetov et al. (2000) and describes the position,

number and colour of setae. Abbreviations used in the description as are

follows: D (dorsal), SD (subdorsal), L (lateral), / (light), d (dark).

Material

The acronyms of the following depositories are given in parentheses: ANIC -

Australian National Insect Collection, CSIRO Entomology, Canberra,

Australia; CAKM -— Collection of Axel Kallies, Melbourne, Australia;

CBMG - Collection of Bernard Mollet, Gif-sur-Yvette, France.

22 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

Figs 1-10. Pollanisus spp. and host plant. (1-2) P. marriotti sp. п.: (1) male

(holotype), dorsal; (2) female (paratype), dorsal. (3-4) P. lithopastus: (3) male, dorsal;

(4) female, dorsal. (5) P. angustifrons (paratype) male, dorsal. (6-7) P. marriotti sp.

n., male: (6) head, ventral; (7) abdomen, dorsal. (8-9) P. lithopastus, male: (8) head,

ventral; (9) abdomen, dorsal. (10) Hibbertia empetrifolia (DC.) Hoogland, the

assumed host plant of P. marriotti sp. n. at the type locality, Gilwell Park, Gembrook,

Victoria.

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1) 23

Pollanisus marriotti sp. n.

(Figs 1, 2, 6, 7, 11-15)

Types. Holotype 3 (Fig. 1): ‘Australia, Victoria, E of Melbourne, Gembrook, Gilwell

Park, $37°26’ E145?39', 3.11.2008, lux, leg. A. Kallies & P. Marriott’ (to be deposited

in ANIC). Paratypes: 1 3, same data as holotype but 10.1.2008 (P. Marriott)

(CAKM); 2 é é, 1 9 (GP698), same data as holotype but 3.11.2008 (A. Kallies & Р.

Marriott) (CBMG); 2 3, 1 9, same data as holotype but 6.11.2009 (A. Kallies & A.

Young) (CAKM); 2 55, same data as holotype but 27.1.2009 (A. Kallies, S. & B.

Mollet) (CBMG); 4 55 (GP697), 1 9 (Fig. 2), same data as holotype but 8.11.2009

(A. Kallies, S. & B. Mollet) (CBMG); 1 $, same data as holotype but 7.11.2009 (M.

Марр) (CAKM); 3 AO. same data as holotype but 2.11.2010 (A. Kallies, P. Marriott &

M. Hewish) (CAKM); 1 d. same data as holotype but 21.11.2010 (A. Kallies)

(CAKM).

Etymology

marriotti — a noun in the genetive case: this new species is dedicated to Peter

Marriott, Bentleigh, Victoria, main author of the *Moths of Victoria book

series, who collected the first specimen.

Description

Male (Fig. 1). Forewing length: 8.5-9.5 mm. Head dorsally dark brown with a

bluish green sheen, with metallic green frontal scales and a narrow stripe of

shiny bluish green scales running along the margin of the black compound

eye; frons ca 1.2 x broader than breath of compound eye in frontal view,

significantly protruding beyond compound eyes in both lateral and dorsal

view; labial palps light brown without metallic scales; proboscis yellow to

light brown; distance of ocellus from compound eye 0.8 x diameter of

ocellus; chaetosemata dark brown, the anterior extension overreaching

ocellus and completely covering the space between compound eye and

ocellus. Antenna dark brown with a weak bluish green sheen on dorsal side

of the shaft; segments 1 to 29-31 bipectinate, segments 30-32 to 39-42

biserrate; at segment 15 pectination 6-6.5 x longer than breath of shaft in

dorsal view and 4-4.5 x longer at segment 25; sensory hairs on pecten very

short. Collar with bright metallic golden green scales.

Thorax dark brown with a weak bluish green sheen dorsally and with shiny

metallic bluish green scales laterally and ventrally; patagia dark brown with

golden green scales proximally. Legs dark brown, femur of hind leg metallic

green blue laterally. Abdomen dark brown on the first segment and mostly

metallic golden green dorsally on other segments, dark brown with a very

weak bluish green sheen ventrally.

Wings broad, forewing elongate triangular, hindwing almost rectangular,

rounded apically, posterior margin straight; forewing upperside dark brown

with a weak bluish green sheen and a patch of green metallic scales near the

cell (on fresh specimens); underside dark grey-brown without metallic scales;

hindwing upperside dark brown with a slightly translucent space between

24 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

veins CuP and Cu2; underside dark brownish grey with metallic bluish green

scales in a band between cell and costa and at anal angle. Fringe blackish

brown with a weak sheen.

Female (Fig. 2). Forewing length: 7-7.5 mm. Similar to male but with

narrower and more rounded wings. Antenna biserrate. Abdominal hair tuft

bright yellow.

Male genitalia (Figs 11-12). Valva pointed distally, slightly convex dorsally,

folded translucent central part triangular, ventral sclerotization broad, ventral

margin of valva straight with a proximal part lobed, saccus strongly

sclerotized. Aedeagus slightly tapered and upcurved, ca 4.5 x longer than

broad; cornutus large and slender, straight, pointed distally, its length ca 80%

of aedeagus.

Female genitalia (Figs 13-14). Sternite VIII not sclerotized, ductus bursae

short, translucent, wall of corpus bursae near point of insertion of ductus

bursae with a sclerotization bearing 2 small teeth. Ductus seminalis arising

near lumen of corpus bursae.

Description of the first instar larva

The L1 (first instar) is cream coloured and about 1 mm in length. It has a

combination of three anal combs, an arrangement known for the genus

Pollanisus and other genera of the tribe Artonini (Mollet and Tarmann 2010).

There are no brown lateral spots on the subdorsal part of the third thoracic

segment and on the second and fifth abdominal segments visible. The setal

formula of the first abdominal segment is: D: 1d; SD: 1d, 1/; L: 21. This

appears characteristic of the Artonini (Mollet and Tarmann 2010).

Diagnosis

Pollanisus marriotti sp. n. is similar and appears to be most closely related to

P. angustifrons Tarmann, 2004, P. eungellae Tarmann, 2004, P. eumetopus

Turner, 1926, P. acharon (Fabricius, 1775) and a number of unnamed

species, all of which occur in the northern parts of Queensland and the

Northern Territory. These all belong to a group of species characterized by

their dark brown forewings with sparse metallic scales, their bright metallic

green collar and a conspicuous green metallic mark that gradually widens

from a point at the centre of the 2nd tergite and covers most of the caudal part

of the abdomen. Within this group, P. marriotti sp. n. is remarkable in that it

occurs outside of the tropics in temperate sclerophyll forest in Victoria. P.

marriotti sp. n. can be distinguished from all other species of the group by its

relatively wider wings and larger size. In particular, P. angustifrons (Fig. 5)

is smaller, has a wider head, more extended pectination of the antennae (Fig.

17) and the forewings are relatively narrower. Pollanisus eungellae, P.

eumetopus and P. acharon are smaller and their forewings are relatively

narrower; P. eungellae and P. eumetopus have a broader frons.

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1) 25

| 4 0.1 mm

Figs 11-17. Pollanisus spp. (11-14) P. marriotti sp. n., genitalia: (11) ventral view of

male genitalia, aedeagus removed, left valve omitted; (12) aedeagus; (13) overview of

female genitalia, praebursa with spermatophore; (14) sclerotization at insertion of

ductus seminalis. (15-17) Pollanisus spp., male antenna with shaft, pectination on

only one side shown: (15) P. marriotti sp. n.; (16) P. lithopastus; (17) P. angustifrons.

26 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

Pollanisus marriotti sp. n. also shows similarities to P. subdolosa (Walker,

[1865]) and some related species. With these it shares the general

morphology such as wing and body shape and the distribution of metallic

scales on the abdomen. However, P. subdolosa and related species can be

readily distinguished by the colour of its abdomen and collar, which are

metallic copper-red, but never metallic green. Females of P. subdolosa also

differ by the lack of metallic scales on the abdomen, which are always

present in P. marriotti sp. n., by their relatively larger yellow anal tuft and by

their somewhat narrower wings. P. subdolosa has not been found at the type

locality of P. marriotti sp. n.; however, it occurs in other forests in the

vicinity of Melbourne and other parts of southern Victoria and is also

attracted to light. Furthermore, P. subdolosa has two generations per year

with adults being on the wing in November and December and again in

March, whereas P. marriotti sp. n. occurs only in a single generation in

summer.

Superficially, P. marriotti sp. n. is also similar to P. lithopastus Turner, 1926

(Figs 3-4) and both species occur syntopically at the type locality. P.

marriotti sp. n. differs from P. lithopastus as follows: head narrower, eyes

smaller and proboscis yellow (Fig. 6) (head wider, eyes larger and proboscis

dark brown in P. lithopastus, Fig. 8); dorsal side of the 1st abdominal

segment without metallic scales, with a conspicuous green metallic mark that

gradually widens from a point at the centre of the 2nd tergite and covers most

of the caudal part of the abdomen (Fig. 7) (dorsal side of abdomen

completely metallic blue in P. /lithopastus, Fig. 9); fore and hindwings

narrower (broader in P. /lithopastus); hindwings lighter (darker іп P.

lithopastus). Furthermore, the apical biserrate part of the antennae is

relatively longer in P. marriotti sp. n. (Figs 15-17).

The new species cannot be confused with any of the other Pollanisus species

(c.f. Tarmann 2004).

Phenology and bionomics

The only known locality of this species is a semi-dry to wet eucalypt forest at

about 300 m altitude with a rich understorey of Leptospermum, Banksia and

Hibbertia. The locality is a mosaic of slopes and wet gullies and harbours a

rich lepidopterous fauna, including many species that apparently reach their

most southern and western distribution limit in this area.

At the type locality, P. marriotti sp. n. shares its habitat with Hestiochora

furcata Tarmann, 2004 and P. lithopastus, the latter being very common in

this locality. The adults of P. marriotti sp. n. fly from early January to late

February, whereas P. lithopastus has a longer flight period from late

November to early March. Although both species are also likely to be active

during the day, most specimens were observed or collected at the light

between 22.00h and 24.00h. Up to 50 specimens of P. lithopastus were

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1) 27

attracted to the light on warm and dark nights and hundreds were observed

over the course of the flight period, all but two being males. P. marriotti sp.

n. is comparatively rare, with typically only a few specimens attracted to the

light during one night. Despite extensive searching during the day, few

specimens of P. marriotti sp. n. were found, two flying at about 5 pm and one

male on the flowers of Leptospermum at about 10.00h. Despite extensive

fieldwork around Melbourne by one of us (AK), P. lithopastus was observed

only once during daytime, when a female was found resting on a grass stem

in the afternoon.

The hostplant of both P. lithopastus and P. marriotti sp. n. in Gilwell Park is

likely to be the Trailing Guinea-flower, Hibbertia empetrifolia (DC.)

Hoogland (Fig. 10). Larvae that hatched from eggs obtained from females of

both species started feeding on the leaves of this species. Larvae of P.

marriotti sp. n. also accepted Hibbertia scandens (Willd) Dryand as a

surrogate, but died subsequently, whereas the larvae of P. lithopastus refused

this plant. P. lithopastus seems to utilize different Hibbertia species as

hostplants as it can be common in places where Hibbertia empetrifolia is

apparently absent.

Distribution

Despite recent intensive collecting around Melbourne and occasional activity

in parts of Gippsland and East Gippsland, P. marriotti sp. n. was only found

at the type locality. However, it can be assumed that other colonies of this

species exist in sheltered coastal forests east of Melbourne. P. lithopastus, on

the other hand, is relatively widespread east of Melbourne and also occurs in

the Otway Ranges and near Nelson in the west of Victoria.

Conservation status

Pollanisus marriotti sp. n. is currently known only from a single locality,

Gilwell Park, in the vicinity of Gembrook. This is remarkable as light

trapping was frequently conducted in similar forests east of Melbourne.

Whereas P. lithopastus was found in most of these locations, P. marriotti sp.

n. was not. A similar distribution pattern was observed for various other moth

species (Kallies and Marriott, unpublished observations). Although the

reasons for the restricted distribution of these species are unknown, we

speculate that lack of fire is a major factor. In an area well known for its high

bushfire risk, Gilwell Park has escaped widespread fire damage for over 80

years and was not subject to ‘controlled’ back burning. This lack of fire may

well be the key factor for the high diversity observed in this area.

Although parts of Gilwell Park are frequently used by Scouts and other

groups for camping and other outdoor activities and the vegetation is

controlled by regular slashing, other parts of the park are relatively

undisturbed. Importantly, these activities do not seem to have obvious

negative impacts on plant and insect diversity. This shows that use of forest

28 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

for recreational activities when carefully managed is fully consistent with

protection of a diverse fauna and flora. It furthermore underlines the

importance of woodland and forest protected from bushfires and back

burning as refugia that ensure long-term survival of a diverse array not only

of birds and mammals but also of butterflies, moths and other insects. Gilwell

Park is a prime example of such a place. P. marriotti sp. n., due to its

restricted distribution and its potential susceptibility to fire, should be

considered a threatened species.

Acknowledgements

We would like to express our gratitude to Peter Marriott who collected and

provided the first specimens of this interesting new species, to Murray Vagg

who helped us with our fieldwork, and to the Gilwell Park authorities for

allowing us to conduct research on their premises and for allowing us to use

the facilities of the Park. We furthermore would like to thank the Victorian

Department of Sustainability and Environment for providing appropriate

research permits.

References

EFETOV, K.A., KEIL, T., MOLLET, B. and TARMANN, G.M. 2000. New data on the

chaetotaxy of the first instar larvae of Forester moths (Lepidoptera: Zygaenidae, Procridinae).

Nachrichten des entomologischen Vereins Apollo (N. F.) 21: 83-90, figs 1-34.

MOLLET, B. and TARMANN, G.M. 2010. Notes on the ecology, phenology, and distribution of

Pollanisus eumetopus Turner (Lepidoptera: Zygaenidae, Procridinae, Artonini). Australian

Entomologist 37(2): 63-67.

TARMANN, G.M. 2004. Zygaenid moths of Australia: A revision of Australian Zygaenidae

(Procridinae: Artonini). CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood; 248 pp, 64 col. pls, 448 text-figs, distr.

maps.

TURNER, A. 1926. Revision of Australian Lepidoptera: Drepanidae, Limacodidae, Zygaenidae.

Proceedings of the Linnean Society of New South Wales 51: 437-445.

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1): 29-36 29

THE NOMENCLATURE OF OGYRIS HALMATURIA (TEPPER, 1890)

(LEPIDOPTERA: LYCAENIDAE)

M.F. BRABY!2*, Е. DOUGLAS? and R.C. WILLAN!

!Museum and Art Gallery of the Northern Territory, GPO Box 4646, Darwin, NT 0801

2Research School of Biology, The Australian National University, Canberra, ACT 0200

?PO Box 37, Rainbow, Vic 3424

*E-mail: michael.braby@nt.gov.au

Abstract

The purpose of this paper is to clarify and resolve the nomenclature of Ogyris halmaturia

(Tepper, 1890), a nationally threatened butterfly which has had a long and complex

nomenclatural history. This complexity has arisen because: (1) the species group name

halmaturia was based on a mixed series comprising two different species; (2) historically at least

six authors have attempted to resolve the nomenclature of halmaturia, but most failed to render a

valid and unambiguous lectotype designation; (3) one of these authors (N.B. Tindale) made a

particularly confusing lectotype designation in 1923; and (4) introduction of the name Ogyris

waterhouseri (Bethune-Baker, 1905). The proposal to treat O. waterhouseri as a junior synonym

of O. halmaturia is accepted. We argue that Tindale made the first valid and unambiguous

lectotypification in 1923. Consequently, we propose, with the intention of bringing closure to

this matter, that O. halmaturia is the senior synonym of O. waterhouseri and that Tepper's

syntype *female' is the lectotype male of O. halmaturia. Attention is drawn to ambiguity in

Article 74.5 (lectotype designation made before 2000) in the most recent edition of the

International Code of Zoological Nomenclature.

Introduction

The Australian endemic butterfly Ogyris halmaturia (Tepper, 1890) (Eastern

Bronze Azure) is an endangered species of heathland and mallee-heathland

habitats in coastal and semi-arid areas of South Australia and (formerly)

western and south-western Victoria (Braby and Douglas 2008). Its taxonomic

status is now agreed upon as a valid species, but a consensus on its

nomenclature needs to be resolved urgently to effectively underpin

conservation efforts.

The species has had a long and complex nomenclatural history (see Braby

and Douglas 2008 for review). This complex nomenclature has arisen in at

least four different ways. The first stems from the fact that Tepper (1890) had

a mixed series comprising four syntypes representing two species (Table 1).

The type specimens were all collected from near Kingscote (given as

‘Queenscliffe’), Kangaroo Island, South Australia, on 20-21 November 1886,

viz: three males of O. otanes (C. & R. Felder, 1865) and a male of O..

halmaturia, which Tepper incorrectly assumed represented the female of his

new species. Because Tepper (1890) did not designate a type specimen or

make reference to a type of any sort, a taxonomist must therefore determine

which specimen of Tepper's type material (i.e. his syntypic series) represents

the name-bearing ‘type’ in order to fix the name О. halmaturia to the species

in question.

30 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

According to Article 74 of the ICZN (1999), the fixation of a name from

syntypes is dependent on the designation of a lectotype; that specimen then

becomes the unique bearer of the name of the nominal species group taxon

and the standard for its application. And here lies the second issue, which is

at the core of this complex problem.

In historical times, at least six authors (Lower 1893, Tepper 1893,

Waterhouse 1903а, 1903b, Bethune-Baker 1905, 1916, Waterhouse and Lyell

1914, Tindale 1923) have attempted to resolve the taxonomy of O.

halmaturia but few attempted to do so definitively by making a lectotype

designation. Lower (1893) placed Tepper's male O. halmaturia under O.

otanes and Tepper's ‘female’ О. halmaturia in synonymy with O. idmo

(Hewitson, 1862) but did not refer to ‘types’ of any form. Tepper (1893)

himself maintained O. halmaturia as a species distinct from O. otanes and O.

idmo, and restricted its distribution to Kangaroo Island (and possibly on the

mainland at Port Lincoln on the tip of Eyre Peninsula, SA), but he did not

refer to type material and still failed to realise that he had a mixed series.

Waterhouse (1903b p. 249) concurred with Lower (1893) and listed O.

halmaturia as a synonym of О. otanes and remarked that ‘I almost certainly

agree with Lower who says that Tepper's O. halmaturia comprises O. otanes

3 and О. idmo 4’. He subsequently treated О. halmaturia as a synonym of

both О. otanes and О. idmo in his catalogue of Australian butterflies

(Waterhouse 19032), but again did not examine or make reference to a single

‘type’ specimen that would bear the name. Waterhouse and Lyell (1914) later

subsumed O. halmaturia under O. otanes in an attempt to resolve the

taxonomy, but did not examine type material to clear up the nomenclature.

Bethune-Baker (1905, 1916) and Tindale (1923) did, however, both refer to

‘types’, which we expand upon below. But here lies the third part of the

problem: Tindale's (1923) type designation was confusing in that he partly

synonymised Tepper's concept of O. halmaturia under O. otanes. Lastly, 15

years after the species was formally described, another name, О.

waterhouseri (Bethune-Baker, 1905), was introduced for it.

In attempting to resolve this complex nomenclatural problem, Braby and

Douglas (2008) traced and critically examined the type series (= syntypes) of

O. halmaturia (currently housed in the South Australian Museum (SAM) and

The Natural History Museum, London (BMNH)), reviewed the historical

literature and concluded that the name O. halmaturia is a junior synonym of

О. otanes, and consequently that Tepper's syntype of the second species is a

paralectotype of O. halmaturia. In contrast, Field (1999), and more recently

Grund (2010), proposed that O. waterhouseri is a junior synonym of O.

halmaturia. Grund's argument was based on three lines of evidence: (1) that

of Tepper's (1890) description of O. halmaturia and his original intention;

(2) crediting Tindale (1923) as the first taxonomist to validly select a

lectotype of O. halmaturia; and (3) espousing the premise of nomenclatural

stability and the presumption that the name waterhouseri was interfering with

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1) 31

Table 1. Tepper's (1890) syntypic series of Ogyris halmaturia and their type status.

MM M M M gege

Specimen, Complete label data, Repository, Type status and Current valid species name

— 1

9 O. halmaturia

“Queenscliffe, 1 mile N.W. very shy, 9, 20.11.86. Tepper” [in Tepper’s original handwriting],

“Ogyris halmaturia Tepper, Type female = 5, Kangaroo Island | n348, vide, TRSSA. 1923”,

“SAMA Database No. 31-001699"

SAM. Lectotype. О. halmaturia д

3 О. halmaturia

“Queenscliffe, @, 1 m. N.W. very shy, 21.11.86. Tepper” [in Tepper's original handwriting],

*Ogyris halmaturia Tepper, Type male, — not type, Kangaroo Island | vide TRSSA 1923, p.

389", “Ogyris otanes 2 not halmaturia", “SAM Database No. 31-001700”

SAM. Paralectotype. О. otanes д

3 О. halmaturia

“Queenscliffe, 1 m. N.W. very shy, 20.11.86. Tepper" [in Tepper's original handwriting],

*Ogyris halmaturia Tepper, Cotype male, Kangaroo Island | vide TRSSA 1923, p. 389",

“Ogyris otanes ĝ not halmaturia", “SAM Database No. 31-001701”

SAM. Paralectotype. О. otanes д

3 О. halmaturia

“Queenscliffe, 1 mile N.W., in scrub. $, 20.11.86. Tepper” [in Tepper’s original handwriting],

“Ogyris halmaturia, Queenscliffe, Kang. Island, Nov. 1886., legit J.G.O. Tepper”, “Bethune-

Baker Coll. B.M. 1927-471."

BMNH. Paralectotype. O. otanes 3

common usage. We discuss each of these components of evidence in turn and

show that, while the hypothesis to treat O. halmaturia as the senior synonym

is supported, two of Grund’s (2010) arguments are misguided on

nomenclatural grounds.

Tepper’s description of O. halmaturia

Grund (2010) argued that Tepper (1890) intentionally gave first priority in his

description to the ‘female’ of О. halmaturia (= 3 О. halmaturia) because

Tepper made reference to its similarity with the underside of O. oroetes

(Hewitson, 1862). ‘This was the normal way of describing new species

during this historical time period, viz. describing the important reference

specimen first, be it male or female’ (Grund 2010 p. 115). However, Tepper

(1890) actually made no reference to the underside of O. oroetes, he just

stated ‘It comes nearest to O. oroetes, Hew., but differs from various details

from Hewitson’s figure’. More importantly though, Tepper (1890) did not

describe the ‘female’ first, but in fact described the two supposed sexes

together: after first giving approximate size measurements of the ‘female’

and male, he then described in some detail the upperside of both sexes (our

emphasis) simultaneously’; he then proceeded to describe the underside of

the ‘female’ and then the underside of the male. Whether Tepper (1890)

intended to give priority to the ‘female’ of O. halmaturia or not is irrelevant

in terms of nomenclature under the ICZN (1999) because Tepper (1890,

1893) did not refer to the specimens before him at the time of description (i.e.

32 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

his type material). As noted above, in such cases where there are two or more

syntypes, especially where two or more species are involved, a lectotype

must be selected from the type series in order to fix the name of the nominal

species group taxon (Article 74.1) (ICZN 1999).

Designation of lectotype of O. halmaturia

Article 74.5 of the ICZN (1999) stipulates that *In a lectotype designation

made before 2000, either the term ‘lectotype’, or an exact translation or

equivalent expression (e.g. ‘the type’), must have been used or the author

must have unambiguously selected a particular syntype to act as the unique

type of the taxon.' That is, the Code appears to recognise three different

situations or criteria under which a lectotype may be designated. In this case,

three authors (Bethune-Baker 1905, 1916, Tindale 1923, Field 1999)

potentially qualify as having undertaken acts of lectotypification under this

ruling.

In his revision of the genus Ogyris, Bethune-Baker (1905 pp 276-277)

remarked under the taxon O. otanes that ‘Mr. Waterhouse has kindly sent me

for examination two specimens from Kangaroo Island with a query as to

whether they are Felder's insect, but after a very careful comparison I believe

them to be distinct, and they are the form named by Tepper halmaturia. І

have now before me the type of this species as well as Felder's type (I must

here express my best wishes to Mr. Tepper for the loan of it); and I consider

that they are distinct forms; more material may prove them to be sub-species,

but they differ sufficiently to warrant them being named.' In other words,

Bethune-Baker (1905) is saying that O. otanes (from the South Australian

mainland) and O. halmaturia (from Kangaroo Island) are closely related

species, but further research may prove them to be conspecific. Indeed, he

later remarked *... in the closing sentence of p. 277 of my monograph I

broadly hint at the possibility of halmaturia being a form of otanes, Felder,

and I am quite willing to concede it as a race of that species? (Bethune-Baker

1916 p. 390). This later statement was made in response to comments by

Waterhouse and Lyell (1914), who did not recognise O. halmaturia,

subsuming it (ie. the Kangaroo Island population) under the Species O.

otanes. Bethune-Baker (1905) was unaware of the fact that Tepper had a

mixed series until much later (see Bethune-Baker 1916); he examined only

one of Tepper's syntypes (= @ О. otanes) and referred to that specimen as a

‘type’, “Т regard Tepper's species as distinct from otanes, Feld., both of

which types are now before me’ (Bethune-Baker 1905 p. 275) and ‘I only had

the 3 type of this insect before me’ (Bethune-Baker 1916 p. 390).

Edwards et al. (2001) interpreted Bethune-Baker’s (1905) reference to a type

as an intentional and valid lectotype designation; however, Braby and

Douglas (2008) and Grund (2010) did not consider this to be the case because

Bethune-Baker (1905 p. 277) used the term ‘type’ rather vaguely to describe

all the syntypes of O. halmaturia, ‘The types from Kangaroo Island are in the

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1) 33

S. Australian Museum. Mr. Waterhouse also has specimens from the same

locality.” and as such he did not intentionally or explicitly make a formal type

designation, at least not one that could be deemed *unambiguous' in the sense

of Article 74.5. Although there is some uncertainty in the current edition of

the ICZN (1999) in relation to Article 74.5, particularly with interpretation of

the second criterion ‘an exact translation or equivalent expression (e.g. ‘the

type’), must have been used’ in a lectotype designation made before 2000,

many taxonomists would interpret the use of the word “уре” by Bethune-

Baker for one of Tepper's syntypes to be construed as a valid lectotype

designation by inference, provided the specimen could be identified and

unambiguously located. The specimen is currently located in the BMNH and

was identified and illustrated by Braby and Douglas (2008 Figs 7-9 p. 319),

who considered it to be a paralectotype of O. halmaturia. On the other hand,

an alternative interpretation of Article 74.5 is that a lectotype designation

must satisfy all three criteria: that of being intentional, unambiguous and

based on a single or unique type specimen (C. Thompson pers. comm. 2010).

Although it is clear that Bethune-Baker (1905) had only one of Tepper's

syntypes available to him, and on two occasions in that publication he

referred to that specimen as the “уре” (see also remarks by Tindale 1923), he

was not intentionally selecting that specimen among the type series to be the

unique type specimen and, moreover, he used the word “type” in different

senses, both in the singular and plural. Bethune-Baker (1916) again referred

to that specimen as ‘the male type’, but this was prefixed by the phrase ‘I

only had...’ (our emphasis), indicating that he was aware of other ‘types’ (i.e.

Tepper's syntypic series); hence, here again there is ambiguity as to whether

or not he was intending the loaned syntype to be the primary type of

halmaturia.

We now reconsider the work of Tindale (1923) because this was the second

line of evidence used by Grund (2010) to synonymise the name О.

waterhouseri. Tindale's publication is interesting because of the confusing

way it was written. Tindale (1923 p. 347) considered O. halmaturia and O.

otanes to be conspecific and synonymised O. halmaturia under O. otanes in

part. Tindale also illustrated one of Tepper's male syntypes (in SAM) from

Kangaroo Island in Plate 24, Figure 16, and in the figure caption (p. 354)

referred to that specimen as “Ogyris halmaturia, Tepper, Type male,

Kangaroo Island = ofanes, Felder.’ Braby and Douglas (2008) considered

Tindale's (1923) action on p. 347 to be an intentional designation of a

lectotype on the basis that: (1) he referred to one of Tepper's syntypes as the

‘type’ in the figure caption (p. 354); and (2) he illustrated that specimen

(Plate 24), but these authors overlooked the fact that Tindale explicitly wrote

‘(part)’ at the end of the synonymy line. Tindale (1923) did the same for О.

halmaturia on the next page (p. 348) on which he redescribed and illustrated

Tepper's ‘female’ syntype in Plate 24, Figure 20 and referred to it as the

‘type’ of O. halmaturia in the figure caption (p. 354). Tindale (1923 p. 348)

34 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

stated ‘The type male is a typical specimen of O. otanes, Feld.; the ‘female’

is the male of a species very close to O. waterhouseri, Bethune-Baker and, as

in the original description, the *female' is mentioned and described first, the

name halmaturia will stand.’ Grund (2010) considered this action by Tindale

to be evidence in support of an intentional lectotype designation; that is,

Tindale deliberately selected the ‘female’ to be the primary type or name-

bearer of O. halmaturia. In considering this particular aspect we concur with

Grund (2010) of Tindale's intent; it is likely that Tindale (1923 p. 347) was

merely referring to, and illustrating, the syntype male of О. halmaturia (= 3

O. otanes) to show that it belonged to a different species, rather than

attempting to synonymise the whole of Tepper's concept of O. halmaturia

with O. otanes.

Tindale's (1923) action on p. 348 in which he explicitly refers to Tepper's

*female' type specimen therefore, in our opinion, fixes the name O.

halmaturia to the taxon. Because the lectotype of О. halmaturia is the same

species as the lectotype of O. waterhouseri, which was described 15 years

later, the species group name waterhouseri is therefore a junior synonym of

O. halmaturia. Accepting Tindale (1923 p. 348), rather than Tindale (1923 p.

347) or Bethune-Baker (1905, 1916), as the first taxonomist to validly and

unambiguously designate a lectotype for the nominal species group name

halmaturia, renders the subsequent action of Field (1999), who also

designated Tepper's “female? syntype as a lectotype of О. halmaturia, as an

incorrect subsequent lectotype designation. That is, once a lectotype has been

validly designated, all subsequent lectotypifications have no validity (Article

74.1.1) and, moreover, this designation permanently deprives all other

specimens that were formerly syntypes of that status in that they

automatically become paralectotypes (Article 74.1.3). Tepper's three syntype

males (= 3 О. otanes) thus all qualify as paralectotypes of О. halmaturia

(Table 1).

Nomenclatural stability

Grund (2010) argued that because the name O. halmaturia has been in usage

for the past 86 years (ie. since Tindale 1923) at one level or another it

qualifies for nomenclatural "protection" in some way. It is true that the name

has been in common usage for a long period, but it is also true that the name

O. waterhouseri has had continuous usage for an almost equally long period,

from 1905 to 1972 (67 years) (see synonymic list and review of literature in

Braby and Douglas 2008). In terms of actual usage, waterhouseri has

appeared unambiguously with full species status four times or as a subspecies

of O. idmo eight times; halmaturia has appeared unambiguously with full

species status only twice or as a subspecies of O. idmo 20 times; and once

they have appeared ambiguously with both names combined, as O.

halmaturia waterhouseri (Tindale 1923). Moreover, the name waterhouseri

has appeared unambiguously as valid in a major checklist of type material in

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1) 35

the Australian Museum, Sydney (Peters 1971) and in several books

(Common 1964, D'Abrera 1971, McCubbin 1971), as well as in the

perceptive paper by Quick (1972).

The ICZN (1999) does allow for the automatic reversal of precedence of a

long-unused senior synonym under its Reversal of Precedence provision

(Article 23.9), but then only under two strict conditions. If either of these

conditions cannot be met completely, then an author must refer the case to

the Commission of the ICZN for a formal decision requesting existing usage

of the junior synonym to be maintained instead of acting unilaterally. A

recent entomological example under this provision is that by Jendek (2007),

wherein the name Buprestris angustulata Illiger, 1803 was given precedence

by the ICZN (2009) over B. pavida Fabricius, 1793. There is no way this

provision by itself could be invoked to conserve halmaturia over

waterhouseri because halmaturia is not the junior synonym.

In closing, our hope in resolving and clarifying the nomenclature of Ogyris

halmaturia — that it is a senior synonym of O. waterhouseri based on

interpretation of Tindale (1923 p. 348) as making the first valid lectotype

designation — is that it will meet acceptance amongst the wider entomological

community, and that it will be the name adopted by students of Lepidoptera,

government agencies and non-government organizations in attempts to

improve the conservation status of the species, which ranks as one of

Australia’s most threatened butterflies (Braby and Douglas 2008). We deem

this more preferable than attempting to decipher confusion inherent in Article

75.4 and prepare an Application to the International Commission of

Zoological Nomenclature to reject O. halmaturia in favour of O.

waterhouseri.

Acknowledgements

We thank Pete Cranston and Penny Gullan (UC Davis, USA), Ted Edwards

(ANIC, Canberra), Tim New (La Trobe University, Melbourne), Graham

Brown (MAGNT, Darwin), Alan Beu (GNS Science, New Zealand) and

past/present ICZN Commissioners Chris Thompson (Smithsonian Institution,

USA), Bruce Halliday (ANIC, Canberra) and Gary Rosenberg (ANSP, USA)

for their wise council on this note.

References

BETHUNE-BAKER, G.T. 1905. A monograph of the genus Ogyris. Transactions of the

Entomological Society of London 1905: 269-292, pl XV.

BETHUNE-BAKER, G.T. 1916. Notes on the synonymy of the genus Ogyris. Annals and

Magazine of Natural History (8) 17(101): 386-390.

BRABY, M.F. and DOUGLAS, F. 2008. The nomenclature, taxonomy and conservation status

of Ogyris waterhouseri (Bethune-Baker, 1905) stat. nov. (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae), a threatened

butterfly from southern Australia. Australian Journal of Entomology 47: 315-329.

36 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

EDWARDS, E.D., NEWLAND, J. and REGAN, L. 2001. Lepidoptera: Hesperioidea,

Papilionoidea. Zoological Catalogue of Australia. Vol. 31.6. CSIRO Publishing, Melbourne; x +

615 pp.

FIELD, R.P. 1999. A new species of Ogyris Angas (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae) from southern

arid Australia. Memoirs of Museum Victoria 57: 251-259.

GRUND, R. 2010. The taxonomy of Ogyris halmaturia (Tepper, 1890) stat. nov. (Lepidoptera:

Lycaenidae). Australian Journal of Entomology 49: 114-120.

ICZN. 1999. International code of zoological nomenclature. International Trust for Zoological

Nomenclature, London; xxix + 126 pp.

ICZN. 2009. Opinion 2221 Buprestris angustulata Illiger, 1803 (currently Agrilus angustulatus,

Insecta, Coleoptera): specific name given precedence over the specific Buprestris pavida

Fabricius, 1793. Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 66: 98-99.

JENDEK, E. 2007. Buprestris angustulata Illiger, 1803 (Insecta, Coleoptera): proposed

precedence of the specific name over that of Buprestris pavida Fabricius, 1793. Bulletin of

Zoological Nomenclature 64: 178-181.

LOWER, O.B. 1893. List of South Australian Rhopalocera. Transactions, Proceedings and

Reports of the Royal Society of South Australia 17: 1-12.

PETERS, J.V. 1971. A catalogue of the type specimens of the Hesperioidea and Papilionoidea

(Lepidoptera) in the Australian Museum. Australian Entomological Press, N.S.W.; 36 pp.

QUICK, W.N.B. 1972. Collected Ogyris idmo waterhouseri. Victorian Entomologist 2: 9-10.

TEPPER, J.G.O. 1890. Common native insects of South Australia: a popular guide to South

Australian entomology. Part II. Lepidoptera, or butterflies and moths. Wigg & Son, Adelaide; iv

+ 65 pp.

TEPPER, J.G.O. 1893. Notes and remarks on South Australian Rhopalocera. Transactions,

Proceedings and Reports of the Royal Society of South Australia 17: 281-286.

TINDALE, N.B. 1923. On Australian Rhopalocera. Transactions and Proceedings of the Royal

Society of South Australia 47: 342-354.

WATERHOUSE, G.A. 1903a. A catalogue of the Rhopalocera of Australia. Memoirs of the New

South Wales Naturalists' Club 1: 1-49, i-ii.

WATERHOUSE, G.A. 1903b. Notes on Australian Rhopalocera: Lycaenidae. Part III

Revisional. Proceedings of the Linnean Society of New South Wales 28: 132-275.

WATERHOUSE, G.A. and LYELL, G. 1914. The butterflies of Australia. A monograph of the

Australian Rhopalocera. Angus and Robertson, Sydney; vi + 239 pp.

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1): 37-48 37

MATERNAL CARE, FOOD PLANTS AND DISTRIBUTION OF

AUSTRALIAN ONCOMERINAE (HEMIPTERA: HETEROPTERA:

TESSARATOMIDAE)

G.B. MONTEITH

Queensland Museum, PO Box 3300, South Brisbane, Qld 4010

(Email: geoff.monteith(a)bigpond.com)

Abstract

New information is given on maternal care, host plants and distribution for 9 Australian

Tessaratomidae: Oncomerinae in the genera Cumare Blóte, Garceus Distant, Lyramorpha

Westwood, Musgraveia Leston & Scudder, Oncoscelis Westwood, Peltocopta Bergroth,

Plisthenes Stal and Stilida Stal. Corrections to some recorded distributions and host plants are

discussed and a summary table of data for all 15 Australian species is presented.

Introduction

The subfamily Oncomerinae of the Tessaratomidae comprises 15 genera of

large, often colourful, shield bugs. It has its greatest generic diversity (12

genera) in Australia (Sinclair 2000). Species of Oncomeris Laporte are the

largest shield bugs in the world, one of which, O. flavicornis (Guérin), occurs

in northern Queensland. Cassis and Gross (2002) listed 18 species from

Australia but three of these (Lyramorpha perelegans Vollenhoven, 1868, L.

diluta Stàl, 1863 and Oncomeris ostraciopterus (Montrouzier, 1855)) are

based on literature records from the 1800s which have never been confirmed,

so the fauna is probably only the 15 species listed in Table 1. They can be

readily identified using the generic key of Sinclair (2000) and the species

keys of Leston and Scudder (1957). АП species are restricted to the eastern

parts of Queensland and New South Wales. Old records from Tasmania,

Victoria and South Australia (Gross 1975, Cassis and Gross 2002) have not

been verified in modern times and are not considered here. All species except

Cumare pallida Blóte, 1945 and Agapophyta bipunctata Guérin, 1831 are

virtually restricted to rainforests.

The group is well known for the parental care of eggs and nymphs shown by

some species, first observed by the pioneer Australian naturalist F. P. Dodd

(Dodd 1904, 1916), with later records by Kumar (1969) and Sinclair (2000).

Previous observations were summarised by Monteith (2006), who gave new

information on several species with photographs of parental behaviour and

discussion of its significance. In the most advanced forms (Cumare Blóte,

Garceus Distant and Peltocopta Bergroth), the female carries the nymphs on

her abdomen for a significant period of time. This so-called *nymphal

phoresy’ is also seen in certain SE Asian Tessaratomini (Gogala et al. 1998).

Oncomerines feed on the sap of woody plants, especially from apical shoots

when in flush growth. All species have a rather narrow host range.

Musgraveia sulciventris (Stal, 1863), the Bronze Orange-Bug, which feeds

on native species of Citrus L. (Rutaceae), has become a pest of cultivated

38 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

Figs 1-6. Oncomerinae. (1-4) Lyramorpha parens: (1) female and large nymphs

feeding at stem internode of Castanospora alphandii; (2) female brooding 2nd instar

nymphs; (3) gregarious group of 2nd and 3rd instar nymphs on non-food plant,

Passiflora; (4) adults feeding on Jagera pseudorhus (5-6) Oncoscelis australasiae on

Medicosma cunninghamii: (5) female brooding egg clutch; (6) eggs in clutch of 14.

Photos: A. Gillanders (1, 3), D. C. F. Rentz (2), K. Aland (4), J. Wright (5-6).

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1) 39

citrus and is well studied (Cant er al. 1996a, 1996b). Recorded food plants for

other Australian species are given by Kumar (1969), Sinclair (2000), Cassis

and Gross (2002) and Monteith (2006). A North Dakota State University

website (Rider 2010) lists all recorded food plants but without assessing

veracity. Some literature records of food plants are clearly simply resting

records and caution is needed in recording food plants in the absence of

actual feeding.

This paper records new information and/or photographs for nine species of

Australian Oncomerinae. Several doubtful food plant records are excluded

and a summary table of details for all Australian species is presented (Table

1). Plant nomenclature is taken from Henderson (2002). Vouchers for many

of the insects mentioned are in the Queensland Museum (QM), Brisbane.

Cumare pallida В1бїе, 1945

Eggs have been recorded (Monteith 2006) but not measured. Those from a

preserved clutch from Auburn River NP (in QM) are barrel shaped, 1.2 mm

high and 1.1 mm in diameter. Micropyles not countable.

Garceus fidelis Distant, 1893

Eggs in a hatched clutch of 14 eggs from Garradunga (in QM) are 1.5 mm

high and 1.7 mm in diameter. Micropyles not countable.

Lyramorpha rosea Westwood, 1837

Lyramorpha Westwood has two species in Australia: L. rosea in NSW and

southern Queensland with 4 antennal segments and L. parens Breddin in

northern Queensland with 5 antennal segments. L. rosea has been recorded

from five genera of the Sapindaceae (Table 1), four of them native plus the

cultivated lychee (Litchi chinensis Sonn.). Kumar (1969) found brooding

females on Alphitonia Reissek ex Endl. (Rhamnaceae) and Flindersia К. Br.

(Rutaceae) in Brisbane but this record has not been repeated for these

common trees in 40 years and they are deleted as host plants pending

confirmation. Similarly, the early record from Synoum glandulosum (Sm.) A.

Juss. (Meliaceae) by Musgrave and Whitley (1931) requires confirmation as

this is not a "beach plant” as described and might be a misidentification of the

confirmed food plant Cupaniopsis anacardioides (A. Rich.) Radlk., which is

a beach plant at the site and has similar leaves and fruit.

Lyramorpha parens Breddin, 1900 (Figs 1-4)

No native food plants have been recorded for this species. During April 2010,

Mr Alan Gillanders recorded it from the following six species of rainforest

Sapindaceae at three localities on the northern Atherton Tableland: Arytera

divaricata F. Muell. (Atherton), A. pauciflora S.T. Reynolds (Yungaburra),

Castanospora alphandii (F. Muell.) F. Muell. (Yungaburra), Guioa acutifolia

Radlk. (Lake Eacham), С. /asioneura Radlk. (Yungaburra), Sarcotoechia

serrata S.T. Reynolds (Yungaburra). Mr Garry Sankowsky recorded it from the

A0 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

Table 1. List of confirmed Australian Oncomerinae showing recorded information on

distribution, host plants, egg clutch size and aspects of brood care. Queensland is

divided into 4 latitudinal zones: SQ, from NSW border to 22°S; NQ, from 16-22°S;

CYP, from 16°S to tip of Cape York; TS, Torres Strait Islands. Blank cells indicate no

ЕЕЕ

SPECIES AND SOURCE AUSTRALIAN AUSTRALIAN FOOD

LITERATURE DISTRIBUTION PLANT FAMILIES &

GENERA

Agapophyta bipunctata NQ, CYP, TS CAESALPINIACEAE:

Guérin, 1831 (1,3,6) Cassia

Cumare pallida Blóte, 1945 SQ, NQ, CYP EUPHORBIACEAE:

(3,4,6,8) Petalostigma

Erga longitudinalis NSW, SQ FABACEAE:

(Westwood, 1837) (1) Austrosteenisia

Garceus fidelis Distant, NQ ELAEOCARPACEAE:

1893 (3,4,6) Elaeocarpus

Lyramorpha rosea NSW, SQ SAPINDACEAE:

Westwood, 1837 (1,3,4,5) Alectryon, Atalaya,

Cupaniopsis, Guioa, Litchi

Lyramorpha parens NQ, CYP, TS SAPINDACEAE:

Breddin, 1900 (6,7,8) Alectryon, Arytera,

Castanospora, Cupaniopsis,

Elattostachys, Guioa, Jagera,

Litchi, Nephelium, Sarcotoechia

Musgraveia antennatus CYP, TS RUTACEAE: Citrus

(Distant, 1880) (8)

Musgraveia sulciventris NSW, SQ RUTACEAE: Citrus

(Stal, 1863) (1,3,6)

Oncomeris flavicornis NQ, CYP -

(Guérin, 1831)

Oncoscelis australasiae NSW, SQ RUTACEAE: Acronychia,

Westwood, 1837 (3,8) Medicosma, Melicope

Peltocopta crassiventris NSW, SQ EUPHORBIACEAE:

(Bergroth, 1895) (1,6,8) Mallotus

Plisthenes australis NQ, CYP MELIACEAE: Aglaia

Horváth, 1900 (3,6,8)

Stilida indecora Stàl, 1863 NSW, SQ, NQ SAPINDACEAE

(1,3,6) Alectryon, Arytera,

Cupaniopsis, Guoia

Stilida sinuata Stàl, 1870 СҮР, -

Tibiospina darlingtoni NQ -

Sinclair, 2000

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1) 41

information. Literature sources for each species are as follows: 1, Kumar 1969; 2,

Cant et al. 1996a, b; 3, Sinclair 2000; 4, Cassis and Gross 2002; 5, Waite and Hwang

2002; 6, Monteith 2006; 7, Astridge 2006; 8, Monteith, this paper.

EGG EGG BROODING BROODING NYMPHAL

CLUTCH BROODING IST 2ND PHORESY

INSTARS INSTARS

14 Yes No

14 Yes Yes Yes Yes

24-26 Yes No

14 Yes Yes - Yes

up to 42 Yes - - No

40-42 Yes Yes Yes No

14 No No No No

14 Үез ?Yes No

24-39 Yes Yes Yes Yes

42 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

following seven additional Sapindaceae planted on his property, 8.5 km

NNW of Atherton: Alectryon coriaceus (Benth.) Radlk., 4. semicinereus

(F. Muell) Radlk., Cupaniopsis anacardioides (A. Rich.) Radlk., С.

diploglottoides Adema, С. flagelliformis (F.M. Bailey) Radlk. var.

flagelliformis, Elattostachys megalantha S.T. Reynolds, E. microcarpa S.T.

Reynolds. The author recorded it feeding on Jagera pseudorhus (A. Rich.)

Radlk. (Sapindaceae) at Iron Range in December 2010 (Fig. 4). Lyramorpha

parens also feeds on the exotic sapindaceous fruit trees lychee (specimens in

the Mareeba DPI collection from Innisfail) and rambutan, Nephelium

lappaceum L. (Astridge 2006), but is not of pest status. Thus both Australian

species of Lyramorpha apparently feed exclusively on Sapindaceae. Fig. 1

shows an adult and several late stage nymphs feeding together at an internode

of Castanospora alphandii.

Gende and Kumar (2001) listed Dodonea viscosa Jacq., plus a variety of non-

sapindaceous plants, from label data of New Guinea specimens identified as

Lyramorpha parens. However, both the identity of the Lyramorpha and the

feeding status of the plant records need confirmation and will not be pursued

for this Australian treatment.

The only breeding behaviour noted previously has been of a female brooding

a clutch of 40 eggs (Monteith 2006). A photograph taken at Kuranda by Dr

David Rentz (Fig. 2) shows a female standing guard over about 20 uniformly

sized nymphs. First instars in Oncomerinae are invariably subglobose in

shape and become flattened when they moult to second instar (Kumar 1969,

Monteith 2006). In L. rosea the nymphal colour pattern changes from

chequered red and black in first and second instars to uniform red in the older

instars (Kumar 1969); this also seems to be the case in L. parens. Based on

the size of the nymphs in Fig. 2, their flattened form and their colour pattern,

it can be assumed that they are second instars. This is evidence that L. parens

broods its young beyond moulting to the second instar.

Observations by Alan Gillanders show that the older nymphs of L. parens

form massed groups, which feed together and frequently move in close-

packed groups to new feeding sites when old sites are exhausted. They are

often to be found on non-host plants while in transit (Fig. 3). Clearly, their

brilliant aposematic colours reinforce the group defence they enjoy from their

dorsal defence glands during these exposed journeys. This feeding strategy

contrasts with that of oncomerines such as Cumare and Peltocopta, which

have solitary, camouflaged and rather sedentary later-stage nymphs

(Monteith 2006).

Musgraveia antennatus (Distant, 1880)

The southern citrus pest, Musgraveia sulciventris, feeds solely on native and

cultivated species of Citrus (Rutaceae), including species of ‘native limes'

previously included in the genera Eremocitrus Swingle and Microcitrus

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1) 43

Swingle, now placed in Citrus (Henderson 2002). The rare Musgraveia

antennatus is found only in Torres Strait (Moa Island) and northern Cape

York Peninsula. Sinclair (2000) recorded it from cultivated West Indian Lime

(Citrus aurantiifolia (Christm.) Swingle) and there is a record from cultivated

Pomelo (Citrus maxima Merr.) at Lockhart River in the AQIS collection,

Cairns (Sally Cowan pers. comm.). It overlaps with the native Citrus

garrawayi F.M. Bailey in the southern part of its range (Iron Range) and this

plant is a candidate for a natural host, but in the northern part of its range

(Lockerbie, Torres Strait) there are no native Citrus (fide Australia's Virtual

Herbarium, http://www.ersa.edu.au/avh/ and Garry Sankowsky pers. comm.)

and it must have a non-Citrus native host there. Mr Sankowsky suggests this

may be the rutaceous Zanthoxylum rhetsa (Roxb.) DC, which is common in

the region and used there by various citrus-breeding papilionid butterflies.

Oncoscelis australasiae Westwood, 1837 (Figs 5-9)

Cassis and Gross (2002) restored the original generic name Oncoscelis

Westwood for this species, instead of Rhoecus Bergroth or Rhoecocoris

Bergroth which have usually been used in modern times (e.g. Leston and

Scudder 1957, Sinclair 2000).

There are no published observations on the biology of this large but

uncommon species apart from records on Melicope micrococca (F. Muell.)

T.G. Hartley (Rutaceae) by Sinclair (2000). It has also been taken on

Melicope elleryana (F. Muell.) T.G. Hartley on Stradbroke Island (pers.

obs.). A specimen (in QM) from near Harrington, NSW, was taken on

Acronychia oblongifolia (А. Cunn ex Hook.) Endl. ex Heynh (Rutaceae) by

Geoff Williams, who reports that it also occurs there on Acronychia

imperforata F. Muell. In February 2009, Chris Burwell (QM) discovered a

colony feeding and breeding on Medicosma cunninghamii (Hook.) Hook. f.

(Rutaceae) along upper Enoggera Creek near Brisbane.

Several adults from this last collection were brought to the Queensland

Museum and maintained on the food plant in plastic bags. On 7 February, a

female laid a batch of 14 eggs on the underside of a leaf and took up a

guarding position over them (Fig. 5). The eggs were arranged in the standard

3,4,4,3 pattern (Fig. 6), which has been described for several other species

(Monteith 2006). The eggs were large (3.2 mm diameter), spherical, with 46-

48 micropyles, the largest number known for any oncomerine. The female

abandoned the eggs during photography two days after deposition. They

hatched on 20 February to give convex, non-feeding, white nymphs (Fig. 7)

which clustered together in an immobile group until the night of 27 February,

when all moulted to highly flattened, semi-transparent second instars (Fig. 8)

which dispersed. This post-hatching nymphal behaviour indicates that the

female would almost certainly have continued to brood the first instars until

their moult, as is usually the case (Monteith 2006).

A4 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

Figs 7-14. Oncomerinae. (7-9) Oncoscelis australasiae on Medicosma cunninghamii:

(7) eggs hatching to 1st instar nymphs; (8) newly hatched 2nd instar and exuvium; (9)

male showing enlarged hind legs. (10-12) Peltocopta crassiventris: (10) female from

Toogoom; (11) 2nd instar on underside of Mallotus discolor leaf; (12) female being

predated by grey butcher bird. (13-14) Plisthenes australis: (13) male (L) and female

on Aglaia meridionalis; (14) two adults and a nymph on presumed Aglaia sapindina.

Photos: J. Wright (7-9), M. Robinson (10-12), M. Cermak (13), G. Monteith (14).

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1) 45

Peltocopta crassiventris (Bergroth 1895) (Fig 10-12, 15)

This extremely rare species has been known from a few coastal localities

over a latitudinal range of 160 km between Iluka in New South Wales and

Surfers Paradise in Queensland (Monteith 2006). Its only food plant is

Mallotus discolor F. Muell. ex Benth. (Euphorbiaceae) and it exhibits the

most advanced maternal care known in the family. In late March 2010, Mrs

M. Robinson recorded the species from her garden at Toogoom

(25.258°S152.696°E), which is on the coast 330 km further north. Females

(Fig. 10) carrying both first and second instar nymphs (Fig. 11) were present.

The author visited and confirmed that the host plants were M. discolor which

was very abundant in this area of partly cleared remnant rainforest. This is a

major range extension for this unique species.

In December 2010, Mrs Robinson noted many bugs on the same trees at

Toogoom, with specimens commonly falling from overhanging Mallotus

trees onto the driveway and verandahs of the house. This coincided with a

heavy wet season and parallels the population outbreak of this usually rare

species described by Monteith (2006) at Surfers Paradise in 1961 and for

several years thereafter. Other observations by Mrs Robinson included

several instances of the unique copulation posture adopted by this species,

including one involving a female that was brooding a batch of 33 eggs at the

time (Fig. 15). Although Pe/tocopta has the same acrid defense secretions

shared by other oncomerines, a successful predation of a female by a grey

butcher bird, Cracticus torquatus (Latham), was also noted (Fig. 12).

Fig. 15. Peltocopta crassiventris: male and female in copulation above a clutch of 33

eggs, which the female was brooding when copultaion was initiated. Note the bright

colours of the male (left) compared with the pallid female. Photo: M. Robinson.

46 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

Plisthenes australis Horváth, 1900 (Figs 13-14)

Sinclair (2000) listed the locality of Byfield (22.858°S, 150.695°E) as the

southern limit for this otherwise far northern tropical species. The specimen

on which this is based has proved to be Oncoscelis australasiae, so the

southern limit for Plisthenes australis is now confirmed as being 740 km

further north at the Mulgrave River (17.34S°).

The only foodplant listed for this species is Citrus, in the Rutaceae (Sinclair

2000). This record is based on a single specimen taken from a planted West

Indian Lime tree at Iron Range in 1978 by M. DeBaar (now in the

Queensland Forestry Collection). This same individual tree is usually host for

the related citrus-feeding Musgraveia antennatus (pers. obs.) Citrus is

commonly available within the range of Plisthenes Stal so, without other

feeding records, it seems best to treat this single specimen as just a resting

record. Two confirmed host records are now available for P. australis on

Aglaia Lour. in the Meliaceae: Michael Cermak photographed it on Aglaia

meridionalis Pannell at Cape Tribulation in 2004 (Fig. 13) and the present

writer took it feeding with nymphs on a plant identified by experienced field

botanist Garry Sankowsky, from the May 1973 photograph taken at

Lockerbie (Fig. 14), as almost certainly Aglaia sapindina (F. Muell.) Harms.

Stilida indecora Stàl, 1863

Monteith (2006) recorded and pictured a female brooding a clutch of 42 eggs

which hatched into first instars. These nymphs dispersed because the food

plant was dead, so it was not possible to be sure that normally they would

have been brooded until the critical moulting from first to second instar. This

has now been confirmed: in February 2007, a female (in QM) was taken on a

species of Arytera in vine scrub at ‘Toomba’ station (19.966°S, 145.582°E),

brooding a mass of nymphs on top of a hatched clutch of 36 eggs. There were

12 first instars and 20 seconds, demonstrating that female brooding does

persist to the second instar.

Discussion

With the additions and corrections presented here we now have a relatively

full body of reliable information on the biology and distribution of the 15

accepted species of Australian Tessaratomidae (Table 1). Host plants are

known for 12 species and at least partial breeding behaviour is recorded for

10 species. Nothing of this behaviour is known for the giant, lowland,

northern Queensland species Oncomeris flavicornis (Guérin, 1831), or for the

curious endemic monotypic genus and species Tibiospina darlingtoni

Sinclair, 2000, known from high altitudes in the Wet Tropics. The author

would welcome observations on these or other species.

Australian oncomerines feed on a relatively limited range of plant taxa,

comprising only seven families in four plant orders. All genera of

oncomerines are restricted to a single plant family. In the Malvales, Garceus

Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1) 47

occurs on Elaeocarpaceae; in the Fabales, Agapophyta Guérin and Erga

Walker occur on the legume families Caesalpiniaceae and Fabaceae

respectively; in the Euphorbiales both Peltocopta and Cumare feed on

Euphorbiaceae; in the Sapindales, Lyramorpha and Stilida Stàl feed on

Sapindaceae; Oncoscelis and Musgraveia Leston & Scudder feed on

Rutaceae; and Plisthenes on Meliaceae.

The Oncomerinae show five progressive levels of maternal care: (1), those

that lay eggs and abandon them (Musgraveia sulciventris); (2), those in

which the female broods the eggs until hatching (Erga and Agapophyta); (3),

those in which the female continues to brood the sedentary first instars until

they moult to second instars (Stilida and Oncoscelis); (4), those in which

females continue to shepherd mobile second instars (Lyramorpha parens);

(5), those in which the brooding female is modified to carry the first and

second instars on her body after hatching (Peltocopta, Cumare and Garceus).

This study confirms that more species than previously suspected guard their

young until the second instar. This supports the idea proposed by Monteith

(2006) that maternal care is largely a device to protect the vulnerable, usually

non-feeding, sub-globose first instars (Fig. 7) until they moult to the

flattened, camouflaged second instars, which disperse and begin to feed (Figs

8, 11).

As evidence for maternal care in more species accumulates, the complete

lack of parental care in Musgraveia sulciventris becomes more unusual.

Maternal care slows the potential for rapid population increase because

females invest time and energy in one egg clutch. Two of the three natural

food plants of M. sulciventris are typical of dry vine forests (Citrus

australasica F. Muell.) or of inland plains (C. glauca (Lindl.) Burkill), where

rainfall and plant growth are seasonal and unreliable. For M. sulciventris, the

loss of maternal care and the ability to produce multiple eggs clutches (Cant

et al. 19962) might give populations the ability to multiply rapidly in

temporarily favourable conditions. This characteristic of the species may

have pre-adapted it for the pest status it gained when cultivated citrus became

available.

Acknowledgements

I am grateful to the following for allowing me to include their observations:

Chris Burwell (QM, Brisbane), Michael Cermak (Cairns), Murdoch DeBaar

(Brisbane), Alan Gillanders (Yungaburra), David Rentz (Kuranda), Meg

Robinson (Toogoom), Garry Sankowsky (Tolga) and Geoff Williams

(Lansdowne). Photos are by Michael Cermak, Meg Robinson, Alan

Gillanders, Jeff Wright (QM, Brisbane) and David Rentz. Harry Fay

(DEEDI, Mareeba) helped with information about lychee feeders.

48 Australian Entomologist, 2011, 38 (1)

References

ASTRIDGE, D. 2006. Rambutan - development of integrated pest management. RIRDC

Publication No 15/187; 59 pp.

CANT, R.G., SPOONER-HART, R.N., BEATTIE, G.A.C. and MEATS, A. 1996a. The biology

and ecology of the Bronze Orange Bug, Musgraveia sulciventris (Stál). A literature review. Part

1. Description, biology, host species and distribution. General and Applied Entomology 27: 19-

29.

CANT, R.G., SPOONER-HART, R.N., BEATTIE, С.А.С. and MEATS, А. 1996b. The biology

and ecology of the Bronze Orange Bug, Musgraveia sulciventris (Stal). A literature review. Part

2. Feeding, control, defensive secretions, pheromones, reproduction and aggregation. General

and Applied Entomology 27: 30-42.

CASSIS, G. and GROSS, G.F. 2002. Hemiptera: Heteroptera (Pentatomoidea). In: Houston,

W.W.K. and Maynard, G.V. (eds), Zoological Catalogue of Australia, Vol. 27.3B. CSIRO

Publishing, Melbourne; xiv + 732 pp.

DODD, F.P. 1904. Notes on maternal instinct in Rhynchota. Transactions of the Entomological

Society of London 1904, pt iii, pp 483-486, plate 28.

DODD, F.P. 1916. Observations on various insects in N. Queensland. Transactions of the

Entomological Society of London 1916, pt il, pp xxv-xxviii.

GENDE, P. and KUMAR, R. 2001. Distribution and host plants of three genera of Papua New

Guinean Oncomerinae (Heteroptera: Pentatomoidea: Tessaratomidae). Science in New Guinea

26(1-3): 46-51.

GOGALA, M., YONG, H.-S. and BRUHL, C. 1998. Maternal care in Pygoplatys bugs

(Heteroptera: Tessaratomidae). European Journal of Entomology 95: 311-315.

GROSS, G.F. 1975. Plant-feeding and other bugs (Hemiptera) of South Australia. Heteroptera,

Part 1. A.B. James, Adelaide; 250 pp, 3 colour plates.

HENDERSON, R.J.F. 2002. Names and distribution of Queensland plants, algae and lichens.

Queensland Herbarium, Environmental Protection Agency; 280 pp.

KUMAR, R. 1969. Morphology and relationships of the Pentatomoidea (Heteroptera) IV.

Oncomerinae (Tessaratomidae). Australian Journal of Zoology 17: 553-606.

LESTON, D. and SCUDDER, G.G.E. 1957. The taxonomy of the bronze orange-bug and related

Australian oncomerinae (Hemiptera: Tessaratomidae). Annals and Magazine of Natural History

12: 439-448.

MONTEITH, G.B. 2006. Maternal care in Australian oncomerine shield bugs (Insecta,

Heteroptera, Tessaratomidae). Pp 1135-1152, in: Rabitsch, W. (ed.), Hug the bug - for the love

of true bugs. Festschrift zum 70. Geburtstag von Ernst Heiss. Denisia 19: 1-1184.

MUSGRAVE, A. and WHITLEY, G.P. 1931. Nature rambles at Trial Bay. Australian Museum

Magazine 4: 149-155.

RIDER, D. 2010. Plant host records. Tessaratomidae. (Accessed June 12 2010).

http://Awww.ndsu.nodak.edu/ndsw/rider/Pentatomoidea/Hosts/plant. Tessaratomidae.htm

SINCLAIR, D.P. 2000. A generic revision of the Oncomerinae (Hemiptera: Heteroptera:

Tessaratomidae). Memoirs of the Queensland Museum 46(1): 307-329.

WAITE, G.K. and HWANG, J.S. 2002. Pests of litchi and longan. Pp 331-359, in: Pena, J.E.,

Sharp. J.L. and Wysoki, M. (eds), Tropical fruit pests and pollinators: biology, economic

importance, natural enemies and control. CAB Publishing, Wallingford; 430 pp.

ENTOMOLOGICAL NOTICES

Items for insertion should be sent to the editor who reserves the right to

alter, reject or charge for notices.

NOTES FOR AUTHORS

Manuscripts submitted for publication can be submitted as either hardcopies

or electronically. Three copies (double spaced text and illustrations) of

hardcopy manuscripts should be submitted. Manuscripts submitted in digital

format should be sent in Microsoft Word. Digital illustrations should be sent

initially as low resolution images in a separate Word file, as low resolution

JPEGs, or as low resolution PDF files, with figure numbers indicated clearly

for each figure. Digital manuscripts may be sent via email to

federica.turco@qm.qld.gov.au Hardcopy manuscripts and digital

manuscripts on disc should be sent to:

The Editorial Co-ordinator

The Australian Entomologist

P.O. Box 537,

Indooroopilly, Qld, 4068

Authors should refer to recent issues for layout and style. All papers will be

forwarded to two referees and the editor reserves the right to reject any

paper considered unsuitable.

It is editorial policy that usage of taxonomic nomenclature will comply with

the mandatory provisions of the International Code of Zoological

Nomenclature.

Papers longer than twenty printed pages will not normally be accepted.

Publication costs are $25 per page. This covers unlimited use of colour

which is encouraged. These costs include the supply of a pdf copy of the

paper and 10 hardcopy reprints to the senior author. Papers occupying one

printed page or less may be accepted without charge if no reprints are

required. Reprints may be supplied for one page papers at the normal cost,

by arrangement. Page charges may be reduced at the discretion of the

Publications Committee. An application for reduction must be made, with

reasons, at the time of acceptance of the manuscript.

Further information for authors is given on the ESQ website at

WWNW.eSq.org.au

Printed by ABC Printing, 2 Dorsey Street, Milton, 4064.

THE AUSTRALIAN

Entomologist

Volume 38, Part 1, 25 March 2011

CONTENTS

BRABY, M. F., DOUGLAS, F. and WILLAN, R. C.

The nomenclature of Ogyris halmaturia (Tepper, 1890)

(Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae)

KALLIES, А. апа MOLLET, B.

А new species of forester moth from Victoria (Lepidoptera:

Zygaenidae: Procridinae)

MONTEITH, G. B.

Maternal care, food plants and distribution of Australian Oncomerinae

(Hemiptera: Heteroptera: Tessaratomidae) 37

THEISCHINGER, G., MILLER, J., TANG, C., KROGH, M. and POPE, E.

The benefits of using both adult and larval stoneflies (Plecoptera)

in environmental surveys: an example from New South Wales with

a summary of the Australian stonefly fauna

ISSN 1320 6133