NOTA

4 | HE NATURAL ;

, MISTORY MUSEUM

28 WAY 7009

PURCHASED

ENTOMOLOGY LIBRARY

LEPIDOPTEROLOGICA

A journal focussed on Palaearctic and General Lepidopterology

Published by the Societas Europaea Lepidopterologica e.V.

http://www.soceurlep.eu

Editors

Dr Niklas Wahlberg (Turku, FIN), e-mail: niklas.wahlberg @utu.fi

Dr Bernard Landry (Geneve, CH), e-mail: bernard.landry @ville-ge.ch

Dr Matthias Nuss (Dresden, D), e-mail: matthias.nuss@snsd.smwk.sachsen.de

Editorial Board

Dr Enrique Garcia-Barros (Madrid, E), Prof. Dr Roger L. H. Dennis (Wilmslow, UK),

Dr Thomas Fartmann (Miinster, D), Dr Axel Hausmann (Munich, D), Dr Peter Huemer

(Unnsbruck, A), Ole Karsholt (Copenhagen, DK), Dr Yuri P. Nekrutenko (Kiev, UA),

Dr Erik van Nieukerken (Leiden, NL), Dr Thomas Schmitt (Trier, D), Dr Wolfgang Speide!

(Bonn, D), Dr Carlos Lopez-Vaamonde (F)

Volume 32 No. 1 - Dresden, 15.5.2009 - ISSN 0342-7536

Contents

Klaus Sattler & W. Gerald Tremewan. The authorship of the so-called

RI eM eo ee ay cocks ies ads os cn suasivoyhghatNevasiudheavecencncaduoonspesantons

Thomas Sobezyk & Max J. Kobbert. Die Psychidae des baltischen Bernsteins .........

Bernd Miiller & Peder Skou. Records of larvae of Eupithecia lentiscata Mabille,

Me ee SIRT (CICCIMICUNORE) .aciccvsssceanacenwsnqpenpsacscadecescenanssercegsscnacasasancessseccersees

Anja Jaschke & Detlef Kolligs. Oviposition habitat and feeding behaviour

of the dingy skipper (Erynnis tages (Linnaeus, 1758), in Schleswig-Holstein

PEP TIRIANY )(RIGCOSCTHOGE) 5......<cc0ececcysnceterssceccsisessceesecansnnecsenscenoenseesssscenessoses

Tomas Kadlec, Pavel Vrba & Martin Konvicka. Microhabitat requirements

of caterpillars of the critically endangered butterfly Chazara briseis (L.)

(Nymphalidae, Satyrinae) in the Czech Republic ................cceceeeeseeeeeeeeeeeeneeneeees

sees ~~

27-37

ee 39—46

- ans. On the identity of Psodos perlinii Turati, 1914

(Geomel dae: Ennominae) wien wa clewecleuc'e'we.e qi e'cis.cig.e eluc-t'e:eya a /elnlels o\clefelcieve einiereiorsiolelcleieieteleetts ara eteiistet slate ea eeotet tee

Tatyana A. Trofimova. Atomorpha punctistrigaria (Christoph, 1893)

(Geometridae, Ennominae) — a new geometrid species 3

for the fauna of Europe ..........:...cccescdesesetonaensarecssspeeeecer let ceeen:. > eee Pena eee

Andreas Triinkner, Houhun Li & Matthias Nuss. On the systematics = a

of Anania Hiibner, 1823 (Pyraloidea: Crambidae: Pyraustinae) sites Rinne 63-80. Sam

Kosmat Marko & Rudi Verovnik. First record of Cacyreus marshalli . ae a ; -

(Lycaenidae) from the Balkan Peninsula: .................c.c.eiesesecsesnaeegecenescarteerie eee BL 8): ——

Barner eer oe seoe2 kc, capes Cb ee ee ee ie 12, 38, 83, 84 = =

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 3—10 3

The authorship of the so-called ‘Wiener Verzeichnis’

KLAUS SATTLER ' & W. GERALD TREMEWAN 7

' Department of Entomology, Natural History Museum, Cromwell Road, London SW7 5BD, U.K.;

email: k.sattler@nhm.ac.uk

> Pentreath, 6 Carlyon Road, Playing Place, Truro, Cornwall TR3 6EU, U.K.;

email: wet.pentreath @btinternet.com

Abstract. The authorship of the so-called “Wiener Verzeichnis’, published anonymously in Vienna in

1775/1776, is discussed. In the interest of stability, it is contended that the work should be attributed

to [Denis & Schiffermiiller], as cited by the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature in

Opinion 516 (1958). Moreover, evidence is provided showing that contemporaries of Ignaz Schiffermiiller

and Michael Denis also considered the work to have been written by ‘die Theresianer’, i.e. multiple

authors, and not by Schiffermiiller alone, as considered by some current authors.

Introduction

The authorship of the anonymously published, so-called “Wiener Verzeichnis’ has

almost always been attributed to Michael Denis and Ignaz Schiffermiiller. Moreover,

the work was even attributed to these authors by the International Commission on

Zoological Nomenclature in Opinion 516 (Hemming 1958). However, in a recent

paper, Kudrna & Belicek (2005) present what they consider to be ‘totally convincing’

evidence that Schiffermiiller alone was the author. As we shall demonstrate, there are

many flaws in their arguments and, as a consequence, we consider their conclusions to

be incorrect. .

The ‘Wiener Verzeichnis’

The famous “Wiener Verzeichnis’ of 1775/1776 was the most influential work on early

European lepidopterology towards the end of the 18th century and has repeatedly been

the subject of papers concerning its correct title, year of issue, authorship and availability

of names. It was first published in 1775 under the title Ankiindung eines systematischen

Werkes von den Schmetterlingen der Wienergegend and, a year later, as Systematisches

Verzeichnif der Schmetterlinge der Wienergegend. Although the different titles suggest

different editions the text was printed only once (Prout 1900: 158); however, there are

two different frontispieces (Kudrna & Belicek 2005: figs 4, 5), two different title pages

(Kudrna & Belicek 2005: figs 2,7) and two different, mirror-reversed versions of the

plates (both versions coloured and uncoloured). These were subsequently combined in

several different ways, but as entomologists only ever had two or three copies available

for comparison they believed that there existed different, clearly definable editions of

the work (Sattler 1970; Wolff 1972).

Kudrna & Belicek call attention to a remarkable copy of the ‘Wiener Verzeichnis’ in the

present library of the Theresianum in Vienna. That copy is unique in that it has both title

pages (1775, 1776), the two known frontispieces, two mirror-reversed monochrome

Nota lepidopterologica, 15.5.2009, ISSN 0342-7536

4 SATTLER & TREMEWAN: Authorship of the so-called “Wiener Verzeichnis’

plates and two mirror-reversed colour plates. A closer study would be worthwhile to

establish whether it could have been Schiffermiiller’s working copy, as Kudrna &

Belicek consider possible. It should be noted that in the library of the Forschungsinstitut

und Naturmuseum Senckenberg in Frankfurt there exists another interesting copy that

initially belonged to J. C. Gerning (who is mentioned in the Nachtrag of the “Wiener

Verzeichnis’ as the collector of several species from Frankfurt) and was later acquired

by C. von Heyden. This copy is also accompanied by both title pages and additionally

has a unique printed index of 29 pages with independent pagination (pp. 1-29), which

lists, in double column, all the species in the ‘Verzeichnis’. Although obviously in-

tended to be alphabetical, the index is curiously jumbled with some individual names

and even entire sections appearing out of sequence in unexpected places. The index is

clearly of the same time as the ‘Wiener Verzeichnis’ but differs in the vignette at the

top of each page. Promitzer (1990: 433) mentioned such an index as published in 1776;

however. we do not know whether that information is based on the Frankfurt copy or

whether there exists a second copy elsewhere.

The original water-colour illustrations may not have been executed by Schiffermiiller

himself (as Kudrna & Belicek, p. 4 imply) but were perhaps the work of Landerer (who

was responsible for the two different frontispieces) and possibly other artists, as implied

on p. 237 (*... um uns und unsere ... Kiinstler [plural] zu tiben ...’). There is also a

reference in Schr6ter (1776: Vorrede) according to which the illustrations will be made

.. unter der Aufsicht [under the supervision] des Herrn Professor Schiefermiiller ...’.

In our opinion, Kudrna & Belicek (2005: 5) make too much of a distinction between

editorship and authorship that was not as clear in the 18th century as it is today.

Interpreting the words ‘herausgegeben von ...’, meaning issued by ... [literally: given

out|, in modern terms as editor, editor-in-chief or scientific editor, is stretching it too

far. We agree with them that these words do not clearly indicate two authors — nor,

however, do they preclude the existence of two authors — but they certainly indicate that

there was more than one author involved.

The fact that a copy in the Senckenberg library in Frankfurt has both title pages even

led to speculation that only the Systematisches Verzeichnis existed, and that the title

page Ankiindung had originally been merely part of a brief prospectus that was later

added to the Verzeichnis by a librarian (Sattler 1970: 2). A similar copy with both title

pages is present in the library of the Theresianum in Vienna (see above). But several

copies having solely the Ankiindung title are also known (Kudrna & Belicek, 2005: 4)

and it is evident that the book was originally distributed under that title.

There is no doubt that the Ankiindung was to announce a detailed work on the Vines

Lepidoptera to be entitled Die Schmetterlinge der Wienergegend untersuchet, und

systematisch beschrieben. The authors say so quite clearly in their introduction (pp. 5—9,

I. Abschnitt. Entwurf des Werkes) where they discuss at length the layout of the work to

come; they also give two sample plates (pls Ia, Ib) with detailed accompanying text ae

244-304) on the illustrated species. Schiffermiiller had secretly begun to collect insects

ue ena s'¢ (Promitze Pat a Secte 2003: 12), but when this became more

nongst his coll “nee such enthusiastic eoecnineg on

ally his friend Den pein ey 1764 |

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 3-10 5

of producing a comprehensive, well-illustrated work on the Lepidoptera of the Vienna

district. By good fortune someone in their midst had artistic talent (and experience in

architectural drawings) and undertook to draw the larvae from live specimens because

their colours could not be preserved. Seven years later, on 16 March 1771, the foreword

(‘An den Leser’) was dated, presumably on completion of the manuscript for the

Ankiindung (pp. 1-304); as a result of long delays in press, a supplement (“Nachtrag’,

pp. 305-322) was added, followed by an unnumbered page with a few corrections of

misprints and errors, before the book was finally published in 1775. By that time it had

become clear that changed circumstances no longer permitted the completion of such

an ambitious project (Denis, 1780), and that may have been the reason for changing

the title from Ankiindung [announcement] to Systematisches Verzeichnif [systematic

check list].

With regard to the title Ankiindung (rather than Ankiindigung) it was quite unnecessary

for Kudrna & Belicek (2005: 3) to pour scorn on Hemming for having meticulously

marked the appearance of the word Ankiindung with ‘[sic]’ wherever it occurred in

Opinion 516. Moreover, it is also immaterial whether the noun Ankiindung was

correct in the 18th century — Kudrna & Belicek erroneously refer to the 17th century

— it is sufficiently unusual that the insertion of ‘[sic]’ behind it, whilst perhaps a little

pedantic, was by no means unjustified. After all, the Viennese authors themselves used

the more usual standard German Ankiindigung in the body of their text (p. 8) and so

did their contemporaries such as the anonymous reviewer in the Jenaische Zeitungen

(Anonymous 1775) and Schréter (1776) amongst others.

On this subject Hemming (1958: 20) stated reasonably enough:

‘Note on the title of the above work: The first word of the title of this work is commonly

cited in the literature as being “Ankiindigung”, though sometimes it appears in the

shorter form “Ankiindung”’. ... Inspection of the copy of this work in the Linnean

Society of London shows however that the spelling used in its title is the archaic

shortened form “Ankitindung” and not the longer form “Anktindigung” which would

be employed today.’

Before accusing Hemming of being ‘obviously unfamiliar with the German language

...., Kudrna & Belicek should have read Opinion 516 carefully and having done so

ensured the accuracy of German words used in their own paper (e.g. ‘geistlicher Vater’

when ‘geistiger Vater’ was meant). Had Hemming not had a thorough knowledge of

German, it would hardly have been possible for him to have done so much research

on the ‘Wiener Verzeichnis’, or on the works of Hiibner, Herrich-Schaffer, etc., which

culminated in his two-volume magnum opus Hiibner published in 1937.

The date of publication

In accordance with the provisions of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature,

the International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (Hemming 1958)

established the Ankiindung as ‘published on an unspecified date after 17" May 1775 and

before 8" December 1775’, the latter being the date when the work was first reviewed

in Jenaische Zeitungen von Gelehrten Sachen (not ‘gelehrnten’ as Kudrna & Belicek

6 SATTLER & TREMEWAN: Authorship of the so-called ‘Wiener Verzeichnis’

write). This was the best evidence at the time and Kudrna & Belicek’s contention that

‘this decision is wrong’ is itself disputable, because the date of Schiffermiiller’s letter

to Linnaeus (11 September 1775) is still within that range. Had that letter materially

affected the decision in Opinion 516, the Commission would have been informed of

that fact at the time of its discovery (Sattler 1970).

The authorship

Who exactly is entitled to authorship or co-authorship of a scientific publication? Surely

not just the person who finally puts pen to paper or, nowadays, finger to keyboard. In

the present authors’ view the authorship of a scientific work should primarily reflect the

scientific responsibility for anything that is published! In determining the authorship of

the “Wiener Verzeichnis’ we consider as paramount the wishes of the people involved, in

particular those of Schiffermiiller as the leading author. Schiffermiiller’s autobiography,

which is preserved in manuscript form, leaves no doubt that he had only agreed to this

enterprise after Denis promised his help. Collaboration between him and Denis grew

extremely close, in fact, so much so that never was anything written up unless both of

them were satisfied of its accuracy (Promitzer 1990: 432).

We also attach some weight to the views of contemporary authors who, almost without

exception, considered the ‘Wiener Verzeichnis’ as the work of more than one author

and, more specifically, as that of Schiffermiiller & Denis or vice versa. With regard to

the sequence of authors’ names it should be noted that in the distant past senior/junior

or firsUsecond author has never played the role that it does nowadays in Anglo-Saxon

countries; in fact, authors were frequently listed in alphabetical sequence and there

were fewer, if any, squabbles over who should be cited first.

From the very beginning the contemporaries of Michael Denis and Ignaz Schiffermiiller

used almost exclusively the plural when talking of the authorship, as hardly any of them

had any doubt about a multiple authorship of the ‘Wiener Verzeichnis’. But the collection

was usually, though not exclusively, considered as belonging to Schiffermiiller; it

went with him to Linz, where it was consulted by, amongst others, Schrank (in 1783),

Fabricius (in 1784) and Hiibner (in 1797), before Schiffermiiller took it with him into

his retirement in Waizenkirchen from where it was taken to Vienna after his death, only

to be destroyed by fire in 1848. All that survives today are some duplicates that were

given to Fabricius on the occasion of his visit to Linz (Karsholt & Gielis 1995: 32).

ironically, had attempts at that time succeeded in securing the collection for the British

Museum (Speta 2003: 13) it would still be in existence!

There follows a sample of contemporary views on the authorship of the ‘Wiener

Verzeichnis’.

Anonymous (1775) refers to ‘[die]Herren Professoren Schiffermiiller und Denis’.

Schroter (1776: Vorrede,pp.{i]—[xx],[xiv]—[xvii]) refers to ‘Hr Professor Schiefermiiller,

und Herr Professor Denis’. ;

Esper (1776-{1830]; 1: 98, 190, 211; 2: 224) refers to ‘Die Herren Verfasser [plural for

Author’] des Verzeichnisses der Wiener Schmetterlinge ..

Denis (1780) refers to ‘Schiffermiiller und Denis’.

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 3-10 7

Schrank (1785), who visited Schiffermiiller in Linz and consulted his collection, refers

to ‘Herr Rath Schiffermiiller’ and his system only, without mentioning Denis.

Illiger (1801: vii) refers to “Denis & Schiffermiiller’ and ‘Das System der Wiener

[plural] (unter dem Namen ist es allgemein bekannt.)’. When this new edition of

the “Wiener Verzeichnis’ was published, Denis (1729-1800) had only just died

whilst Schiffermitiller (1727—1806) lived for another five years.

Ochsenheimer (1807: 12) refers to ‘... die Verfasser [plural] des Verzeichnisses der

Schmetterlinge der Wiener Gegend ...’.

Fabricius (1819: 107) refers to ‘... die Verfasser [plural] des Verzeichnisses der

Schmetterlinge der Wiener Gegend ...’. He mentions that he had met Denis

(and other entomologists) in Vienna before proceeding to Linz specifically to see

Schiffermiiller and his collection, referring to him as ‘Der eigentliche Verfasser [the

principle author] des Wiener Verzeichnisses, Schiefermiiller ...’. We are aware that

‘Der eigentliche Verfasser ...’ might leave some room for interpretation but in the

light of the simultaneous reference to ‘die Verfasser’ [plural] a few lines earlier we

cannot translate it other than as principle or leading or main author.

Charpentier (1821: vii) refers to *... Sammlung Schiffermillers [sic]...’ and ‘... von

Schiffermillers Hand geschriebenen Bestimmungen...’. Otherwise he refers quite

consistently throughout the book to *... die Theresianer ... (der Theresianer, den

Theresianern)’ (plural, e.g. pp. 39, 56, 81, 101, 150).

Zincken, genannt Sommer, in Charpentier (1821: Vorrede, p. xii) refers to *... Sammlung

der Verfasser ...’ (plural).

Percheron (1837) lists the “Wiener Verzeichnis’ first under Denis (“conjointement avec

Schiffer-Muller [sic]’) (1: 82) and later under ‘Schiffer (Muller)’ (‘conjoiniement

[sic] avec Denis’) (2: 39), in both instances referring to the Verzeichnis (although

under slightly different titles) but citing it as published in 1775. Both entries are full

of spelling errors.

Hiibner (1816—[1825]) uses extreme abbreviations (‘Schiff. Verz.’) in the Verzeichniss

bekannter Schmettlinge, but reference to other Hiibner works shows that it was not

meant to signify single authorship by Schiffermiiller as Kudrna & Belicek (2005:

6) suggest. Hiibner’s other works demonstrate that he was well aware of the multiple

authorship. For example, in the Systematisch-alphabetisches Verzeichniss (1822:

v) he specifically introduced the abbreviation ‘S’ for ‘Schiffermiiller und Denis’;

there is also ample reference to multiple authors (‘... die Herren Theresianer...’

[plural]) or even specifically to ‘Schiffermiiller und Denis’ in the Sammlung euro-

paischer Schmetterlinge.

Hiibner made many references to the Wiener Verzeichniss in volumes | and 8 of his

Sammlung europdischer Schmetterlinge (1796—[1836]), as follows:

1: [i]: ‘Die von ... den Herren Theresianern, Schiffermiiller und Denis ... den

Schmetterlingen ertheilten Namen ... ’.

1: 3, footnote 3: ‘Diese Benennung [Schmetterlinge] fiihrten schon die ehemaligen

Herren Theresianer [plural!], durch ihr systematisches Verzeichnif der

Schmetterlinge der Wienergegend ein, ... °. The very first species mentioned

8 SATTLER & TREMEWAN: Authorship of the so-called “Wiener Verzeichnis’

in that volume is referred to as Papilio Cynthia der Theresianer [plural!],

whilst in following species the authors are abbreviated to ‘d. Ther.’.

1: 124: ‘Die Herren Theresianer, Schiffermiiller und Denis ...’. In addition there is

ample reference to ‘die Herren Theresianer ...’ [plural] throughout the text

(e.g. pp. 6,43, 45,47, 61).

8: [3]: °... die Lehrer [plural] am ... Theresianum ...’.

In their eagerness to prove Schiffermiillers’s sole authorship, Kudrna & Belicek have

missed a rare but decisive document in which Denis himself lists his name as that of

co-author. In a catalogue, published in 1780, of the ‘Merkwiirdigkeiten’ [curiosities] in

the Garelli library, of which Denis was at that time the librarian, he recorded, for the

year 1776, ‘Systematisches VerzeichniB der Schmetterlinge der Wienergegend, heraus-

gegeben von einigen Lehrern am k.k. Ther. Verlegts Bernardi. gr. 4. von Schiffermiiller

und Denis [the present writers’ emphasis].’ Denis goes on to say that the continuation

of that work had been interrupted for some years, as a result of Schiffermiiller having

been promoted to the directorship of the Nordisches Collegium in Linz (Denis 1780).

Kudrna & Belicek (2005: 6) considered it as ‘wholly inconceivable’ that Schiffermiiller,

as a devout [not devote] Jesuit, would have denied Denis, his closest friend and brother

Jesuit, the co-authorship if the latter had deserved such recognition, but one could argue

with similar force that neither would Denis have usurped undeserved co-authorship.

As further evidence against Denis being a co-author, Kudrna & Belicek referred to the

fact that Denis had left the Theresianum in 1773, two years before the publication of

the Ankiindung. However, they overlooked the fact that the foreword (‘An den Leser’),

presumably written on completion of the manuscript, is dated 16 March 1771 and thus

well before Denis had left his post. Moreover, in the Nachtrag (p. 305) reference is

made to considerable delay during the printing process.

Whilst Schiffermiiller might name a Tinea denisella (p. 138) in honour of his co-author,

we consider it rather unlikely that this modest man, were he the sole author, would

simultaneously name a Tinea schiffermillerella (p. 142) after himself! We assume that

the latter name was proposed by one of his collaborators, probably Denis.

Kudrna & Belicek (2005: 6) considered it noteworthy that Forster & Wohlfahrt

(1952-1955) and Higgins & Riley (1970) had attributed authorship of the butterflies to

Schiffermiiller alone. However, Forster & Wohlfahrt were not specifically concerned

with authorships'; they used extreme abbreviations for all authors, and the usage of

‘Schiff. does not signify anything with regard to single or multiple authorship. Whilst

it is true that Higgins & Riley attributed the names only to Schiffermiiller in their first

edition, and this is followed in several foreign editions, they switched to ‘Denis and

Schiffermiiller’ in their later editions (e.g. edn 4, 1980).

| Nor, for that matter, were they much concerned with the then current nomenclature/taxonomy, as

witnessed in volume 3 of their work in which they raised to full genera, without explanation, various

nominal subgenera in the genus Zygaena Fabricius!

Mae 1) a ;

a , ts t. -

"i _* . i a ' : y es

re oe ie ee ee

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 3-10 9

Summary

Whilst we acknowledge that Kudrna & Belicek have produced an interesting and

beautifully illustrated historical paper on the ‘Wiener Verzeichnis’, they have presented

no convincing evidence that Schiffermiiller was the sole author of the work. In contrast,

it is shown in the present paper that, notwithstanding Schiffermiiller’s leadership and

monumental personal contribution, he did not see himself as the sole author, whilst

his contemporaries also considered the book to be the work of more than one person

and credited Denis with co-authorship. In the interest of stability, if not for historical

accuracy alone, we suggest that the long-established (50 years) current practice of

attributing the work (and all new names established therein) to Denis & Schiffermiiller,

as cited in Opinion 516, is adhered to.

We should point out that we do not wish to comment specifically on Kudrna &

Belicek’s proposals with regard to the availability of certain butterfly names. But whilst

each name has to be considered on its own merit, we call attention to the fact that the

majority, if not all, of Denis & Schiffermiiller’s names can be accepted as available

(Sattler & Tremewan 1984). We urge lepidopterists to interpret the provisions of the

Code as far as possible in favour of preserving the old established names and thereby

contributing to stability. Moreover, we fail to understand where Kudrna & Belicek (p.

2) got the idea that Kocak (1982, 1984, 1986) and Sattler (1970 — not 1969!) rejected

the Ankiindung for the purposes of zoological nomenclature — in fact, the exact opposite

is the case. Kocgak explicitly separated those names he considered available from those

that he considered to be nomina nuda, whilst Sattler clearly indicated how to cite the

species described in the Ankiindung.

References

Anonymous 1775. Rezension. — Jenaische Zeitungen von Gelehrten Sachen LXXXXVIII. Stiick. Pp.

825-826.

Charpentier, T. von 1821. Die Zinsler, Wickler, Schaben und Geistchen des systematischen Verzeichnisses

der Schmetterlinge der Wiener Gegend. Mit Anmerkungen von J. L. T. F. Zincken genannt Sommer. —

Schulbuchhandlung, Braunschweig. 178 pp.

Denis, M. 1780. Die Merkwiirdigkeiten der k.k. garellischen 6ffentl. Bibliothek am Theresiano. —

Augustin Bernardi, Wien. 770 pp. [Not seen except copy of title page and part of page with entry on

Systematisches Verzeichnif.]

[Denis, M. & I. Schiffermiiller] 1775. Ankiindung eines systematischen Werkes von den Schmetterlingen

der Wienergegend. — Augustin Bernardi, Wien. 323 pp., 3 pls.

[Denis, M. & I. Schiffermiiller] 1776.Systematisches Verzeichnif8 der Schmetterlinge der Wienergegend. —

Augustin Bernardi, Wien. 323 pp., 3 pls.

Esper, E. J. C. 1776-[1830]. Die Schmetterlinge in Abbildungen nach der Natur mit Beschreibungen. —

Wolfgang Walthers, Erlangen. 1-5.

Fabricius, J.C. 1819. Autobiographie des Naturforschers Fabricius. — Kieler Blatter fiir 1819 1: 88-117.

Forster, W. & T. A. Wohlfahrt 1952-1955. Die Schmetterlinge Mitteleuropas. — Frankh’sche Verlags-

handlung, Stuttgart. 1-5

Hemming, F. 1937. Hiibner. — Royal Entomological Society, London. 1: xxiv, 605 pp., frontispiece; 2: ix,

274 pp.

Hemming, F. (Ed.) 1958. Opinion 516. Determination under the plenary powers of the relative precedence

to be assigned to certain works on the order Lepidoptera (Class Insecta) published in 1775, by Pieter

10 SATTLER & TREMEWAN: Authorship of the so-called ‘Wiener Verzeichnis’

Cramer, Michael Denis & Ignaz Schiffermiiller, Johann Christian Fabricius, Johann Casper Fuessly,

and S. A. von Rottemburg respectively. - Opinions and Declarations rendered by the International

Commission on Zoological Nomenclature 19: 1-43.

Higgins, L.G, & N. D. Riley 1970. Field guide to the butterflies of Britain and Europe (Edn 1). — Collins,

London. 380 pp., 60 pls, text-figs, 371 distr. maps.

Higgins, L.G. & N.D. Riley 1980. Field guide to the butterflies of Britain and Europe (Edn 4). — Collins,

London. 384 pp.. 63 pls, text-figs, 384 distr. maps.

Hiibner, J. 1796-[1836]. Sammlung europaischer Schmetterlinge. — [Privately published,] Augsburg. 8:

78 pp. (1796), 71 pls (1796-[1836]). [For dates of publication, see Hemming, 1937: 291—302.]

Hiibner, J. 1816—[1825]. Verzeichniss bekannter Schmettlinge. — [Privately PUPS eee 431 pp.

|For dates of publication, see Hemming, 1937: 517.]

Hiibner, J. 1822. Systematisch-alphabetisches Verzeichniss aller bisher bey den Fiirbildungen zur Samm-

lung europaischer Schmetterlinge angegebenen Gattungsbenennungen; mit Vormerkung auch augs-

burgischer Gattungen. — [Privately published,] Augsburg. vi, 81 pp.

(Iliger, J.C. W.] 1801. Systematisches Verzeichniss von den Schmetterlingen der Wiener Gegend.1 Heraus-

gegeben von einigen Lehrern am kaiserl. konigl. Theresianum in Wien. Mit einer Synonymie der vor-

ziiglichsten Schriftsteller und vielen Anmerkungen und Zusatzen von neuem herausgegeben. — Schul-

buchhandlung, Braunschweig. 1,482 pp. 2, 284 pp.

Karsholt, O. & Gielis, C. 1995. The Pterophoridae described by J. C. Fabricius, with remarks on type

material of Fabrician Lepidoptera (Insecta). — Steenstrupia 21: 31-35.

Kocgak, A. O. 1982, 1984. On the validity of the species group names proposed by Denis & Schiffermiil-

ler, 1775 in Ankiindung (sic.) eines systematischen Werkes von den Schmetterlingen der Wiener.

Gegend. — Priamus 2: 5-42 (1982); 3: 98-130, 133-154 (1984).

Kocak, A. O. 1986. On the paper “The Lepidoptera names of Denis & Schiffermiiller — a case for stabil-

ity” by K. Sattler and W. G. Tremewan in 1984. — Priamus 4: 3-12. |

Kudma,O. & J. Belicek 2005. On the “Wiener Verzeichnis’, its authorship and the butterflies named

therein. — Oedippus 23: 1-32, figs 1-7.

Ochsenheimer, F. 1807. Die spieamnetiase von Europa. Gerard Fleischer jun., Leipzig. 1: 240, xxx pp.

Percheron, A. 1837. Bibliographie entomologique. — Paris. 1: xii, 326 pp.; 2: 376 pp.

Promitzer,C. 1990. Ignaz Schiffermiiller— eine Fallstudie zur 6sterreichischen Naturgeschichte im Zeitaltes

der Aufklarung.—/n: H. Ebner, H. Haselsteiner & I. Wiesflecker-Friedhuber (eds), Geschichtsforschung

in Graz. Festschrift zum 125-Jahr-Jubilaum des Instituts fiir Geschichte der Karl-Franzens-Universitat

Graz: 427-441.

Prout, L. B. 1900. On the ‘Ankiindung eines systematischen Werkes von den Schmetterlingen der Wiener-

gegend’ of Schiffermiiller and Denis. — Annals and Magazine of Natural History (7) 6: 158-160.

Sattler, K. 1970. Das ,,Wiener Verzeichnis“ von 1775. — Zeitschrift der Wiener Entomol e ae Gesell-

schaft 80: 2-7, pls 1-3.

Sattler, K. & W. G. Tremewan 1984. The eee names by Denis & Schiffermiiller — a case for sta-

bility. — Nota lepidopterologica 7: 282-285.

Schrank, F. von P. [1784]. Entomologische Nachrichten. — Neues Magazin fiir die Liebuaber der Rito.

mologie 2: 199-222.

Schroter, J. S. 1776. Abhandlungen iiber verschiedene Gegenstinde der Naturgschichte, - - Gebauer, =

4 : oa . Sy

L a a

f 2

Ww,

| Speta, F. 2003. Ignaz Schiffermiiller (1727-1806) — — eine Biographie. — Denisia 8: i 14. 2 ee

Wolff,.N.L. 1972. ee ete eemstitones Verzeichniss” (Lep.). - Entpinol a Meddelelser

Book review 1]

Lafranchis, T. 2004. Butterflies of Europe. New Field Guide and Key. — DIATHEO, Paris.

351 pp., 13 x 19 cm, softcover. ISBN 2-9521620-0-X. Price: 32,00 € (+ 3,20 € postage).

This book is an impressive, pocket field guide supported by more than 1300 colour figures of

living butterflies and skippers, which are reproduced from photographs by B. Watts, T. Benton

and D. Jutzeler. It is a richly illustrated identification key accompanied by distribution maps; line

drawings are also provided when identifications require special attention to detail and selected

characters. The book has been very well received and reviewed and it has been accepted by the

lepidopterist community as a valuable addition to the existing literature.

However, it is being reviewed again in Nota lepidopterologica because of the necessity to discuss

and rectify some of the remarks by Tristan Lafranchis in the introduction of his work. The main

intention of his guide is to make it possible to identify butterflies and skippers in the field without

collecting and killing them. For this he has undertaken remarkable effort and, without doubt, has

succeeded in creating an excellent book based on his views that lepidopterists should be prevented

from collecting specimens. Lafranchis formulates his ideas as ‘a wish’. He writes, *... Very re-

cently, I found people overcollecting local butterflies in Greece and in southern France, killing

dozens of specimens of the same species at the same place in a couple of hours. Asking them why,

they always answered it was for some study, but this argument did not stand up to questioning.

They were really killing butterflies only for their collections, for exchange or for trade. Even some

serious lepidopterists still consider they have to collect most of the European butterflies to iden-

tify them carefully at home. I hope this book will help to convince everybody that almost all the

butterflies flying in Europe can be identified in the field and alive. Collecting should be reserved

for small insects of difficult orders, excluding both butterflies and dragonflies. Killing and trad-

ing should be banned in the whole of European Union, as it is in the case in Spain and Germany,

scientists only getting a permit when they really need to collect specimens for study. We now

need more studies on the ecology and the biology of butterflies, in order to understand them and

to prevent their decline. We hope that the few nets we will see in the future will be carried only to

check some difficult butterfly before releasing it. These creatures are really much nicer seen in a

flowery slope than put in a line in a cabinet drawer’.

As the acting head of the Conservation Committee of SEL and the current SEL President, I can-

not avoid commenting on such words even though I appreciate some of the views of Lafranchis.

I accept his wish to contribute to nature conservation and I agree with him that mass collecting

of selected, well-known species merely for the sake of dealing has nothing to do with science.

However, his well-intentioned words reflect many dangers. For example, they could influence

authorities to compensate their often helpless attempts to protect nature from the omnipresent

destruction of biotopes through agriculture and forestry, industry and building lobbies, by draw-

ing even further attention to entomologists and ‘identifying’ them as an easy target to blame for

the decline of species biodiversity and population densities in Europe. The consequences of this

could be disastrous. The existing restrictions on fieldwork would increase, it would become more

difficult to transport specimens and even laws that forbid private reference collections can well

be imagined.

If we want to conserve nature and Lepidoptera especially, we need a European-wide programme

to emphasise, especially to young people, that the diversity of nature is a real treasure. In order

to succeed we have to teach people how to learn as much as possible about species and their life

histories. Children between the age of 8 and 13 years old can easily be inspired by the wonders of

biodiversity. Because of their enquiring minds, they will want to know the names of various spe-

cies and to recognise differences. For this some collecting is absolutely essential, as one has to be

trained to recognise different characters. To look carefully and to observe the habits of larvae and

adults also requires training and sometimes one has to be inspired to find a love for such exacting

Nota lenidanterolocica 155.2000 ISSN 0349.7536

—_—

Book review

work. Accurate documentation of observations has to be learned, as well as the proper preparation

of specimens and the accuracy of their labelling; in this respect, a small reference collection has

always been the best method of reaching such a goal.

Lafranchis is correct when he states that many of the European butterflies can be identified in the

field and that it is therefore not necessary to collect and kill them. This can be accepted if the aim

of fieldwork is, for example, monitoring populations and counting population densities of well-

known, easily recognisable species, or observing the habits of such species — in this respect I have-

to agree that a lot of valuable work can be done without killing specimens. However, not a single

species of Lepidoptera would ever have been recognised as new and therefore not have been

described (including all the butterflies and skippers) if it were based on observations alone. In

order to acquire genuine documentation of sustainable value we need to have collected specimens

for reference purposes. The study of microscopic external and internal morphological characters,

Mendelian genetics and modern DNA analyses, and the comparison of geographical differences

between populations, cannot be undertaken without possessing collected material. Moreover, it

is dangerous to use butterflies as an example against collecting, as they are almost a synonym for

all Lepidoptera in the minds of the average laypersons. Who but an entomologist or zoologist

knows that butterflies represent only a very small percentage of the order? Banning the collection

of butterflies could inevitably lead to a total ban on the collecting of Lepidoptera. The majority of

Lepidoptera species cannot be accurately identified in the field by observation alone, or by look-

ing at photographs of them, even when the observer is an experienced local person who knows

the fauna of a restricted area very well. What is needed are many knowledgeable recorders and

the way to become a good recorder is through responsible collecting and accurate documentation.

We all know that, because of the dramatic decline of their biotopes to their small, present-day

relict areas, most of the populations of butterfly species that are threatened have decreased from

what were formerly rich populations with wider distributions. Collecting has hardly ever been a

real factor for such population decline although, of course, there have been a few exceptions in

those localities where the populations were already small and extremely isolated. In such excep-

tional cases a complete ban on collecting a certain species would then be justified. I realise that

a positive aspect in motivating young people to observe nature and to collect a few insects can,

in very few cases, easily turn a person that is greedy by nature into the well-known ‘maniac col-

lector’. I hope Tristan Lafranchis was thinking of this when he states, ‘... they were really killing

butterflies only for their collections, for exchange or for trade’. We all know that such people do

exist, but fortunately they are few and far between. Therefore, it should be emphasised that serious

and responsible lepidopterists only collect specimens as reference material for study and research

and not as ‘nuggets’ in order to make money or to subsidise expeditions.

To summarise the pros and cons, I am deeply convinced that there is no real pathway to science

without responsible collecting, which has to be accompanied by exact documentation of the lo-

cality, the circumstances of the collecting and all observational data. This needs concentration,

responsibility and experience. Lepidopterists, be they professional or amateur, contribute signifi-

cantly to our knowledge of biodiversity and the present changes that are taking place and their

research has high priority value for Europe and for the rest of the world. Therefore they deserve

to be treated and respected as valued members of society and they should not to be discriminated

against. The numbers of specialists with a thorough knowledge of certain groups, or with an over-

a poe een seeninic view of certain geographical areas, are nowadays rare and only a small _

gps are doing profound faunistic research; therefore, we urgently need mor

mt coloing and our Soi a pasecenence, SEL is fighting for greater free

a .

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 13-22 13

Die Psychidae des baltischen Bernsteins

THOMAS SosczyK! & MAx J. KOBBERT?

' DiesterwegstraBe 28, 02977 Hoyerswerda, Germany; E-Mail: ThomasSobczyk @aol.com

2 Franz-Marc-Weg 71, 48165 Miinster, Germany; E-Mail: max.kobbert@t-online.de

Abstract. For the first time an overview is given on the Psychidae preserved in Baltic amber. All known

psychid fossils from Baltic amber are larval cases. Some of them can be assigned to recent taxa: at the

subfamily level to the Oiketicinae, Psychinae, and Typhoniinae; at the generic level to Rebelia Heylaerts,

1900 (Epichnopteriginae); and at the species level to Dahlica triquetrella (Hiibner, 1813) (Naryciinae).

Two of the species differ significantly from recent taxa and several inclusions are available for study. They

are described as the ichnotaxa Palaeopsyche secundum gen. et sp. n. and P. transversum sp. n. The larval

cases of P. secundum sp. n. are characterised by plant fragments attached to the spinned tube along the

longitudinal axis. In contrast, in P. transversum sp. n. the plant fragments are attached at right angles on

the longitudinal axis and almost horizontally protruding, which makes the case to appear almost bristly.

Additionally, P. secundum sp. n. has the fragments fixed at one end only, so that they are movable and

sometimes slightly sticking out. In contrast, P. transversum sp.n. has the plant fragments sometimes fixed

in the middle only, so that both ends stick out, but they are obviously not movable. It can be excluded

that the two described species are representatives of the two sexes of one species because (1) both species

posteriorly have silken tubes, which is a characteristic of males only, and (2) such a distinct fragment

attachment is unknown in recent species. The plant fragments are possibly grass.

Zusammenfassung. Erstmals wird ein Uberblick tiber die im baltischen Bernstein erhaltenen Psychidae

gegeben. Dabei handelt es sich ausschlieBlich um Raupensacke. Einige von ihnen entsprechen rezenten

Taxa der Unterfamilien Oiketicinae, Psychinae und Typhoniinae und auf Gattungsebene Rebelia Heylaerts,

1900 (Epichnopteriginae) sowie auf Artebene Dahlica triquetrella (Hiibner, 1813) (Naryciinae). Zwei

der Arten unterscheiden sich deutlich von den rezenten Arten und mehrere Inklusen konnten von ihnen

untersucht werden. Sie werden als Ichnotaxa Palaeopsyche secundum gen. et sp. n. und P. transversum

sp. n. beschrieben.

Einleitung

Die Zahl nachgewiesener Lepidoptera-Individuen im baltischen Bernstein ist gering. Der

Anteil an den Insekten-Ordnungen wird mit 0,1 bis 1,1 % angegeben (Klebs 1910; Bru-

es 1930; Théobald 1937; Skalski 1977). Fiir die Geologische Sammlung des Museums

fiir Naturkunde und Vorgeschichte Dessau (www.dessau.de/print.asp?MenuID=1322)

werden 2885 Insekteninklusen aus dem Bitterfelder Bernstein gelistet, von denen

5 Lepidoptera und 2 ,,K6chern“ zugeordnet werden (0,3 %). Fiir den dominikanischen

Bernstein werden etwas hdhere Werte genannt: 4,23 % (Henwood 1993) und 2.2 %

(Poinar & Poinar 1999). Insgesamt wird die Anzahl bekannter Inklusen mit Schmetter-

lingen auf 500 geschatzt (Kristensen & Skalski 1998). Sie reprasentieren 71 beschrie-

bene und zahlreiche unbeschriebene Taxa. Die itiberwiegende Anzahl der beschriebe-

nen Taxa sind hierbei den Tineidae (19 Arten) und Oecophoridae (17 Arten) zugeord-

net, wobei Kristensen & Skalski (1998) darauf hinweisen, dass die Familienzuordnung

teilweise nicht in Ubereinstimmung mit heutigen Konzepten steht.

In der Literatur finden sich zahlreiche Hinweise auf Psychidensacke im baltischen

Bernstein (Bachofen-Echt 1949; Kusnezov 1941; Poinar 1992). Der Begriff Sack leitet

sich vom deutschen Namen der Familie Psychidae ,,Sacktrager“ ab. Bei den durch die

Larven hergestellten Gehausen handelt es sich im eigentlichen Sinne nicht um Sacke,

da sie auf beiden Seiten offen sind. Die Bezeichnung Kocher ist viel treffender und

Nata lepidopterologica. 15.5.2009. ISSN 0342-7536

14 SospczyYk & Koppert: Die Psychidae des baltischen Bernsteins

wird fiir Kécherfliegen (Trichoptera) mit zum Teil ahnlichem Bauplan der Gehause

verwendet (Wichard et al. 1995). Ebenso ist dieser Begriff in der Literatur iber Bern-

steininklusen auch fiir Lepidopteren fixiert (Weitschat & Wichard 1998). Im Folgenden

wird analog zur entomologischen Literatur (z.B. Sauter & Hattenschwiler, 2004) der

Begriff Sacke verwendet.

Beschrieben wurde aus dem baltischen Bernstein bislang eine Psychide nach einem

Sack, Sterrhopteryx pristinella Rebel, 1934 (Abb. 1). Diese den Oiketicinae zuorden-

bare Inkluse liasst sich allerdings nicht eindeutig der Gattung Sterrhopteryx Hiibner,

1825 zuordnen. Demgegeniiber ist der Anteil und die Vielfalt von Larven-Sacken im

Verhaltnis zu anderen Lepidoptereninklusen im baltischen Bernstein jedoch bemer-

kenswert hoch. Eine gréBere Anzahl Psychidensacke ist bei Kobbert (2005) neben

Sacken der Tineidae (Abb. 2) und weiterer Familien abgebildet. Die vorliegende Ar-

beit soll einen Uberblick iiber die Vielfalt der im Bernstein vorkommenden Psychiden-

sicke geben und einen Bezug zur rezenten Fauna herstellen.

Die Kenntnisse der Bernstein-Psychidae beziehen sich gegenwartig ausschlieBlich auf

Sackfunde. Die Wahrscheinlichkeit, Imagines der Psychidae als Inklusen zu finden, ist

auberst gering. Ihre Lebensdauer ist sehr kurz und liegt oft unter einem Tag. Die Mann-

chen haben verkiimmerte Mundwerkzeuge und k6nnen keine Nahrung aufnehmen. thr

Flug wird in der Regel ausschlieBlich durch das Pheromon der Weibchen gesteuert.

Die Weibchen vieler Gattungen sind fliigellos und verbleiben im Sack, sind also in

Inklusen unsichtbar, oder auf dem Sack, miissten also zum Zeitpunkt des Einschlusses

eben geschliipft sein. Zur Verpuppung werden die Sacke angesponnen, sind also zum

Schlupfzeitpunkt unbeweglich. Die Chance, dass an diesem Ort genau zu diesem Zeit-

punkt Harz austritt und den Sack umschlieBt besteht kaum.

Sauter & Hattenschwiler 1991 unterteilen die palaearktischen Psychidae in 7 interfa-

milien. Eine weitere Unterfamilie (Scoryoditiinae) ist aus Neuseeland bekannt (Hatten-

schwiler 1989). Als typisch fiir Psychidensacke geben Sauter & Hattenschwiler (2004)

folgende Merkmale an:

- Vorder- und Hinterende sind morphologisch unterscheidbar.

- Durch die vordere Offnung kann die Raupe den Kopf und die Brustsegmente her-

ausschieben und sich mit Hilfe der Brustbeine bewegen, wahrend der hintere Teil im

- Sack verbleibt und die Bauchbeine diesen festhalten.

- Das Hinterende des Sackes dient der Kotabgabe und spater dem Schliipfen der

Imagines.

- Die Sacke sind im Querschnitt rund, rundlich oder oval, bei einigen Unterfamilien

dreieckig mit meist deutlichen Kanten.

Die Untersuchungen von Sauter & Hattenschwiler (2004) beziehen sich auf die palae-

arktische Fauna, die nur etwa ein Viertel der bekannten Psychidae-Arten ausmacht. _

Diese Merkmale weisen jedoch alle bekannten Psychidae-Sacke auf und kénnen somit

als B iteeae to: gelten. 7

‘ iw 7

Te ts oe

. ‘=

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 13-22 15

einzelnen Partikeln belegt ist. Beide Sackenden stimmen in der Form itiberein und sind

gleich gebaut. Die Sacke sind rohrenf6rmig, sie kOnnen auch abgeflacht und mit dach-

formig erweiterten Enden versehen sein. Sie sehen dann bilateral symmetrisch aus. Die

Raupen fressen Algen und Flechten oder auch tierische Produkte. Bei den Coleopho-

ridae sind die Sacke bilateralsymmetrisch gebaut und Vorder- und Hinterende deutlich

unterschiedlich gestaltet. Es handelt sich um minierende Arten. Einige Arten der Incur-

variidae, Prodoxiidae und Adelidae weisen in den ersten Larvenstadien ebenfalls Sacke

auf, diese sind flach und zweikantig (Sauter & Hattenschwiler 2004).

Material und Methoden

Ausgewertet wurden insgesamt 126 Sacke der Sammlungen Kobbert und Sobczyk.

Zwei Drittel der Sacke konnten der Familie Psychidae zugeordnet werden. Dies sind

aus der Sammlung Kobbert 71 Inkusen mit den Sanimlungsnummern T103, T144,

ier tes, 1194, 1195, 1197, W211, 1219, 1221, 1231, 1232, T269, T279, T314,

T316, T322, T1338, T339, T376, T389, T416, T430, T439, T452, T482, T491, T517,

T3518, T519, T529, T531, T543, T557, T602, T603, T604, T605, T606, T608, T609,

T610, T611, T612, T618, T648, T650, T651, T663, T664, T665, T666, T667, T669,

T670, T1697, T7703, T704, T705, T706, T707, T708, T709, T710, T722, T723, T724,

T1725, T7726, 1727, 1729. Aus der Sammlung Sobczyk wurden 14 Inklusen von Psy-

chidae mit der Bezeichnung OO04TS, OO6TS, OO8TS, OO9TS, O14TS, O1S5TS, O16TS,

O21TS, 022TS, 023TS, 024TS, 026TS, 027TS, 041TS untersucht.

Weitere Inklusen gehdren zu den Tineidae, Adelidae, vermutlich auch Diptera und

Coleoptera, einige sind nicht zuordenbar. Zum Vergleich wurden Sacke von Psychiden

aus dem Dominikanischen Bernstein (T512,T513 coll. Kobbert, ein Sack einer Oiketi-

cinae aus coll. Hattenschwiler) und dem madagassischen Kopal (O6STS coll Sobczyk)

untersucht.

Die taxonomische Zuordnung der Sécke aus dem baltischen Bernstein folgt im We-

sentlichen dem Bestimmungsschliissel fiir die Sacke rezenter Psychidae von Sauter &

Hattenschwiler (2004). Dabei bestehen die folgenden Schwierigkeiten:

Nicht alle Gehéuse mit randem Querschnitt sind von Psychiden hergestellt (bei rezen-

ten Arten ist eine Zuordnung meist zweifelsfrei méglich, wenn die Gehause gedffnet

und die Larven oder deren Fragmente oder die Puppen/Exuvien untersucht werden).

Die Anzahl landbewohnender Trichoptera-Larven ist heute gering, doch kénnen deren

Kocher gelegentlich nicht von den Saécken der Psychiden unterschieden werden. Inwie-

weit zur Zeit der Bernstein-Lebensgemeinschaften Trichopteren-Larven an das Landle-

ben angepasst waren, ist unbekannt. Auch bei Trichopteren ist die sichere Determinati-

on und Unterscheidung der Larven zu denen der Psychidae zweifelsfrei méglich.

Es ist denkbar, dass Psychiden mit abweichendem Sackbau in der Bernsteinfauna ver-

treten waren, die heute ausgestorben sind.

Es ist nicht ausgeschlossen, dass weitere Arthropoden-Taxa des Eozans Sacke bauten,

die denen heutiger Psychidensacke dhneln.

Die Sacke zeigen eine erhebliche Variabilitat, die manchmal mit dem in der Umgebung

des Nahrungshabitates vorhandenem Baumaterial korelliert. Die hier untersuchten Sa-

sae

Rede)

S =

pag ors

16 Sosczyk & KosBerT: Die Psychidae des baltischen Bernsteins

cke weisen zum iiberwiegenden Teil eine gute Ubereinstimmung zur rezenten Fauna

auf, wobei sie nicht zwangslaufig mit rezenten Taxa identisch sein miissen. Soweit

méglich, wird die Bernsteinfauna hdheren taxonomischen Ebenen zugeordnet.

Die Internationalen Nomenklaturregeln (ICZN, 1999) sehen im Artikel 1.2.1 fiir ,,na-

mes based on the fossilized work of organisms“ den Begriff des Ichnotaxons vor. Dies

ist in der vorliegenden Arbeit anzuwenden, da von den Psychidae ausschlieBlich der

Sack im Bernstein erhalten ist, wobei die Larve méglicherweise im Sack enthalten oder

teilweise sichtbar ist, aber keine ausreichenden morphologischen Merkmale sichtbar

sind.

Eine Beschreibung von Sacken als Ichnotypen erscheint nur dort sinnvoll, wo keine

vergleichbaren rezenten Formen bekannt sind. Wenn mehrere Inklusen vorliegen, kann

ausgeschlossen werden, dass es sich um Individuen mit zufalliger Abweichung in der

Struktur und dem verwendeten Baumaterial handelt.

Ergebnisse

Selbst wenn man die bei Kristensen & Skalski (1998) geschatzte Zahl von 500 Lepido-

ptereninklusen um die Anzahl der hier zuordenbaren Sacke und neuer Funde erganzt,

sind Psychidae mit mehr als 10 % an den im baltischen Bernstein dokumentierten Lepi-

doptera vertreten. Von den derzeit beschriebenen etwa 160.000 rezenten Lepidopteren-

arten entfallen weniger als 1 % auf die Psychidae, von denen etwa 1200 valide Arten

bekannt sind (Sobczyk, unpubl.).

Die weitaus tiberwiegende Zahl der untersuchten Gehause weist eine Gréfe unter e1-

nem Zentimeter auf (Abb. 13). Die GréSenverteilung a4hnelt jener der anderen Arthro-

poden-Familien und kann wohl ausschlieBlich darauf zuriickzufiihren sein, dass vor

allem kleine Arten durch den klebrigen Harz nachhaltig festgehalten wurden und die

Chance des vollstandigen Einschlusses und damit ausbleibender Verwitterung deutlich

gréBer war.

Auch unter heutigen Verhaltnissen finden sich an Kiefernharz z.B. Saécke von Siede- —

ria pineti (Zeller, 1852) und Taleporia tubulosa (Retzius, 1783), einzeln auch Bacotia

claustrella (Bruand, 1845). Wahrend einer Untersuchung 1982 in der Diibener Hei-

de (Sachsen, Deutschland) konnten auf Harzungsflachen insgesamt 17 von Harz um-

schlossene Sacke der oben genannten Arten registriert werden. -

Von den Unterfamilien sind mit Sicherheit die Oiketicinae gut im baltischen Bernstein

dokumentiert (Abb. 3, 4, 5), ebenso sind einige Sacke den Psychinae zuordenbar, ei-

nige stimmen gut mit Sdécken der rezenten Gattung Proutia Tutt, 1899 iiberein (Abb. |

6). Zu den Typhoniinae werden einige Arten mit Sandbestandteilen gestellt (Abb. 7,

8). Von den Epichnopteriginae sind mehrere der Gattung Rebelia sehr ahnliche Sé-

cke dokumentiert. Erstmals nachgewiesen werden konnten im Rahmen dieser Unter-

ke mit netomat Querschnitt i im baltischen Bernstein. Diese big fiir >

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 13-22 LZ

Scoriodytiinae Belege aus dem baltischen Bernstein fehlen, stimmen zwei der Sacke

(Abb. 9, 10) véllig mit denen der rezenten Dahlica triquetrella (Hiibner, 1813) aus der

Unterfamilie der Naryciinae tiberein.

Beschreibung von Ichnotaxa

Im Folgenden wird eine Gattung mit 2 Arten neu beschrieben, bei denen auf Grund

eines deutlich abweichenden Sackbaus eine Zuordnung zu rezenten Formen auch unter

Einbeziehung der tropischen Fauna nicht méglich ist. Die Sacke der tropischen Arten

wurden im Deutschen Entomologischen Institut Miincheberg, dem Museum der Hum-

boldt Universitat Berlin, dem Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle Paris, im National

History Museum London und der Zoologischen Staatssammlung Miinchen untersucht.

Ebenso ergab die Literaturrecherche und das umfangreiche Material zur Bearbeitung

der Psychidae der Orientalis (Sobczyk, 2008) keinerlei Hinweise auf 4hnliche Arten.

Palaeopsyche gen. n.

Gattungstypus: Palaeopsyche secundum sp. n.

Typenlokalitat: Baltikum (Russland und Polen).

Beschreibung. Sacke lang gestreckt, von rundem Querschnitt, posterior sich gering-

fligig verjiingend, aus feinen Gespinstfaden bestehend. Vermutlich relativ weich und

nicht druckfest. Dicht mit sehr schmalen Pflanzenfasern und -teilen (vermutlich Gra-

ser) bedeckt. Diese besonders im anterioren Drittel konzentriert. Anteriore und posteri-

ore Offnung rund, mit geradem Rand, aus lateraler Sicht etwa rechtwinklig zur Langs-

achse.

Diagnose. Durch die extrem feine Struktur des verwendeten Baumaterials in Verbin-

dung mit dem lang gestreckten Habitus von allen bislang bekannten fossilen und rezen-

ten Gattungen der Psychidae deutlich verschieden. Es wurden neun solcher Inklusen

mit identischer Bauart nachgewiesen, die zudem eine unterschiedliche Grobe aufwei-

sen. Es ist somit auszuschlieBen, dass es sich um eine zufallige Bildung in Ermange-

lung anderen Baumaterials handelt. Rezente Unterfamilien mit Sacken von rundem

Querschnitt sind Oiketicinae, Psychiinae, Typhoniinae, Epichnopteryginae. Eine Zu-

- ordnung zu einer dieser Unterfamilien ist ohne Vorliegen von Imagines oder Larven

nicht méglich.

Etymology. palaios (griech.) = alt, Psyche = ( griech.) Geist.

Palaeopsyche secundum sp. n. | Abb. 11

Typenlokalitat: Baltikum (Russland und Polen).

Material. Holotypus: T666: Bernstein 28 mm lang, Sack 18 mm; in coll. Kobbert. Der

Holotypus befindet sich in der Sammlung Kobbert und gelangt spater in die Bernstein-

sammlung des Staatlichen Museums fiir Naturkunde in Stuttgart. — Paratypen: T349:

Bernstein 38 mm lang; Sack 10 mm lang. Mit feinen starren Pflanzenfasern bedeckt,

Re SosczyYk & Koppert: Die Psychidae des baltischen Bernsteins

Abb. 1-6. Sacke von Lepidopteren in baltischem Bernstein. 1. ..Sterrhopteryx“ pristinella Rebel,

934, L 4.2 mm, B 50 mm, Baumaterial: Nadelfragmente (T144, coll. Kobbert). 2. Tineidae (Eudarcia

p. ’), L65 mm, B 18 mm, Baumaterial: FraBspaine (T069, coll. Kobbert). 3. Oiketicinae, L 8.0 mm,

B 45 mm, Baumaterial: Nadeln und FraBspaine (T279, coll. Kobbert). 4. Oiketicinae, mit Raupe,

L 8&5 mm, B 25 mm, Baumaterial: vermutlich Borkenpartikel (T314, coll. Kobbert). 5. Oiketicinae,

L& mm. B 65 mm, Baumaterial: Nadelfragmente und FraBspane (T609, coll. Kobbert). 6. Proutia sp.,

L 9D mm. B 4) mm, Baumaterial: Borkenpartikel (T338, coll. Kobbert).

diese vorn schrag nach hinten abstehend und etwa die Halfte der Gesamtlange des

Sackes, hinten anliegend und deutlich kiirzer. — T618: Bernstein 49 mm lang; Sack

19.4 mm lang: Pflanzenfragmente vorn nur an einem Ende angeheftet und kiirzer als

be: den beiden anderen Sacken (2—3 mm lang). Vom Habitus sonst den beiden anderen

gleichend. Syninkluse Weberknecht mit 25 mm langem Bein. —T557: Bernstein 32 mm

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 13-22 19

(T145, coll. Kobbert). 8. Typhoniinae, L 7,0 mm, B 1,7 mm, Baumaterial: FraBspane (T194, coll. Kobbert).

9. Dahlica triquetrella, L 7,0 mm, B 2,7 mm, Baumaterial: FraBspane, Insektenreste (T663, coll. Kobbert).

10. Dahlica triquetrella, L 6,0 mm, B 2,5 mm, Baumaterial: Sand Insektenreste (T729, coll. Kobbert).

11. Palaeopsyche secundum, sp. n. Holotype, L 18 mm, B 20 mm, Baumaterial: grasartige Fragmente

(T666, coll. Kobbert). 12. Palaepsyche transversum sp. n. Holotype, Baumaterial: grasartige Fragmente,

Blatt- und Insektenreste (T316, coll. Kobbert).

lang; Sack 21 mm lang. Raupe vorn herausschauend. Vorn mit abstehenden 4 bis 5 mm

langen Fasern bekleidet, distales Drittel mit nicht naher erkennbaren feinem Detritus

oder Kot bekleidet, mit nur einzelnen kurzen Fasern durchmischt. (alle in coll. Kob-

bert). — ST 15: Bernstein 20 mm lang; Sack 8 mm lang Pflanzenfragmente vorn nur an

einem Ende angeheftet und kiirzer als bei den beiden anderen Sacken (2—3 mm lang).

20 SospczyYk & KopBerT: Die Psychidae des baltischen Bernsteins

Vom Habitus sonst den beiden anderen gleichend. Syninkluse Abdomen einer Ameise

(in coll. Sobezyk).

Beschreibung. Sacklinge 8—21 mm. Sack anliegend mit sehr feinen Pflanzenfasern be-

deckt, diese meisten zwischen 3—5 mm lang, im Querschnitt rund, 0,1—0,2 mm Durch-

messer. Ende weniger dicht bedeckt (teilweise mit Schlupfrohre der Mannchen), Ein-.

zelne Pflanzenfasern lose und abstehend.

Differentialdiagnose. Vgl. P. transversum, sp. 0.

Etymology. secundum (lat.): langs. Der Name bezieht sich auf die Anordnung der

Pflanzenfragmente auf dem Sack.

Palaeopsyche transversum sp. Nn. Abb. 12

Typenlokalitat: Baltikum (Russland und Polen).

Material. Holotypus: T316, Bernstein 48 mm lang; Sack 26 mm lang; in coll. Kobbert.

Der Holotypus befindet sich in der Sammlung Kobbert und gelangt spater in die Bern-

steinsammlung des Staatlichen Museums fiir Naturkunde in Stuttgart. Paratypen: T710,

Bernstein 37 mm lang; 15 mm lang (in coll. Kobbert), 021TS Bernstein 27 mm, Sack

13 mm lang (in coll. Sobezyk). —

Beschreibung. Holotypus: T316: Vordere Halfte mit deutlich quer gelegten Pflanzen-

fragmenten, vor allem kurzen starren Fasern und kurzen Halmstiicken (?) hinten dicht

langs angeheftete kurze Fasern an der schmalen, lang ausgezogenen Rohre. Gréfter

bisher aus dem Bernstein bekannter Larvensack! — Paratypus: T710: Bernstein 37 mm

lang: 15 mm lang, ahnlich dem vorherigen, doch vorn ausschlieBlich mit sehr feinen,

geraden Fasern, s-fOrmig gekriimmt (vermutlich durch den Einschluss), (in coll. Kob-

bert). 021 TS: Sack 13 mm, an beiden Enden angeschliffen, pflanzliche Teile 2-5 mm

lang, im Querschnitt kreisrund, Durchmesser ca. 0,05—0,15 mm. Die Fragmente schei-

nen auf die jeweilige Lange abgebissen zu sein und sind deutlich abstehend. Gespinst-

rohre distal Durchmesser 2 mm (angeschliffen).

Diagnose. Gesamthabitus der beiden Taxa ahnlich. Wahrend bei P. secundum sp.n. die

Pflanzenfragmente an der Gespinstrohre anliegend oder zumindest deutlich nach hinten

gerichtet sind, wird bei P. transversum sp.n. das Material iiberwiegend quer verbaut.

Die Fragmente sind somit fast waagerecht abstehend, der Sack erhalt dadurch ein fast

struppiges Aussehen. Bei P. secundum sp.n. sind die Fragmente an nur einem Ende an-

gesponnen und dadurch beweglich. Durch Lageveranderung im Bernstein k6nnen die —

lose angesponnen Pflanzenfragmente daher etwas abstehen. Bei P. transversum sp.n.

hingegen sind Fragmente teilweise auch in der Mitte angesponnen, so dass beide Enden

abstehen. Sie sind offensichtlich nicht beweglich angesponnen. Es wird ausgeschlos-

sen, dass es sich um Sacke der beiden Geschlechter einer Art handelt, da bei beiden

___ Arten Sacke in Gespinstréhren enden, die nur den Mannchen eigen sind. Ebenso we-

; a ist bei on eine mn J unterschiedliche wonders in —_ nal mal ‘“ a

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 13-22 Je.

14 5

illus. ee

Poe Or oS ONO Nie12 13 14 45 16 17 18 19.20 21 22 23 24 25 26

Lange (mm)

Abb. 13: Langenverteilung der untersuchten Psychiden-Siacke im baltischen Bernstein.

Etymology. transversum (lat.) = quer. Der Name bezieht sich auf die Anordnung der

Pflanzenfragmente auf dem Sack.

Diskussion

Auffallig ist die verhaltnismaBig geringe Anzahl kleiner Sacke von 1-3 mm Lange,

die im Wesentlichen dem ersten Larvenstadium zuzuordnen sind. Die Ausbreitung der

Psychidae erfolgt vor allem durch Balloning der frisch geschliipften Raupen mit ihrem

ersten Sack. Die Chance, dabei weitab von ihrem Schlupfort z.B. an Harz festzukleben

ist relativ groB. Der Lufttransport wird aktiv vorbereitet, indem die Larve an einen

erhohten Platz kriecht und sich an einem Gespinstfaden herablasst, der dann durch den

_ Wind mitsamt der Raupe verweht wird (Beobachtung Sobczyk). Diese passive Verbrei-

tung wiirde auch Arten in Bernstein fixieren, die in gro®erer Entfernung (bis mehrere

hundert Meter) vom Habitat vorkommen.

Demgegeniiber sind groBe Sacke unterproportional erhalten, so dass der tiberwiegende

Teil von ihnen unmittelbar im Nahrungs- oder Verpuppungsbiotop fixiert worden zu

sein scheint.

Ein GroBteil der heute vorkommenden Arten besiedelt Offenlandhabitate. Nur weni-

ge Arten sind ausschlieBlich an Waldstrukturen gebunden. Da in vielen Fallen kleine

Blattfragmente verbaut wurden, die nicht von verholzten Pflanzen stammen und bei

einigen der Sacke obligatorisch Sandfragmente eingesponnen sind, kann darauf ge-

schlossen werden, dass solche offenen Flachen auch in den Habitaten der Bernsteinfau-

na vorhanden gewesen sein miissen.

22 Sopczyk & Koppert: Die Psychidae des baltischen Bernsteins

Danksagung

Herzlichen Dank an Hans Werner Hoffeins (Hamburg) und Angelika Hesse (Dessau-Rosslau) fiir wertvolle

Informationen in Zusammenhang mit der Bernsteinfauna sowie Hans Riefenstahl (Hamburg) und Matthias

Nu (Dresden) fiir Literaturbeschaffung und Diskussion. Weiterhin danken wir Peter Hattenschwiler

(Uster, Schweiz) fiir die Méglichkeit der Untersuchung einer Inkluse aus dem dominikanischen Bernstein.

Literatur

Bachofen-Echt, A. 1949. Der Bernstein und seine Einschliisse. - Springer, Wien. Nenani J. Wunderlich

Verlag, Straubenhardt 1996.

Brues, C. F. 1933. Progressive change in the insect population of forests since phe early tertiary. — — American

Naturalist 67: 385—406.

Hittenschwiler, P. 1989. Genus Scoriodyta Meyrick, 1888, anew subfamily and description of new species

| and forms. — New Zealand Journal of Zoology 16: 51-63.

ICZN (International Commission for the Zoological Nomenclature). 1999. International Code of Zoo-

logical Nomenclature, adopted by the International Union of Biological Sciences, 4th Se = -232S.

London (International trust for Zoological Nomenclature).

Klebs R. 1910. Uber Bernsteineinschliisse im Allgemeinen und die Coleopteren meiner Remietemeamnm.:

lung. — Schriften der K6niglichen physikalisch-6konomischen Gesellschaft zu K6nigsberg 51: 217-—

242.

Kobbert, M. J. 2005. Bernstein —Fenster in die Urzeit. — Planet Poster Edition. Dortmund, 224 Seiten.

Kraus, O. 2001. Internationale Regeln fiir die Zoologische Nomenklatur, 4. Auflage. — offizieller deutscher

Text. — Abhandlungen des Naturwissenschaftlichen Vereins in Hamburg, Neue Folge 34: 1-232.

Kristensen, N. & A.W. Skalski 1998. Palaeontology and phylogenie. S. 7-25. In: N. P. Kristensen (Hrsg.).

Lepidoptera, Moths and Butterflies. Volume 1: Evolution, systematics and biogeography. — In:

M. Fischer (Hrsg.): Handbook of Zoology. Volume IV Arthropoda: Insecta, Part. 35. — Walter de

Gruyer, Berlin.

Kusnezoy, N. J. 1941.A revision of the amber lepidoptera. — Académie des Sciences de L’'URSS, Moscou,.

137 S.

Poinar, G. O. 1992. Life in Amber. — 368 S. Stanford University press. ,

Poinar,G.O. & R. Poinar (1999. The amber forest: a reconstruction of a vanished world. — 239 Seeing

Princeton University Press, Princeton, New Jersey.

Rebel, H. (1934): Bernstein Lepidopteren. — Palaobiologica 6: 1-16.

Sauter, W. & P. Hattenschwiler (1991): Zum System der palaarktischen Psychiden (Lep., Psychidae). sy

1. Teil: Liste der palaearktischen Arten. — Nota lepidopterologica 14 (1): 69-89. — r

Sauter, W. & P. Hattenschwiler 2004. Zum System der palaearktischen Psychiden (Lep., Peychide) ;

3. Teil: Bestimmungsschliissel fiir die Sacke. — Nota lepidopterologica 27 (1): 59-70. y

Théobald, N. 1937. Les insectes fossiles des terrains oligocénes de France. — G. Thomas, Nancy, 473 - +.

[1] p. ~ ,

Skalski, A. W. 1977. Studies on the Ss iters from fossil resins. Part I. armed remarks and description td,)

of a new genera and species of the families Tineidae and Oecophoridae from the Baltic amber. — ed ti

Muzeum Ziemi 26: 3-24, 10 pl.. . 6

___ Sobezyk, T. 2008. Beitriige zur Kenntnis der orientalischen Psychidae (Lepidoptera). 1. Te .

tie — und Ske neuer Arten aus Thailand, Myanmar und von den Bee } "a on. -

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 23-26 DS

Records of larvae of Eupithecia lentiscata Mabille, 1869 on

Sardinia (Geometridae)

BERND MULLER ! & PEDER SKOU ”

' Weissdornallee 13, D-13158 Berlin, Germany; e-mail: geobernd@gmx.de

* Kirkeby Sand 19, DK-5771 Stenstrup, Denmark; e-mail: apollobooks@vip.cybercity.dk

Abstract. The first record of the little known Eupithecia lentiscata Mabille, 1869 on Sardinia is reported.

Two forms of the larva, the adult moth, and the habitat are illustrated, and the breeding method and wing

pattern characters of the moth are described. Remarks on three other geometrid species found in the same

habitat are added.

Zusammenfassung. Es wird tiber den Erstnachweis der wenig bekannten Eupithecia lentiscata Mabille,

1869 auf Sardinien berichtet. Zwei Raupenformen, Falter und Lebensraum werden abgebildet, der

Zuchtverlauf und typische Merkmale des Falters beschrieben. Bemerkungen tiber drei Begleitarten

erganzen die Arbeit.

The Mediterranean Eupithecia lentiscata Mabille, 1869 is one of the geometrid species

that has been most rarely recorded since it was discovered on Corsica. This is probably

caused by the unusual flying time for a Eupithecia species, which 1s in the middle of the

winter. Mironov (2003) mentions the adults flying from January to early March.

In their checklist Raineri & Zangheri (1995) did not record this species from Italy, so

the records from Corsica were the only known ones for a very long time (Miiller 1996).

In 2002 the species was found for the first time in Italy by the record of one caterpillar

on Sardinia (8 km E of Porto Torres, Platamona Lido, 5 m, 10. iv. 2002, Peder Skou

leg.). This record was included in Mironov (2003) along with that of one specimen

from Monemvasia on the southern end of the Peloponnes peninsular in Greece.

During a collecting trip from 4th to 18th April 2007 on Costa Smeralda, Sardinia, three

fully grown larvae of Eupithecia lentiscata were found by Golfo Aranci (6. iv. 2007,

Bernd Miller leg.).

The literature mentioned that Ewpithecia lentiscata feeds on the inflorescences of the

mastic tree, Pistacia lentiscus (Anacardiaceae) (Mabille 1869, 1872; Dietze 1910,

1913; Mironov 2003). We obtained caterpillars by carefully beating the inflorescences

over an umbrella. The caterpillars fed only on the flowers and pupated after just a few

days in the breeding case in a cocoon between remains of the food. The pupae were

taken out of these and placed between pieces of tissue in a pupae box. There they spent

the summer and the following winter, and were sprayed with water only now and then.

In order to imitate the mild winter climate on the coasts of Sardinia, the pupae box was

kept under cool conditions, but not below -2 °C. All four pupae hatched as adult moths

in late January 2003 (1 female) and on 21, 25 and 26 January 2008 (1 crippled male and

2 well developed females, Fig. 1).

Further beating for caterpillars of E. /entiscata at other localities of Costa Smeralda

in 2007 was negative, but resulted in caterpillars of the Geometridae species Co/otois

pennaria (Linnaeus, 1761), Agriopis bajaria (Denis & Schiffermiiller, 1775), and

A. marginaria (Fabricius, 1776). Until their pupation the larvae of these three spe-

Nota lenidonterolosica. 15.5.2009. ISSN 0342-7536

24 MULLER & Skou: On Eupithecia lentiscata

cies were fed with flowers of Pistacia

lentiscus, which appear to be a little

known food-plant for the three spe-

cies since Flamigni et al. (2007) only

mention it for A. bajaria. During our

search for caterpillars of E. lentiscata

of the food-plants were flowering, 1.e.

only less than 10 % of the total number

of plants.

The larva of E. lentiscata is very vari-

ait ie able and occurs in two main forms, a

Fig. 1. Female of Eupithecia lentiscata Mabille, 1869. green and a red one. Dietze (1910)

exsemarie anil eat Forewing length 10.5 mm, shows on his excellent colour plates

; two green and one red form, that all

differ a little in detail from the cater-

pillars from Sardinia (triangular spots less red-brown filled). Figure 2 shows a green

caterpillar with a red-brown line on the back and red-brown filled triangular spots, that

are pointing forwards. Figure 3 shows a reddish caterpillar with a similar red-brown

pattern on the back. Both forms are very well camouflaged among the flowers of the

food-plant.

There is hardly any material of Eupithecia lentiscata in public or private collections,

and Mironoy (2003) could only illustrate two males on his colour plates, including the

holotype of the species, that was previously used by Dietze (1910) for his somewhat

dark illustration. The material available now, i.e. the three females from Sardinia, re-

semble the holotype with a rather weak and poorly contrasting wing pattern. As in

many Eupithecia species, the newly emerged adults are rather grey in their ground

colour. Even if the specimens are kept in complete darkness, this colour slowly changes

over decades to more brownish as can be seen on the nearly 140 years old holotype on

the colour plate by Mironov (2003). However, two elements of the wing pattern are

more or less visible on all specimens: Firstly, the narrow medial transverse line run-

ning through the discal spot and, secondly, the nearly nght-angled dark area between

cubital vein CuA2 and the inner margin on the forewing between the wavy line and the

subterminal line, which is clearly visible on the specimen in Fig. 1. Apart from this the

species seems to be somewhat variable in the distinctness of the wing pattern, and there

may be a slight sexual dimorphism.

The habitat at Golfo Aranci is a coastal maquis with numerous Pistacia lentiscus on

a hill of about 50 m in elevation (Fig. 4). It was surprising to find that the caterpillars

were found on a sun exposed, but rather windy hill. No caterpillars were observed on

the more shaded and moist parts of the hill. The habitat near Platamona Lido (Fig. 5) is

a costal dune area overgrown with herbaceous plants, trees, and bushes of which Pinus

spp. (Pinaceae )and Juniperus oxycedrus L. (Cupressaceae) were the dominant species.

There were rather few P. lentiscus bushes, and the only one with flowers, where the

caterpillar was found, was growing on the south side of the locality, exposed to the sun

and rather protected against the wind.

we noted that only a small proportion ©

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 23-26 DD

cat oe

y ¢ Sant. ee .

Figs 2-3. Larva of Eupithecia lentiscata Mabille, 1869. 2. Green form. 3. Reddish form.

Figs 4—5. Habitat of Eupithecia lentiscata Mabille, 1869. 4. Near Golfo Aranci, Sardinia. 5. Near Porto

Torres, Platamona Lido, Sardinia.

Acknowledgements

We are thankful to Dr Vladimir Mironov, St. Petersburg, for his kind confirmation of the identification of

the caterpillars and the male genitalia slide, based on the authors’ photos, and to Martin Corley, Faringdon,

United Kingdom, for linguistic help.

References

Dietze, K. 1910. Biologie der Eupithecien. Teil 1 (Tafeln). — Friedlander & Sohn, Berlin.

Dietze, K. 1913. Biologie der Eupithecien. Teil 2 (Text). — Friedlander & Sohn, Berlin.

Flamigni, C., G. Fiumi & P. Parenzan 2007. Lepidotteri Eteroceri d‘Italia, Geometridae Ennominae I. —

Natura Edizioni Scientifiche, Bologna. 384 pp.

Mabille, P. 1869. Enumération monographique des Eupithécies de lile de Corse (2° partie). — Annales de

la Société Entomologique de France 9 (4 sér.): 64-80.

Mabille, P. 1872. Recherches et observations lépidoptérologiques. — Annales de la Société Entomologique

de France 2 (5 sér.): 489-502.

Mironov, V. 2003. Larentiinae II (Perizomini and Eupitheciini). — Jn: A. Hausmann (ed.), The Geometrid

Moths of Europe 4. — Apollo Books, Stenstrup. 463 pp., 16 pls.

26 E

MULLER & Skou: On Eupithecia lentiscata

Miiller, B. 1996. Geometridae. — Jn: O. Kholk & J. Razowski (eds.), The Lepidoptera of Biaeees A Dis-

tributional Checklist. Pp. 218-249. — Apollo Books, Stenstrup.

Raineri, V. & S. Zangheri 1995. 90. Lepidoptera Drepanoidea, Axioidea, Geometroidea. — In: A. Mineili

S. Ruffo & S. La Posta (eds.), Checklist delle specie della fauna Italiana, parts 88-91. — Edizioni

Calderini, Bologna. 43 pp.

Fal

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 27-37 De

Oviposition habitat and feeding behaviour of the dingy skipper

(Erynnis tages (Linnaeus, 1758), in Schleswig-Holstein (North

Germany) (Hepseriidae)

ANJA JASCHKE! & DETLEF KOLLIGS”

' Institut fiir Geowissenschaften, Abteilung Biogeographie, Universitatstrabe 30, 95447 Bayreuth

2 Okologie-Zentrum der Universitat Kiel, Abteilung Landschaftsékologie, Olshausenstr. 75, 24118 Kiel;

E-Mail: dkolligs@ecology.uni-kiel.de

Abstract. The habitat requirements of the dingy skipper (Erynnis tages (L., 1758), Hesperiidae), especially

for Oviposition, were unknown in Schleswig-Holstein, North Germany. In order to gain information on its

environmental requirements, egg-laying females were observed in early June, 2006, at one location close

to the town of Schleswig. Altogether, 62 egg depositions were recorded and different parameters were

measured. The only host plants in this region are small, separated growing, non-flowering plants of Lotus

corniculatus (L., 1753, Fabaceae) which were exposed to the sun. These observations point toward a

narrow microclimatic preference of the butterfly in this area. Additional visiting of flowers by the imagines

was observed. Erynnis tages seems to prefer yellow-flowering plants.

Zusammenfassung. Die Habitatanspriiche des Leguminosen-Dickkopffalters (Erynnis tages) sind

bisher wenig untersucht worden. Deshalb wurden Anfang Juni 2006 Weibchen bei der Eiablage in einer

ehemaligen Kiesgrube nahe Schleswig in Norddeutschland beobachtet und unterschiedliche Parameter

an den Eiablagestellen aufgenommen. Insgesamt konnten 62 Eiablagen beobachtet werden. Es wurden

ausschlieBlich kleine, einzeln stehende, nicht bliihende Pflanzen von Lotus corniculatus belegt, die

gleichzeitig stark besonnt waren. Dies deutet auf eine enge mikroklimatische Einnischung des Falters in

diesem Gebiet hin. Zusatzlich wurden die von den Imagines aufgesuchten Bliitenpflanzen dokumentiert.

Erynnis tages scheint gelb-bliihende Pflanzen zu bevorzugen.

Introduction

In Schleswig-Holstein, North Germany, the dingy skipper (Erynnis tages (Linnaeus,

1758) is threatened with extinction. Formerly widespread in different types of nutrient-

poor grasslands, it is now found in stable populations at only three sites (Kolligs 2003).

Erynnis tages is also listed as highly endangered in adjacent Denmark (Stolze 2005).

In Central Germany oviposition and adult habitats in semi-dry calcareous grasslands

have been analysed by Fartmann (2004). But for successful conservation and

recolonisation of this species in Schleswig-Holstein, a detailed knowledge of the local

egg-laying and larval habitat is essential, such as Asher et al. (2001) published for the

conservation action plans in Great Britain. In contrast Fartmann & Hermann (2006)

have shown that the knowledge needed for the conservation and recolonisation of most

Central European butterfly species, including E. tages, is still insufficient.

Therefore, this paper uncovers the habitat requirements of E. tages in a part of Northern

Germany, including the oviposition microhabitats as well as the feeding behaviour of

the butterfly. |

Material and methods

S tudy Area. The study was carried out near the city of Idstedt, close to the city

of Schleswig (Schleswig-Holstein, North Germany) (Fig. la). The study area was for-

Nota lepidopterologica, 15.5.2009, ISSN 0342-7536

28 JASCHKE & Ko tics: Life history of Erynnis tages

| Fig. 1. Map of Schleswig-Holstein with

| a) the location and b) the topography of the

| study area.

merly used as a gravel pit. The butterfly had a scattered distribution on the site, reaching

highest densities between two ponds (Fig. 1b). The study area was characterised by a

nutrient-poor (oligotrophic) grassland community (e.g. Agrostis capillaris (L., 1753,

Poaceae), Anthyllis vulneraria (L., 1753, Fabaceae), Hieracium pilosella (L., 1753,

Asteraceae) and Lotus corniculatus) with shrubs (Fig. 2). The open parts were exposed

to the sun, where different young trees were coming up (e.g. Acer pseudoplatanus

(L., 1753, Aceraceae), Betula pendula (Roth, 1788, Corylaceae), Crataegus monogyna

(Jacqg., 1775, Rosaceae), Quercus robur (L., 1753, Fagaceae), and Larix decidua (Mill.,

1768, Pinaceae).

Observation of oviposition. These observations were carried out from June

2 to June 8, 2006. The egg-laying analysis started with the pursuit of females, with

care taken not to disturb them. When egg-laying was observed, the site was marked

with a post. Following egg deposition, the female was pursued further, if possible. The —

observation was stopped after five minutes if the female did not lay additional eggs.

Sample plots were established with the host plant in the center of the area. Each sample _

plot included one square meter around the egg-laying site (Fig. 3). The following

environmental parameters were measured: 1. Growth form of the plant (single-shooted,

oligo-shooted, young side shoot, extensive stand); 2. Plant height; 3. Oviposition height;

4. Mean vegetation height (three measurements, randomly); 5. Vegetation coverage

(estimated, in 5% units), 6. Mean litter layer height (three measurements ingmasstotely a

at the covered plant). i:

Feeding behaviour of the adults. The feeding behaviour of Erynnis ee M a

was observed during monitoring of the females. The plant species and the quae) ity,of ~.4

feeding observations were recorded. ar “

em St tistics. peessoeccal: analysis was carried out with STATISTICA a

__ 1998). Data were b fonies Lon fasten distribution che Peneail (8 jm:

eee ev Oy en Pe

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 27-37

Yi3)

Figs 2-3. Study area. 2. Habitat between the two lakes;

view from the south. 3. Marked egg-laying plant in the

centre of the sample plot.

Results

Feeding observations. The

butterflies were observed visiting

flowers primarily in the morning

and after oviposition. During phases

without sun, the butterflies rested

on the vegetation. Yellow-flowered

plants were the most frequented

(S15 of 574; 89.7%). Feeding was

observed less often on blue-violet

flowers (43 of 574; 7.5%). Red and

white flowers as well as plants with

small flowers were rarely visited (16

of 574; 2.8%) (Fig. 4). Hieracium

pilosella and Trifolium medium

(L., 1759, Fabaceae) were the most

abundant flowering plant species

at the time of our observations.

However, Trifolium medium was

clearly less used than Hieracium

pilosella. Lotus corniculatus was

often visited too, though it just

started flowering during our field

work.

Oviposition. In total, 62 egg

Ovipositions were observed. The

eggs were placed exclusively on

Lotus corniculatus. Only one egg

per plant was laid although once two

eggs were found on one plant. Fifty-

three of the 62 eggs deposited (85%)

were placed on the costa of the upper

surface (Fig. 5), eight eggs (12.9%)

on the inferior leaf surface, and one

egg (1.6%) on the stalk. There were

no flowers developed on any of the

host plants at that time.

Most of the occupied plants were

single-shooted (62.9%) or oligo-

shooted young plants (20.9%). In six

cases (9.7%), the eggs were laid on

a side shoot of a young plant; in four

cases (6.5%), the eggs were laid in

a Lotus corniculatus stand (Fig. 6).

30 JASCHKE & Ko ics: Life history of Erynnis tages

Feeding observations

)

ae :

Cc >

| ro

| -

| >

| -

| +

6 1. 1 (eee

Es D a es ee aoe E €£ 25 SF BS SC € Eo

Esso 328 £56 Es So eh Feige § 20a

50D o®B® HSE oe 5. sy ye eS a] eS 2) Wea == =

7” Sy PO DBS OS Se On Ole OSs al nOmeO 6 ono 2

“Se oe ao te ® De Oe | Oy Cer iGO ‘= O= 972 £ oO £ &

Sp ET ae 7) oO iL o 0 0D ws a 2 0 OS ees

=a +e sc D = @ Doe) Sta i 2 as) £ S30 F = @&

7 Big) Geo yO OL ee OES =o=

yellow violet white blue red

Species

Fig. 4. Number of feeding observations during field work; n = 574.

Fig. 5. Shoots of Lotus corniculatus with eggs of Erynnis tages on the costa.

Most of the eggs (80.7%) were placed on small plants up to 9 cm height (Fig. 7). The

highest number of eggs (45.2%) was found on plants that were 3 to 6 cm high. Egg

placement on a plant that was more than 18 cm high was observed only once though

extensive stands of Lotus corniculatus were the most frequent growth form (>80%)

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 27-37 31

20 -

plants

single-shooted young plant oligo-shooted young plant young side shoot stand

growth form

Fig. 6. Number of occupied Lotus corniculatus depending on growth form; n = 62.

plants

eggs/plants

>9-12

height [cm]

Fig. 7. Height [cm] of egg-laying of Erynnis tages and of occupied Lotus corniculatus; n = 62.

in the habitat. Most of the eggs laid (45.2%) were found 3 to 6 cm above ground.

Above 6 cm, the number of eggs deposited decreased with an increase in the height

of the plants. Egg depositions were only rarely observed at heights of more than 9 cm

and less than 3 cm.

- ?

D2 JASCHKE & Ko tics: Life history of Erynnis tages

Wh...

>16-21 >21-26 >26-31 >31-36 >36-41 >41-46

mean vegetation height [cm]

sample plots

Fig. 8. Mean vegetation height [cm] one square meter around the occupied plants; n = 62.

: : tiie

vegetation coverage [%]

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 27-37 33

Tab. 1. Minimum (MIN), maximum (MAX), mean value (MV) and standard deviation (SD) for the

examined parameters, n = 62.

>2-3 >3-4

mean litter layer [cm]

Fig. 10. Mean litter layer [cm] immediately under the occupied plant; n = 62.

(Fig. 8). The mean vegetation of all egg-laying sites was dominated by few grasses per

square meter, resulting in a loose vegetation structure 5 cm above the ground.

The vegetation coverage in the examined plots was more than 65% in all areas. Most

of the egg depositions (32.3%) were observed in sample plots with coverage between

90 and 95%. Overall, 80.7% of the eggs were placed in plots with more than 85%

| vegetation coverage (Fig. 9).

The litter layer was below 1.5 cm around a predominant number of the egg-occupied

plants (71%). The number of egg depositions observed decreased with an increase in

litter layer. The highest litter layer (6 cm) was observed only at one plant on which two

eggs had been laid (Fig. 10).

. For all parameters, the values for the minima and maxima show large deviations

34 JASCHKE & Ko.tics: Life history of Erynnis tages

Statistics. All recorded parameters were tested against the dependent variables

“height of egg deposition” and “plant height” for the correlation analysis (Tab. 2).

Significant linear correlations were found between plant height and mean litter layer,

mean vegetation height and vegetation coverage as well as egg-laying height against

plant height, mean litter layer, mean vegetation height, and vegetation coverage.

The height of egg deposition was positively correlated to plant height, but also with

vegetation coverage, mean litter layer height, and mean vegetation height (Tab. 2). The

height of the plant was also positively correlated with these four parameters (Tab. 2).

A positive correlation was also found between the height of egg deposition and the

percentage of the used plant height. Most eggs were placed on the top 20% of the plant

(Fig. 11).

Discussion

Visited flowers. The observation of flowers visited as nectar sources by Erynnis

tages provided information on habitat requirements other than the larval food plant.

Although Lotus corniculatus was the only plant observed for egg-laying, its importance

as a nectar source for the adults was small, though it just started flowering during the

time of our observations. The most abundant flowering plant species at that time were

Trifolium medium and Hieracium pilosella. However, the most frequented flowering

plant during this study was Hieracium pilosella. Whether this observation indicates a

real preference for this plant species in general or just a reaction to the current flower

offer (number in the study area during time of observation) cannot be answered at this

time. Feeding observations on blue-violet flowers as well as red and white flowers

may be assessed as an indication that Erynnis tages is able to use a wider spectrum of

flowering plants. The affinity for Fabaceae, mentioned by Ebert & Rennwald (1993)

could not be confirmed.

Egg-laying habitat. Ourresults show a clear preference for oviposition habitat

in the investigated area. Because the observed E. tages females “showed” where they

layed their eggs we can exclude that our results reflect our field search strategy or that

alternative egg-laying structures were overlooked.

Plant height. The height of egg deposition was narrowly correlated with the height

of the egg-laying plants. Small Lotus corniculatus plants were preferred as directly

proven by our observations of the egg-laying females. The choice of small Lotus

corniculatus plants for egg placement seems to point toward a narrow microclimatic | 2

preference because in the habitat such plants were only a minor resource. Extensive

stands of Lotus corniculatus with plants more than 10 centimetres high dominated. The ©

preference for small, isolated plants for oviposition contradicts the results of Gutiérrez

: bere — and Asher et al. Soules They observed that females of mili S

SL OF a ee a eS

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 27-37 5S

Tab. 2. Results of Spearman-rang-correlation (rs); n = 62; * = p< 0.05, ** =p < 0.01, *** =p <0.001

mean vegetation height [cm] ().30*

vegetation coverage [%]

litter layer height [% 0.41 **

plant height [cm] 0.97**

plant height [cm]

—~6

tau

percent [%]

Fig. 11. Regression analysis of egg-laying height in percentage of the occupied plant versus plant

height [cm]; r=0.32; p=0.01; y=-3.87 + 0.12*x.

plant. All studies indicate local accommodations on different habitats in order to find

warm microclimatic conditions for oviposition. Therefore climatic differences between

studied regions could be the reason for the use of varying habitat structures over the

distribution range of Erynnis tages.

Mean vegetation height. A correlation between egg deposition and the mean vegetation

height is shown. The eggs were mainly placed at sites with vegetation between 16 and

31 cm in height and dominated mostly by grasses. In all sample plots the vegetation

structure was loose and dominated by single plants only. The advantage of these

conditions is the combination of wind sheltering and good insolation of the eggs.

Second, the females of Erynnis tages are able to fly low through the vegetation in

search of oviposition plants (personal observation). No females have been observed

flying in areas with high and dense vegetation.

Vegetation covering. Most eggs were deposited on plants surrounded by more than

80% vegetation coverage, mostly 100% coverage. Fartmann (2004) found most eggs in

36 JASCHKE & Ko tics: Life history of Erynnis tages

semi-dry grasslands on sites with varying percentages of bare ground around the food

plant, preferably with 15% bare ground. In contrast, Gutiérrez et al. (1999) found that

most eggs were laid “on large plants growing in hollows with intermediate cover of

bare ground [...]”.

This difference in habitat selection of the English population could be interpreted as

local accommodation for the preferred warm microclimate as well. It is also known

that bare ground is used by the imagos for warming up and for water intake on wet

soil (Ebert & Rennwald 1993). It is likely that there must be open soil in the habitat in

general to allow these activities.

Mean litter layer. The egg-laying height was positively correlated to the mean litter layer

height surrounding the egg-laying plant. A microclimatic influence of the litter layer on

the choice of egg-laying sites seems possible. As Fartmann & Hermann (2006) pointed

out, species with eggs susceptible to drought depend on habitats with higher humidity,

mostly in combination with warm microclimatic conditions. We have observed that

most eggs of E. tages at our study site were placed on plants surrounded by a thin litter

layer. Fartmann (2004) found the eggs of E. tages in semidry calcareous grasslands

mostly on plants with no litter layer underneath.

Conclusions. For Hesperia comma (L., 1758) (Hesperiidae), Hermann and Stei-

ner (1997) showed that occurrence, frequency, and distribution are strongly limited

by quality and expansion of suitable oviposition habitats. This depended on different

parameters such as microclimate, host plants, and quantity and quality of food (Fartmann

& Hermann 2006). In this investigation a microclimatic preference could be assumed

from the shown positive correlation of plant height and oviposition height with the

parameters measured. Unfortunately we did not map all plants of Lotus corniculatus in

the sample plots. Generally not more than 5 to 10 single shoots per sample plot were

found. In contrast, all areas were Lotus corniculatus stood in extensive stands were

not used for oviposition. We interpret the shown range of used vegetation densities by

Erynnis tages as a microclimatic preference which leads to increasing use of higher

plants with increasing vegetation density and height in the observed possible spectrum.

With increasing litter layer, mean vegetation height, or vegetation coverage the height

of Lotus corniculatus plants used for oviposition increased also. In contrast, the height

of egg deposition was independent of the height of the used plant and with only a few

exceptions the top 20% of the plant was used.

For Erynnis tages, the microclimatic conditions seem to be an important parameter.

Gutiérrez et al. (1999) suggested that “selection for warm micro-sites for egg-laying

can be the result of temperature requirements for the early stages [...]”. Fartmann & — 3

Hermann (2006) assumed that exposition, slope, vegetation height, and vegetation |

coverage of the oviposition site as well as the height of egg deposition had a decisive | 3

: influence on the microclimate and, consequently, on the chances of successful es

bas ieistame. cae |

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 27-37 37

plant; (5) The mean vegetation height ranged between 16 and 36 cm; and (6) The

vegetation coverage was 85% or more. Occasional egg depositions on the inferior leaf

surface or on the stalk may be connected to the plant’s growth form. It may also depend

on the way a female climbs along the host plant. Although extensive stands of Lotus

corniculatus were most frequent at our study site, only small, single-stemmed young

plants were chosen for oviposition by the observed females. The placement of just

one egg per plant may be explained by a preference for young and small specimens of

Lotus corniculatus; there were not enough food resources for more than one larva on

one plant. Plants bearing eggs of their own species are often avoided in order to prevent

competition between larvae (Fartmann & Hermann 2006).

References

Asher, J.. M. Warren, R. Fox, P. Harding, G. Jeffcoate & S. Jeffcoate 2001. The Millennium Atlas of

Butterflies in Britain and Ireland. — Oxford University Press, Oxford. 433 pp.

Braun-Blanquet, J. 1964 (3 edn.). Pflanzensoziologie. — Springer, Wien-New York. 865 pp.

Ebert, G. & E. Rennwald (eds) 1993. Die Schmetterlinge Baden-Wiirttembergs; Band 2, Tagfalter II. —

Ulmer, Stuttgart. 535 pp. ,

Fartmann, T. 2004. Die Schmetterlingsgemeinschaften der Halbtrockenrasen-Komplexe des Diemelta-

_ Jes. — Abhandlungen aus dem Westfalischen Museum fiir Naturkunde 66: 1—256.

Fartmann, T. & G. Hermann 2006. Larvalékologie von Tagfaltern und Widderchen in Mitteleuropa —

von den Anfangen bis heute. Pp. 11-57 — Jn: Fartmann, T. & G. Hermann (Eds), Larvalokologie von

Tagfaltern und Widderchen in Mitteleuropa. — Abhandlungen aus dem Westfalischen Museum fiir

Naturkunde 68. 361 pp.

Gutiérrez, D., C. D. Thomas & J. L. Leon-Cortés 1999. Dispersal, distribution, patch network and meta-

population dynamics of the dingy skipper butterfly (Erynnis tages). Oecologia 121: 506-517.

Hermann, G. & R. Steiner 1997. Eiablage- und Larvalhabitat des Komma-Dickkopffalters (Hesperia

comma Linné, 1758) in Baden-Wiirttemberg (Lepidoptera, Hesperiidae). Carolinea 55: 35-42.

Kolligs, D. 1998. Die Gro&schmetterlinge Schleswig-Holsteins — Rote Liste. —- Landesamt fiir Natur und

Umwelt des Landes Schleswig-Holstein. 68 pp.

Kolligs, D. 2003 (2™ edn). Schmetterlinge Schleswig-Holsteins: Atlas der Tagfalter, Dickkopffalter und

Widderchen: Bilanz und Analyse der Gefahrdungssituation. — Wachholtz, Neumiinster. 218 pp.

Stolze, M. 2005. Status over Danmarks dagsommerfugle 2005. — Internet publication: http://www.dof.dk/

pdf/nyhede.

38 Book review

Bernard Skinner (Illustrations by David Wilson) 2009. Colour identification guide to moths

of the British Isles (Macrolepidoptera), 3rd revised and updated edition. — Apollo Books,

Stenstrup. — 325 pp. incl. 51 colour pls. — Hardcover, ISBN 978-87-88757-90-3. Price 69 €

(See www.apollobooks.com).

The scope of this beautifully prepared book is all macro moths, as well as the Hepialidae,

Cossidae, Zygaenidae, Limacodidae, and Sesiidae of the British Isles (including all of Ireland). |

It treats more than 750 species, but the exact number is unspecified. Its purpose is to provide

photos of the moths to enable their identification by wing pattern. In variable species up to six

or more specimens are shown on the plates.

The second edition of the work, published in 1998, has been expanded here to treat a number of

additional species shown on three extra plates from the original 42, which are simply presented

anew, but which are better in quality than in previous editions (P. Skou, pers. comm.; I didn’t

have access to previous editions). In addition, there are six new plates with 2x natural size

exquisite photos of the right pair of wings of species that are more difficult to identify, with the

species names mentioned directly on the plates. In some cases the upper- and undersides of the

wings are presented. There is no doubt that these new plates will be found very useful, and some

of the species of Eupithecia would have benefited from being presented on these plates as well.

However, in general I found the plates all a bit dark. The plate legends give the English and

scientific names with the page number on which the species treatment starts.

The text is devoted almost entirely to the species treatments, although most families are given a

short introduction as well. A preface explains in one page the reasoning behind the making up of

this new edition. A page of acknowledgements, misspelled in heading without final ‘s’ and half

a page of introduction follow. Among others, author B. Skinner thanked Roger Tory Peterson

for his permission to use his method of pointers in some of 57 sets of black and white figures

scattered throughout the text and designed to illustrate diagnostic characters. The introduction

explains where the common and scientific names of plants and insects come from, as well as

those used for counties. A glossary and abbreviations page precedes the species descriptions. It

is supplemented by a useful drawing with labels to the diverse wing pattern elements and main

body parts.

Each species description is headed by the common name, followed by the scientific name, and

a plate and figure number. The descriptions per se start with or without chapters on variation

and/or similar species, depending on the need for.this information. The following chapter, titled

Imago, gives wingspan, resident status, flying habit and phenology, habitat, distribution, and

abundance. A Larva chapter then provides information on time of occurence and host-plant(s)

of the caterpillar. Sometimes a chapter on the pupa is provided as well.

The colour plates immediately follow the species description and then, a page with heading

‘Further information’ gives the names of the species protected by Law, a few useful references,

and the names and addresses of four local entomological societies. This is followed by alistof

the host-plants with their scientific names, an index of moth scientific names, and one for moth

English names. The latter indices are easy to use as only the page numbers, in normal type, and. @

plate number(s) in bold type are provided. a

Po bel the species accounts one can tell why the moth fauna of the British Isle sisone

___ of the best known, if not the best known in the world. For example, I was impressed 6

exact re ss — r od melant more nchncrcorinoanee In my shpat DC

Re F re

“try

& F yi . > ei ie at

yi a ns Pa aor way

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 39-46 39

Microhabitat requirements of caterpillars of the critically

endangered butterfly Chazara briseis (L.) (Nymphalidae,

Satyrinae) in the Czech Republic

TomAS Kapiec!, PAVEL VRBA? & MARTIN KONVICKA ”*?

' Department of Ecology, Faculty of Science, Charles University, Vinicna 7, 128 44 Prague,

Czech Republic; e-mail: lepidopter@seznam.cz (corresponding author)

* Department of Zoology, School of Biological Sciences, University of Southern Bohemia,

Branisovska 31, 370 05, Ceske Budejovice, Czech Republic; e-mail: vrba_pavel@centrum.cz

> Institute of Entomology, Czech Academy of Sciences, Branisovska 31, 370 05 Ceske Budejovice,

Czech Republic; e-mail: konva@entu.cas.cz

Abstract. We report the larval microhabitat preferences of the critically endangered Hermit butterfly,

Chazara briseis (L.) (Nymphalidae, Satyrinae), from a population inhabiting steep basaltic hills of the

Ceske Stredohori highlands, Czech Republic. Based on field records of 61 pre-pupation larvae, we argue

that they require dry, south to south-west exposed slopes containing short tufts of their fescue host-plants

(Festuca ovina L. agg.) growing on exposed bedrock. These conditions have been maintained by traditional

sheep grazing, recently supplemented by trampling along tourist paths. These preferences are practically

identical to those found in an earlier study near Halle an der Saale, Germany, situated 180 km to the

northeast. Despite the larval preference for short-sward vegetation, C. briseis also requires taller-sward and

even shrubby patches providing nectar and shelter for adults. Heterogeneity of conditions is also necessary

for several co-occurring endangered insects, including Lepidoptera. Efficient conservation of C. briseis

should be planned and practised over the whole area of occurrence of the population.

Introduction

The Hermit, Chazara briseis (Linnaeus, 1764) (Nymphalidae, Satyrinae) is increasingly

threatened throughout the European part of its range. Its global distribution includes the

Mediterranean region, Europe up to southern Scandinavia, southern Russia, Asia Minor,

Central Asia, and Northern China. This specialist of xeric grasslands was once widely

distributed in all warmer regions of Central Europe. It underwent a severe decline

during last decades due to habitat loss caused mainly by abandonment of grazing and

by subsequent successional overgrowth, locally hastened by intentional afforestation

of its sites (e.g. Dolek & Geyer 1997; Reinhardt et al. 2007). The speed of the decline

is illustrated by the situation in the Czech capital Prague, where the butterfly was so

common in the 1950s that it was nicknamed “the Prague butterfly”, but it completely

disappeared after the 1980s (Kadlec et al. 2008). In the whole country, the species

occurred in 60 atlas grid cells (10 x 11 km) prior to the 1950s, but occurs in just three

cells presently (Benes et al. 2002; Czech butterfly recording scheme). Similarly rapid

losses are under way in Austria, Germany, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and Slovenia

(Ebert & Rennwald 1991; Buszko 1993; Van Swaay & Warren 1999; Cremene et al.

2005; R. Verovnik pers. comm.).

In 2006 we made an autecology research of the last large (meta)population in the Czech

Republic, in the Ceske Stredohori highlands. The population appeared prospering,

containing over 1000 adults of each sex in ten separate but mutually interconnected

colonies, and exhibiting a high within-population genetic diversity. Less optimistically,

Nota lepidopterologica, 15.5.2009, ISSN 0342-7536

bey nz lipoda germanica (Latreille, 1804), Stenobothrus eurasius (Zubowsky, ee

40 KADLEC et al.: Chazara briseis’ caterpillar microhabitat

our findings were remarkably similar to those found a decade ago in Germany, Halle an

der Saale region, 180 km to the NW from our study area, within a volcanic chain forming

a continuation of the Ceske Stredohori highlands. This German (meta)population

appeared as abundant, structured, and genetically diverse (Seufert & Grosser 1996),

but despite these signs of a healthy status, it has become nearly extinct during just a

decade (M. Dolek, pers. comm.). We also discovered, in the Czech population, that

inseminated females required a strikingly long period of about three weeks to complete |

egg maturation. This pattern, characteristic for several genera of large Satyrinae (Garcia-

Barros 2000), resulted in only 25-50 per cent of adult females living long enough to

lay any eggs during their lifetime (unpubl. data). This demographic load decreases the

effective population size to a half, or even a quarter, of the census population. Viable

populations of C. briseis thus must contain twice to four times as many individuals

than populations of “normal” butterflies. Because large populations require large areas

of habitat, restoration of suitable habitat conditions over large pieces of land appears as

the only chance to preserve C. briseis in Central Europe.

In this study, we focus on larval habitats of the Ceske Stredohori population. We (i)

describe the larval requirements of the Ceske Stredohori populations; (ii) compare

them with the situation at geographically close sites in Germany; and (iii) discuss the

conservation implications of the larval requirements.

Material and methods

Study system. The studied population inhabits steppic grasslands on ten basaltic

hills at the southwestern edge of the Ceske Stredohori Highlands, NW Czech Republic

(—). The grasslands are believed to have been present there for the entire Holocene

owing to grazing pressure combined with a highly continental climate in rain shadows

of the Krusne Mts (Lozek 2000). They were traditionally used as sheep pastures,

whereas the intermingling landscape consists of arable fields and orchards. The grazing

management has been declining gradually from the early 20th century onwards, some

of the hills were intentionally afforested, and the land use changes accelerated in the

1960s (intensification of agriculture, further decline of sheep grazing), and again in the

1990s (closure of remaining commercial sheep farms).

The hills represent an important refuge for the steppic flora and fauna in Central

Europe. Besides of C. briseis, they host the last Czech populations of several species

of Lepidoptera, such as the lycaenid butterflies Polyommatus damon (Denis et

Schiffermueller, 1775) and Pseudophilotes vicrama (Moore, 1865), the arctiid moth

Watsonarctia casta (Esper, 1785), and the noctuid Sideridis lampra (Schawerda, 1913).

Notable Orthoptera include Euchorthippus pulvinatus (Fischer-Waldheim, 1846),

tithe on ts frontalis Fieber, 1844). The area also harbours one of the agg

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 39-46 4]

small-scale sheep grazing and scrub clearance. Another important activity is a tolerated

use of one of the hills for aeronautic sports, such as hang gliding and paragliding.

Chazara briseis adults appear in mid-July, but the females start laying eggs as late

as late August (unpubl. data). They do so singly, utilising shorter-sward patches,

maintained by grazing or trampling. The host plants are fescue grasses (Festuca ovina

agg., F. pallens H.) and Sesleria albicans Sch. (Ebert & Rennwald 1991) (Poaceae).

The larvae emerge at the end of September, overwinter in the first instar, and pupate in

early summer.

Data and analysis. Wesearched for caterpillars at Rana hill, a colony that hosted

almost 40% of the total adult numbers (870 out of 2300) in 2006, for a total of three

nights in 2007 (May 30, June | and 3, 2007). We always begun at sunset and used torch

light to search short-sward patches, where we observed the majority (26 out of 30) of

Oviposition events during the mark-recapture study in September of the previous year.

These places were either giazed by sheep, or occasionaliy trampled owing to proximity

of walking paths. For each caterpillar found, we recorded the closest hour, temperature,

cloudiness, wind, behaviour (feeding, resting, crawling), and its body length. We then

delimited a circle with a 0.25 m* surface around the larva and ortho-photographed it

from a height of 1.5 m. These photographs were subsequently used to quantify the

proportional amount of open soil and rocks, host-plants and other vegetation, using the

program DIVA-GIS version 5.2.0.2 (www.diva-gis.org). For each positive record we

also measured the height of the vegetation, inclination, and geographical aspect. We

established the minimum distance to the nearest shrub (up to 5 meters), habitat type

(distinguishing short-sward steppe — maximum height of vegetation < 50 cm and long-

sward steppe — height of vegetation > 50 cm), and habitat structure (open — grasslands

without shrubs, shrubby — grasslands with sparse growth of shrubs, forest steppe —

mixture of grassland, scrub and occasional trees). The data were compared with similar

data from a German population near Halle an der Saale (Seufert and Grosser 1996),

using ¥? tests.

Results

During the three-night search, we located a total of 61 C. briseis larvae at 55 separate

plots (6 plots hosted two larvae) (Fig. 1). The length of the caterpillars was 18-38 mm

(30.743 .7SD), corresponding to the last two larval instars.

The prevailing weather was mild, with half-overcast sky and weak gusts of wind. The

temperature was around 10 C, dropping to 4 C before sunrise. The first caterpillars

were observed around 10 pm, the last were still active at 3 am. Most of the interim time

(n= 49), they fed on fescue grasses from the Festuca ovina group, whereas only twelve

larvae crawled or rested on barren substrate (n = 2) or on herbaceous material (7 = 10).

The fescue tufts used were narrow, with a surface of 120-240 cm’; only few larvae fed

on narrower or wider ones.

All larvae were found on slopes exposed mainly to the S or SW (Tab. 1). The habitat

was short-sward steppe, locally overgrown by shrubs (the mean distance from larvae

4? KapDLec et al.: Chazara briseis’ caterpillar microhabitat

Tab. 1. Comparison of conditions of larval sites at two nearby regions hosting populations of Chazara

briseis. In all cases except for n (sample size), means + SD, Chi-sq values of tests, and P values are

presented. Data for the German population are from Seufert & Grosser (1996).

Population arren ground (%) | Turf height (cm)

Ceske Stredohori (Cz)

Halle an der Saale (D)

Chi-sq values

to the edges of the nearest shrub: 120+70 cm). All occupied plots were either grazed

by sheep a year before ( = 40) or trampled by visitors (n = 15). The turf was short and

sparse (Tab. 1, Fig. 2).

In the German population (Seufert & Grosser 1996), caterpillars were found in

remarkably similar conditions. Their habitats were also restricted to volcanic hills, and

the conditions at occupied plots were practically identical to the conditions within the

Czech population (Tab. 1). There were no differences between conditions in the Czech

and the German population (all y* tests were non-significant at P > 0.1).

Discussion

We located a relatively high number of caterpillars during the three-night searches.

This was likely because we restricted the sampling to sections of the Rana hill with

short steppic vegetation, where a year before we actually observed ovipositing females,

i.e. the mothers of the investigated larvae. The area with suitable conditions is rather

restricted on the hill, covering no more than 30 ha, whereas the remaining 140 ha of

the hillsides is covered by tall-sward formations dominated by Stipa spp., completely

unsuitable for the butterfly.

The caterpillars used either grazed or trampled micro-sites. Both grazing and trampling

favour the low growing tussocky host plants (Festuca ovina agg., Sesleria albicans)

over tall-bladed ones (e.g., Stipa spp.) (cf. Hill et al. 1992) thus increasing host plant

supply. They also maintain bare bedrock (Fig. 2), which, here and in other studies

(Dolek & Geyer 1997; K6nigsdorfer 1997; Leopold 2001), appears to maintain a warm

and dry microclimate suitable for the C. briseis development (examples from other

butterfly species, e.g., Thomas 1995; Fartmann 2006; Maes et al. 2006). The decline

of the heterogeneous, non-intensive grazing, once carried out by most of the village _ : 4

households across Central Europe, is widely recognised as the main reason for the C.

briseis decline. Once the grazing is terminated, the conditions change dramatically

from short, tussocky vegetation to taller-sward. Grass feeding by sheep, on the other

irea left and before local conservationists established a co

_ hand, probably does not harm the caterpillars owing to their nocturnal activity and the

ability to wander among host-plants, e.g., if entire the tussock is consumed.

_ Mhenills: were leftungrazed for almosta decade during the 1990s, after the lastcomm

- ~ ‘

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 39-46 43

and fans of aeronautic sports. For some

time, it was feared that these activities

may harm the grassland vegetation. This

view is changing rapidly as it is becoming

clear that limited trampling is beneficial

for C. briseis and other species profiting

from the presence of patches of barren

ground.

The short-sward patches with barren

bedrock —1.e., the larval habitat — represent

just one of several resources required

as by C. briseis. Further resources include

Fig. 1. A caterpillar of the Hermit (Chazara briseis). nectar supply, critical for this long-lived

Rana Hill, Ceske Stredohori, Czech Republic, .

May 30, 2007. species (Garcia-Barros 2000), and shelter.

We observed that if the ground cover was

appropriate for larvae, sparse solitary

shrubs nearby did not affect the occurrence of caterpillars, and the shrubs instead

provided shelter for ovipositing females (unpublished data). It follows that managing

localities for C. briseis requires maintenance of heterogeneous conditions via applying

such measures as fencing to temporarily exclude grazing animals.

Heterogeneity of conditions is also necessary for other co-occurring and endangered

species. While some such species require the short sward utilised by C. briseis larvae

(e.g., the butterfly P. vicrama, the mammal S. citellus), others prefer taller herbaceous

vegetation. Perhaps the most dramatic case is represented by Polyommatus damon,

an endangered species occurring in the Czech Republic in just four populations. The

butterfly is absolutely intolerant to sheep grazing (e.g., Kudrna 1998; Dolek & Geyer

2002), in striking contrast to C. briseis. While past landscapes consisted of fine-grained

patchworks allowing sensitive insects to track temporarily suitable sites (e.g., Kruess

& Tscharntke 2002; Saarinen & Jantunen 2005), modern landscapes consist of large

and homogeneously managed tracks of land, and conservation management strives to

pack entire past habitat diversity into limited space of reserves (Morris 2000; Bourn &

Thomas 2002; Wenzel et al. 2006).

The striking similarity between the Czech Ceske Stredohori and the German Halle an der

Saale populations, and the pessimistic fate of the latter, allow some speculation on the

Czech population’s future. The German population has been declining rapidly despite

its seemingly good condition a decade ago (M. Dolek, pers. comm.). The underlying

reason seems to be the requirement for large numbers of individuals, plus the complex

habitat requirements of the butterfly: short-sward larval habitat, taller-sward nectar-

rich sites, and sheltering shrub. To prevent a decline of the Czech population, it is

necessary to expand the current conservation grazing to a considerably larger area,

while maintaining sufficient extents of taller-sward grassland and scrub. This requires

comprehensive management of the entire area, including restoration of more favourable

conditions in long-abandoned orchards at the piedmonts of the hills, now covered by

impenetrable scrub. This will incur considerable cost, but the positive news is that there

4 Wy . r. mae? §: ¥ Age. 3 “y 4 i

44 Kap ec et al.: Chazara briseis’ caterpillar microhabitat

Fig. 2. Suitable microhabitat structure occupied by C. briseis larvae. Short-sward grassland with high

proportion of exposed bedrock.

is enough space for a generous restoration project, as much of the land is currently

unused. Conserving the system is also easily reconcilable with a regulated recreation

use of the hills by hikers and aeronautic sports fans. A species action plan, now under

preparation, should secure coordination of all these activities.

Acknowledgements

We thank V. Kadlec for helping in the field, T. Fartmann for providing some less accessible literature,

and M. Dolek, J. Settele, J. Kulfan, and R. Verovnik for discussing the fate of C. briseis populations in

Germany, Slovakia, and Slovenia. The study was supported by the Czech Department of Environment

(VaV/620/1/03), Department of Education (6007665801, LC06073), doctoral grant (206/08/H049), and

the Grant Agency of the Czech Republic (206/05/HO12).

References

Wenes. J..M. Konvicka, J. Dvorak, Z. Fric, Z. Havelda, A. Pavlicko, V. Vrabec & Z. Weidenhoffer (eds.)

2002. Butterflies of the Czech Republic: Distribution and conservation I., II. - SOM, Prague, 857 pp.

Bourn. N. A.D. &J.A. Thomas 2002. The challenge of conserving grassland insects at the margins of their

range in Europe. — Biological Conservation 104: 285-292.

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 39-46 45

Pe 3 Zz

Fig. 3. Shrubby short-sward steppic grasslands in the Ceske Stredohori hills host a number of endangered

insects besides C. briseis. The habitats are under serious threat due to ongoing successional processes.

Buszko, J. 1993. Atlas motyli Polski. I. Motyle dzienne (Rhopalocera). — Grupa IMAGE, Warszawa.

269 pp.

Cepdkova, E. & S. Hulova 2002. Current distribution of the European souslik (Spermophilus citellus) in

the Czech Republic. — Lynx 33: 89-103.

Cremene, C., G. Groza, L. Rakosy, A. Schileyko, A. Baur, A. Erhardt & B. Baur 2005. Alterations of

steppe-like grasslands in Eastern Europe: a threat to regional biodiversity hotspots. - Conservation

Biology 19: 1606-1618.

Dolek, M. & A. Geyer 1997. Influence of management on butterflies of rare grassland ecosystems in

Germany. — Journal of Insect Conservation 1: 125-130.

Dolek, M. & A. Geyer 2002. Conserving biodiversity on calcareous grasslands in the Franconian Jura by

grazing: a comprehensive approach. — Biological Conservation 104: 351-360.

Ebert, G. & E. Rennwald 1991. Die Schmetterlinge Baden-Wiirttembergs. Vol 2: Tagfalter II. — Ulmer,

Stuttgart. 535 pp. |

Fartmann, T. 2006. Welche Rolle spielen Stérungen fiir Tagfalter und Widderchen? Pp. 259-270. — In:

T. Fartmann & G. Hermann (eds.), Larvaloékologie von Tagfalter und Widderchen in Mitteleuropa.

Wesfalisches Museum fiir Naturkunde 68 (3/4), Miinster.

Garcia-Barros, E. 2000. Comparative data on the adult biology, ecology and behaviour of species belonging

to the genera Hipparchia, Chazara and Kanetisa in central Spain (Nymphalidae: Satyrinae). — Nota

lepidopterologica 23: 119-140.

Hill, M. O., D. F. Evans & S. A. Bell 1992. Long-term effects of excluding sheep from hill pastures in

North Wales. — Journal of Ecology 80: 1-13.

Kadlec, T, J. Benes, V. Jarosik & M. Konvicka 2008. Revisiting urban refuges: changes of butterfly and

burnet fauna in Prague reserves over three decades. — Landscape and Urban Planning 85: 1-11.

46 Kab_ec et al.: Chazara briseis’ caterpillar microhabitat

K6ningsdorfer, M. 1997. Die Berghexe (Chazara briseis L., Satyridae) in Schwaben und angrenzenden

Gebieten. — Berichte des naturwissenschaftlichen Vereins fiir Schwaben e. V. 100: 69-87.

Kruess, A. & T. Tscharntke 2002. Grazing intensity and the diversity of grasshoppers, butterflies, and trap-

nesting bees and wasps. — Conservation Biology 16: 1570-1580.

Kudrna, O. 1998. Die Tagfalterfauna der Rh6n. — Oedippus 15: 1-158.

Leopold, P. 2001. Schmetterlingsz6nosen ausgewahlter Kalk-Magerrasen im Saale-Unstrut-Gebiet (Sach-

sen-Anhalt) unter besonderer Beriicksichtigung der Habitate des Segelfalters und der Berghexe. —

Unpublished Diploma thesis, Westfalische Wilhelms-Universitat Minster, Inst. Landschaftsdkologie. .

Lozek, V. 2000. Problematika krajinné historie Ceského sttedohoi. [Problems of landscape history of the

Ceske stredohori Mts.] — Ochrana prirody 55: 18—24.

Maes, D., A. Ghesquiere, M. Logie & D. Bonte 2006. Habitat use and mobility of two threatened coastal

dune insects: implications for conservation. — Journal of Insect Conservation 10: 105-115.

Morris, M.G. 2000. The effects of structure and its dynamics on the ecology and conservation of arthropods

in British grasslands. — Biological Conservation 95: 129-142.

Reinhardt, R., Sbieschne, H., Settele, J., Fischer, U. & G. Fiedler 2007. Tagfalter von Sachsen. Pp. 537—

541 — Jn: Klausnitzer, B. & R. Reinhardt (eds.), Beitrage zur SLT Sachsen Band 6. Ento-

mologische Nachrichten und Berichte, Dresden.

Saarinen, K. & J. Jantunen 2005. Grassland butterfly fauna under traditional animal husbandry: contrasts

in diversity in mown meadows and grazed pastures. — Biodiversity and Conservation 14: 3201-3213.

Seufert, W. & N. Grosser 1996. A population ecological study of Chazara briseis (Lepidoptera, Satyrinae).

Pp. 268-274. — In: Settele, J.. C. R. Margules, P. Poschlod & K. Henle (eds.), Species survival i in

fragmented landscapes. Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht.

Thomas, J. A. 1995. The conservation of declining butterfly populations in Britain and Europe: priorities,

problems and successes. — Biological Journal of the Linnean Society 56: 73-93.

Van Swaay, C. A. M. & M.S. Warren 1999. Red Data book of European butterflies (Rhopalocera). -

Nature and Environment, No. 99. Council of Europe Publishing, Strasbourg.

Wenzel, M., T. Schmitt, M. Weitzel & A. Seitz 2006. The severe decline of butterflies on western German

calcareous grasslands during the last 30 years: a conservation problem. — Biological Conservation 128:

542-552.

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 47-54 47

On the identity of Psodos perlinii Turati, 1914

(Geometridae: Ennominae)

SVEN ERLACHER ! & CLAUDIA JUNGHANS 2

' Museum fiir Naturkunde, MoritzstraBe 20, 09111 Chemnitz, Germany;

e-mail: erlacher@naturkunde-chemnitz.de

* Universitat Leipzig, Institut fiir Biologie I], AG Molekulare Evolution & Systematik der Tiere

Abstract. One of the type specimens of Psodos perlinii Turati, 1914, which was believed destroyed was

surprisingly found in the Wehrli collection at the Museum Alexander Koenig in Bonn. This specimen is

here designated as a lectotype and is figured for the first time. A study of Turati’s original description as

well as an examination of the genitalia of the specimens collected in the Adamello region showed that

“Psodos perlinii” is conspecific with the species Psodos bentelii Ratzer, 1890. Because of the geographical

isolation of the Adamello population and its phenotypic characteristics, we propose giving P. perlinii the

status of a subspecies of P. bentelii: Psodos bentelii perlinii Turati, 1914 stat. n.

Zusammenfassung. Eines der zerst6rt geglaubten Typus-Exemplare von Psodos perlinii Turati, 1914 wurde

iiberraschend in der Kollektion Wehrli am Museum Alexander Koenig Bonn gefunden. Das Exemplar wird

hier als Lectotypus designiert und erstmals abgebildet. Das Studium der Urbeschreibung Turatis sowie

genitalmorphologische Untersuchungen der am Adamello gesammelten Tiere ergaben, dass das Taxon

,»P. perlinii“ mit Psodos bentelii Ratzer, 1890 konspezifisch ist. Aufgrund der geografischen Isolation und

phanotypischer Charakteristika wird fiir P. perlinii ein Unterartstatus zu P. bentelii vorgeschlagen: Psodos

bentelii perlinii Turati, 1914 stat. n.

Introduction

During our work on the taxonomy and distribution of the high mountain Geometrid

moths genus Psodos Treitschke, 1825 we came across the often mentioned and

mysterious taxon ‘Psodos perlinii Turati, 1914’, whose identity has remained dubious

despite various attempts of clarification (Wehrli 1919, 1921; Forster & Wohlfahrt 1980:

Burmann & Tarmann 1983).

At the beginning of the last century, Conte Emilio Turati described a new Geometrid

moth species based on two males collected by C. Kriiger in the higher region of the

Adamello in Northern Italy, which he named Psodos perlinii (Turati 1914). After that,

E. Wehrli acquired a third specimen from the type locality, also collected by C. Kriiger,

which he figured in his first work on the genus Psodos “with doubts” as P. perlinii

(Wehrli 1919). After examination of the genitalia, Wehrli (1921) held that illustrated

specimen to be a taxon “close to” Psodos canaliculata (Hochenwarth, 1785) (Wehrli

1921). Consequently, Schwingenschuss (1923) listed P. perlinii as a separate species

within the P. canaliculata group. Finally, however, Wehrli stated that the third specimen

in question had “turned out a true trepidaria’, i.e. P. canaliculata (Wehrli 1954).

Eventually Wehrli received from Turati one of the two type specimens (“Kotype”) for his

comprehensive work on the palaearctic Geometridae. However, he was only permitted

to examine the specimen without dissection (Wehrli 1954). On the bases of an external

examination of the male genitalia of that type specimen, Wehrli found a close relation

of P. perlinii to Psodos spitzi Rebel, 1905 (“soweit dies durch die Trockenuntersuchung

festgestellt werden konnte“ [as far as this was possible to determine through a dry

P r

Nota lepidopterologica, 15.5.2009, ISSN 0342-7536

48 ERLACHER & JUNGHANS: On Psodos perlinii 3

examination], Wehrli 1954: 631) and gave a comparison of both species. Accordingly,

Wolfsberger (1966) treated P. perlinii as a separate species within the subgenus Triglavia

Povolny & Moucha, 1955, to which P. spitzi belongs. However, this was not yet the end

of the confusion on P. perlinit.

Forster & Wohlfahrt (1981) contended in their well-known standard work on Central

European Geometridae that P. perlinii is possibly a subspecies of Psodos coracina

(Esper, 1805). Burmann & Tarmann (1983) came to the same conclusion after —

evaluation of material collected (by K. Burmann & J. Wolfsberger) in the Adamello

Mountains and after comparison with the original description by Turati and with the

results of comprehensive examinations of the genitalia of other species. Nevertheless,

the authors did not avoid drawing attention to the problems which occurred with regard

to the destruction of Turati’s types in the collection of F. Hartig (Museo Regionale

di Scienze Naturali di Torino). Thus, the attempts by Burmann & Tarmann (1983)

to clarify the identity of P. perlinii remained unsatisfactory. Whereas Miller (1996),

following Raineri & Zangheri (1995), still treated P. perlinii in his check-list of the

Geometrid moths of Europe as a separate species, P. perlinii is listed in Scoble (1999),

in agreement with Burmann & Tarmann (1983), as a subspecies of P. coracina.

Since 1954, the comprehensive Wehrli collection of Psodos has been deposited in the

Museum Alexander Koenig in Bonn. At the beginning of the 1980s, this Psodos material

was loaned to the Tiroler Landesmuseum Ferdinandeum in Innsbruck, where it was

then considerably damaged by floods in 1985. Fortunately, most of the labels remained

legible and most of the abdomens were still preserved. In this situation, the colleagues

at the Innsbruck museum made the farsighted decision to make about 1,600 genitalia

slides of the partially damaged moths during the following years, which we were able

to work on. Among this material, we found a specimen that Wehrli had received from

Turati (see Wehrli 1954) and that he obviously did not return. Its labels, above all the

almost square, bright red label with a thin black edge surprisingly enough reveal that

this must be the one of the two male type specimens of Psodos perlinii mentioned by

Wehrli (1954) (Figs 1-3). The extraordinary find, finally, allows unveiling the mystery

around P. perlinii, almost a century after its description.

Abbreviations

MNC = Museum fiir Naturkunde Chemnitz (Coll. S. Erlacher), Germany

TLMF _ Tiroler Landesmuseum Ferdinandeum, Innsbruck, Austria

ZFMK Zoologisches Forschungsmuseum Alexander Koenig, Bonn, Germany

ZSM Zoologische Staatssammlung, Munich, Germany

Material and Methods

Photographs were taken with a Nikon D200 camera attached toa Nikon stereomicroscope

SMZ1000 for the genitalia and a Nikon Coolpix 4500 camera for the specimens. \

Material. Psodos perlinii Turati, 1914: Lectotype oO (hereby designated in order to stabilize

nomenclature according to article 74 ICZN), ‘Italia sept. | Valcamonica | [L.] Salar[no] | Geo. C. a a

= ~

. i

> , fe

= * As

. ‘¥ ~ 7 . , 3

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 47—54 49

‘perlinii Trti’, <red label:> ‘<unreadable>’, ‘PRAP. NR. 1447 | M. Hreblay prip.’, <red label:>

‘LECTOTYPUS | Psodos perlinii Turati, 1914 | designated by | Erlacher & Junghans (2009)’, ZFMK. —

Italy: 10; Trentino, Adamello, Refugio Madrone, 2500 m, 01.vii.1964, leg. J. Wolfsberger; ZSM. 10;

ibd.; genitalia slide no. GU:27/1999, ZSM. 1; ibd., 07.-10.viii.1964, leg. K. Burmann; TLMF. 10; ibd.

1Q; ibd.; CJ-64, TLFM. 19; ibd., 01.viii.1964. leg J. Wolfsberger; GU:28/1999, ZSM. 1; ibd., 2500—

2800 m, 01.vili.1965, leg. J. Wolfsberger; CJ-72, ZSM. 1¢; ibd., 01 .viii.1967, leg. J. Wolfsberger; ZSM.

1; ibd.; CJ-71, ZSM. 10; ibd., 2900 m, mid—viii.1958, leg. K. Burmann; G0054, TLMF. 19; ibd., 31.

vii.1964, leg. K. Burmann; G0055, TLMF. 10; ibd., 2500 m, 9.vii.1994, leg. S. Erlacher; SE-356, MNC.

10; ibd.; MNC. — Psodos bentelii Ratzer, 1890: Italy: 19; Dolomiti, 28.vii.1907, leg. A. Petry; G1264,

ZFMK. 10; ibd., Passo di Valparolo, 13.vii.1994, leg. S. Erlacher, CJ-38, MNC. 1¢; ibd., 2200 m, 13.

vii.1994, leg. S. Erlacher; GU:15/1999, MNC. Trentino-Alto Adige, Bolzano, Lago di Antermoja, 15.

vii.1924, leg. Dannehl, ZSM. 19; Siidtirol, Seiser Alm, 10.vii.1921, unknown collector; GO242, ZFMK.

10; ibd.; G0243, ZFMK. Switzerland: 1 sp.; Graubiinden, Engadin, Alp Griim, 05.viii.i926, leg. C.

Horhammer, ZSM. 10; ibd., Diavolezza, 3000 m, 31.vii.1922, leg. E. Wehrli; GO319, ZFMK. 10; ibd..,

Piz Campascio, 01.viii.1922, leg. E. Wehrli; GO298, ZFMK. 10°; 1ibd.; GO314, ZFMK. 10: ibd.; G0315,

ZFEMK. 19; ibd.; G1827, ZFMK. 1; ibd., Piz Lagalp, 29.vii.1922, unknown collector; G0317, ZFMK.

1: Uni, Furka, 14.vi.1912, unknown collector; G0305, ZFMK. 10; Wallis, Eggerhorn, 24.vii.1912,

unknown collector; G0856, ZFMK. 10; ibd., Gornergrat, 11 .viii.1898, unknown collector; G0303,ZFMK.

10; ibd., 02.vii.1899, unknown collector; GO724, ZFMK. 19; ibd., 08.viii.1917, leg. E. Wehrli; GO287,

ZFEMK. 10; ibd., 16.vii.1919, leg. E. Wehrli; G0262, ZFMK. 19; i¢d.; G0263, ZFMK. 1C; ibd.; G0264,

ZEMK. 1¢; ibd.; G0265, ZFMK. 1C; ibd.; GO266, ZFMK. 1C; ibd.; GO267, ZFMK. 1¢; ibd.; GO268,

ZFMK. 1; ibd.; G0269, ZFMK. 10; ibd.; G1683, ZFMK: 10; ibd., 28.vii.1919, leg. E. Wehrli; G1421,

ZEMK. 1C; ibd.; G1433, ZFMK. 1¢; ibd.; GO272, ZFMK. 1C; ibd.; GO273, ZFMK. 1C; ibd.; G0274,

ZFMK. 10; ibd.; GO275, ZFMK. 1¢; ibd.; G0276, ZFMK. 19; ibd.; G0277, ZFMK. 1C; ibd., 03.

vili.1919, leg. E. Wehrli; GO271, ZFMK. 1°; ibd., 28.viii.1919, leg. E. Wehrli; G1659, ZFMK. 1; ibd.,

25.vii.1920, leg. E. Wehrli, ZFMK. 1 v; ibd.; GO282, ZFMK. 1¢; ibd.; G0283, ZFMK. 1¢; ibd.; G0285,

ZEMK. 1C; ibd.; G1669, ZFMK. 1C; ibd.; G1705, ZFMK. 1C; ibd.; G1721, ZFMK. 1¢C; ibd.; G1722,

ZEMK. 1G; ibd.; G1737, ZFMK. tC; ibd.; G1738,ZFMK. 1C; ibd.; G1753, ZFMK. 1C; ibd., 28.vii.1920.

leg. E. Wehrli; G0278, ZFMK. 10; ibd.; G0279, ZFMK. 19; ibd.; GO280, ZFMK. 10; ibd.; G0O281,

ZFMK. 1¢; ibd.; G1671, ZFMK. 10; ibd.; G1682, ZFMK. 19; ibd.; G1698, ZFMK. 10; ibd.; G1729,

ZFMK. 1¢C; ibd.; G1730, ZFMK. 10; G1746, ZFMK. 1¢C; ibd.; G1837, ZFMK. 1C; ibd., 08.viii.1920,

leg. E. Wehrli; G1679, ZFMK. 1¢; ibd.; G1833, ZFMK. 1; ibd.; G1836, ZFMK. 10; ibd., 25.viii.1920,

leg. E. Wehrli; G1660, ZFMK. 1; ibd., 28 .viii.1920, leg. E. Wehrli; G1661, ZFMK. 10; ibd., 20.x.1920,

leg. Bale; GO270, ZFMK. 19; ibd.; GO288, ZFMK. 1; ibd., 12.vii.1921, leg. E. Wehrli; GO307, ZFMK.

19; ibd.; G0308, ZFMK. 1C; ibd.; G0309, ZFMK. 10; ibd.; GO310, ZFMK. 10; ibd.; GO311, ZFMK.

1C; ibd.; G0312, ZFMK. 1C; ibd.; G1386, ZFMK. 1¢C; ibd.; G1396, ZFMK. 1¢; ibd.; G1830, ZFMK.

10; ibd.; G1838, ZFMK. 1; ibd., 17.vii.1921, leg. E. Wehrli; G1436, ZFMK. 10; ibd., 27.vii.1931, leg.

Wehrli; G1503, ZFMK. 1 sp.; ibd., 16.vii.1935, leg. Eisenberger, ZSM. 10; ibd., 22.vi.1937, leg. E.

Wehrli; G1610, ZFMK. 1C; ibd., 22.vii.1937, leg. E. Wehrli; G1594, ZFMK. 10; ibd.; G1612, ZFMK.

1C; ibd.; G1630, ZFMK. 1C; ibd.; G1631, ZFMK. 1C; ibd.; G1632, ZFMK. 1C; ibd.; G1633, ZFMK.

10; ibd.; G1634, ZFMK. 1¢C; ibd., 24.vii.1937, leg. E. Wehrli; G1404, ZFMK. 10; ibd.; G1406, ZFMK.

10; ibd.; G1407, ZFMK. 1¢; ibd.; G1608, ZFMK. 1¢C; ibd.; G1623, ZFMK. 1¢; ibd.; G1629, ZFMK.

10; ibd., 20.vii.1938, leg. E. Wehrli; G1435, ZFMK. 10; ibd.; G1507, ZFMK: 10; ibd.; G1508, ZFMK.

1C; ibd.; G1509, ZFMK. 1¢; ibd.; G1515, ZFMK. 1¢C; ibd.; G1516, ZFMK. 19; ibd.; G1528, ZFMK.

10; ibd.; G1531, ZFMK. 19; ibd.; G1553, ZFMK. 19; ibd.; G1574, ZFMK. 10; ibd., 27.vii.1939, leg. E.

Wehrli; G1378, ZFMK. 1’; ibd.; G1397, ZFMK. 1¢; ibd.; G1429, ZFMK. 10; ibd.; G1430, ZFMK. 1¢;

ibd.; G1499, ZFMK. 1; ibd.; G1618, ZFMK. 1C; ibd., 31.vii.1939, leg. E. Wehrli: G1394, ZFMK. 1°;

ibd.; G1395, ZFMK. 1¢; ibd., 12.viii.1942, leg. E. Wehrli; G1495, ZFMK. 1¢; ibd.; G1496, ZFMK. IC;

ibd., 28.vii.1948, leg. E. Wehrli; G1754, ZFMK. 10; ibd., 01 .viii.1962, leg. Sielmann; G1314, ZFMK. |

sp.; ibd., 19.vi.1962, unknown collector, ZSM. 1; ibd., 3100 m, 18—24.vii.1955, leg. GroB; ZSM. | Kom

ibd., Matterhorn, 2600-2700 m, 15.viil997, leg. J. Gelbrecht et al.; GU:21/1999, coll. J. Gelbrecht, KOnigs

Wusterhausen. 1¢; ibd., Mettelhorn, 18.vii.1919, leg. E. Wehrli; G1670, ZFMK. 1; ibd.; G1706, ZFMK.

10; ibd., 04.viii.1934, leg. E. Wehrli; G1613, ZFMK. 10; ibd., Riffelalp, vii/vili.1942, leg. E. Wehrli;

G1494, ZFMK. 1¢’; ibd., Rotenbachn, 22.vii.1937, leg. E. Wehrli; G1611, ZFMK. 1; ibd., 06.viii.1937,

leg. E. Wehrli; G1599, ZFMK. 1¢; ibd.; G1609, ZFMK. 10; ibd., 20.vii.1938, leg. E. Wehrli; G1533,

ZFMK. 1; ibd.; G1539, ZFMK. 1; ibd.; G1569, ZFMK. 1; ibd., 25.vii.1938, leg. E. Wehrli; G1586,

ZFMK. 10; ibd., 30.vii.1938, leg. E. Wehrli; G1543, ZFMK. 10; ibd.; G1545, ZFMK. 1; ibd.; G1556,

ZFMK. 1; ibd.; G1579, ZFMK. 1¢; ibd.; G1581, ZFMK. 1¢; ibd., Rotenboden, 23.vii.1919, leg. E.

Wehrli; G0301, ZFMK. 10’; ibd., 20.[vii].1938, leg. E. Wehrli; G1SO05, ZFMK. 1@; ibd., Saas-Fee, 31.

vii.1956, leg. J. Wolfsberger; ZSM. 19; ibd., Schwarzsee, 19.vii.1918, unknown collector; GO352,ZFMK.

1C; ibd., Stellisee, 19.vii.1938, leg. E. Wehrli; G1385,ZFMK. | sp.; ibd., Stockhorngrat, 07.viii.1919, leg.

E. Wehrli, ZSM. 1¢; ibd., Trifthorn, 31 .vii.1920, leg. E. Wehrli; GO299, ZFMK. 1; ibd.; GO300, ZFMK.

10; ibd.; 3730 m, 09.viii.1919, leg. E. Wehrli; G1681, ZFMK. 1¢; ibd., Triftjoch, 07.viii.1920, leg. E.

Wehrli; G1689, ZFMK. 1; ibd., Weg-Britannia Hiitte, 2600 m, 22.vii.1941, leg. E. Wehrli: GO803,

50 ERLACHER & JUNGHANS: On Psodos perlinii

ZFMK. 1¢C; ibd.; GO804, ZFMK. 1¢; ibd.; GO805, ZFMK. 1¢; ibd.; GO807, ZFMK. 10; ibd.; G0814,

ZFMK. 1C:; ibd., 2700 m, 22.vii.1941, leg. E. Wehrli; G0811, ZFMK. 19; ibd., 2800 m, 26.vii.1941, leg.

E. Wehrli: GO815, ZFMK. 1@; ibd.; GO817, ZFMK. 10; ibd.; GO244, ZFMK. 19; ibd., Weg-Mischabel

Hiitte, 2300 m, 29.vii.1941, leg. E. Wehrli; GO821, ZFMK. 1 sp.; ibd., Zermatt, 07.viii.1912, unknown

collector, ZSM. 1@; ibd., 12.vii.1918, leg. E. Wehrli; G0289, ZFMK. 10°; ibd.; GO290, ZFMK. 10’; ibd.;

G0291, ZFMK. 1: ibd.; GO292, ZFMK. 1; ibd.; G0293, ZFMK. 19; ibd.; G0294, ZFMK. 10; ibd.;

G0295, ZFMK. 10; ibd.; GO296, ZFMK. 10; G0297, ZFMK. 10; G0326, ZFMK. 19; ibd.; G0332,

ZFMK. 19; ibd.; GO339, ZFMK. 19; ibd.; G0433, ZFMK. 10; G1651, ZFMK. 10°; G1690, ZFMK. 10;

G1697, ZFMK. France: 1c, Alpes-Maritimes, Cime di Argentera, 3350 m, 30.vii.1923, leg. E. Wehrli;

G0259, ZFMK. 1¢C: ibd., 31.vii.1923, leg. E. Wehrli; GO255, ZFMK. 19; ibd.; G0256, ZFMK. 19; ibd.; ©

G0257, ZFMK. 1¢: ibd.; G0258, ZFMK. 1¢; ibd., Mont Gélas, 20.vii.1923, leg. A. Strébl; G0260,

ZFMK. 19: ibd., 24.vii.1923, leg. R. Kitschelt; G0860, ZFMK. 19; Haute-Pyrénées, Cauterets, date

unknown, unknown collector; GO221,ZFMK. 19; ibd., Gédre, 31.vii.1898, leg. E. Wehrli; GO225, ZFMK.

|@: ibd., Pic du Midi, 26.vii.1901, unknown collector; G1250, ZFMK. 10%; Haute-Savoie, Mont Blanc,

2000 m, 26.vii.1926, leg. W. Ripper; GO381, ZFMK. 2 sp.; Provence, Alpes-Maritimes, Saint-Martin,

Ol .vii.1913, unknown collector, ZSM. 1@; Pyrénées-Orientalis, Arele Nord du Contigou, 31.vii—01.

viii.1909, leg. E. Wehrli; GO210, ZFMK. 19; ibd., Cambras d’Aze, 10.vii.1929, v.d.Goltz; G0222, ZFMK.

| O: ibd., Esquerdes de Routje, 23.vii.1909, leg. H. Powell; GO212, ZFMK. 10; ibd.; G0213, ZFMK. 1¢;

ibd.: GO214, ZFMK. 1¢; ibd.;: GO215, ZFMK. 1; ibd.; GO216, ZFMK. 10; ibd.; GO217, ZFMK. 19;

ibd., Haute-Vallée-de-Montet, 26.vii.1909, leg. H. Powell; GO207, ZSM. 10; ibd.; GO208, ZSM. 10; ibd.;

G0209, ZSM. 19: ibd., Mont Canigou, 24.vii.1929, unknown collector; GO219, ZFMK. 19; ibd.; G0220,

ZFMK. 1G: ibd.. Vernet-les=Bains, date unknown, E. Wehrli; GO211, ZFMK. 1¢; ibd.; GO223, ZFMK.

1@: Savoie, Bonneval-sur-Arc, 1400 m, 22.viii.1912, unknown collector; G1302, ZFMK. 1¢C; ibd.,

Pralognan, 1440 m, date unknown, unknown collector; G1278, ZFMK. Spain: 10; Aragon, UII de Ter,

23-25 vii.1909, unknown collector; G0218, ZFMK. Romania: 10; Retyezat, Zenoga, 2200 m, 28.

vii.1932, leg. Bartha; ZSM.

Results

The study of Turati’s original description and examinations of the genitalia of specimens

collected in the Adamello region compared with the type specimen of P. perlinii showed

that the latter is identical with the species Psodos bentelii Ratzer, 1890. Nevertheless,

the geographical isolation of the Adamello population and its phenotypic characteristics

justify assigning the status of P. perlinii as a subspecies of P. bentelii:

Psodos bentelii perlinii Turati, 1914 stat. n. (Figs 1-8)

Redescription. Male (Figs 1-2). Measurements. Body length: 9,8 mm. Wingspan

(longest distance vertical to body): 21.9-24.1 mm. Length of forewing (along the costa):

12.2-13.4 mm. Width of forewing (longest distance parallel to body): 8.4-9.1 mm.

Upperside of wings with slight from greenish-blue to metallic shiny scales. Ground

colour of upperside of wings: unsettled soot-black with dappled light scales. Forewings

with marked distal point. Hindwings with weak distal point. Antemedian line not as

clearly serrated as postmedian line, rather rounded. Antemedian line not continued on =

hindwings. Distal line serrated, continued on hindwings, towards the edge delimited by

thin light shades. Terminal fascia mostly interrupted in a wedge-shaped way. Ground

colour of underside of wings: soot-black, partially with lightly shiny scales. Antemedian

line absent. Postmedian line unserrated. Distal points as on upperside. Proboscis well 2 ~

developed. Head, thorax and abdomen, legs and antennae in the ground colour.

oar. wre ond epivaiie. (Fig. 4). Uncus b peated, shorter than gnathos. Gnathos Ic

ted ett ivi ae

ew © oe

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 47-54 5]

| PRAP. NR. AYU

Figs 1-4. Lectotype of “Psodos perlinii Turati, 1914” deposited at the ZFMK. 1. Upperside, 2. Underside

(scale bars: 10 mm). 3. Labels. 4. Male genitalia; genitalia slide 1447 (prep. M. Hreblay); ae — aedoeagus,

c.p — costal process, gn — gnathos, ju — juxta, j.a — juxta arm, sc — sacculus, sp — spines, un — uncus, va —

valve (scale bar: 1.0 mm).

from that; distal with numerous strongly sclerotisised spines which can form two to

three rows. Proportion length of valve to juxta arm length (without sacculus) 1.78.

Juxta arms slender, distally broadened, slightly arched on the inside, terminal with a

group of strongly sclerotised and medially directed spines; underneath a larger canine

tooth and a further dorsally-directed spine on the inner side of the juxta. Aedoeagus

S-shaped, first arch roughly in the centre, second arch roughly in last sixth of length,

with numerous small spines at the tip. Proportion juxta arm length (without sacculus)

to length of aedoeagus (from bases to tip) 0.6.

Female (Figs 5-6). Measurements. Body length: 8,9 mm. Wingspan (longest distance

vertical to body): 20.7—21.8 mm. Length of forewing (along of costa): 10.4-12.2 mm.

Width of forewing (longest distance parallel to body): 6.6—7.6 mm. Ground colour and

habitus same as in male.

Female genitalia (Fig. 7). Corpus bursae pear-shaped, membranous, anally a

fourth up to a third sclerotised, in sclerotised part shaping folds. Signum with strongly

sclerotised, inverted, mouth-shaped strip in anal half of corpus bursae, vertical along

the longitudinal body line. Ductus bursae membranous, short, not clearly standing out

against corpus bursae. Antrum funnel-shaped, orally becoming narrower only after

half of antrum length; proportion length of corpus bursae (from apex to anal end of

}

ERLACHER & JUNGHANS: On Psodos perlinii

Figs 5-7. Female of Psodos bentelii perlinii; data: Italy, Adamello, Rif. Mandrone, 2,500 m, 7-10.

vii.1964, leg. K. Burmann; genitalia slide CJ-64 (prep. C. Junghans); in coll. TLMF. 5. Upperside, 6.

Underside (scale bars: 10 mm). 7. Female genitalia of the same specimen; a.m — anal margin, an — antrum,

c.b — corpus bursae, d.b — ductus bursae, l.a — lamella antevaginalis, l.p — lamella postvaginalis, s.d. —

sclerotised disc, si — signum, u.g — uncus gap (scale bar: 1.0 mm).

sclerotisation) to length of antrum 0.46 mm. Lamella postvaginalis: lateroventral part

(“Mittlerer Haftwulst” sensu Wehrli 1921) widely U-shaped, orally shaping a straight

line; mediodorsal part shaping a sclerotised disc, widely heart-shaped; anal margin

of sclerotised disc (“Freie Analwiilste” sensu Wehrli 1921) not clearly arched, almost

shaping a straight line; inverted anal part of sclerotised disc (“Uncusliicke” sensu Wehrli

1921) as little pit without orally continuing fissure. Lamella antevaginalis as narrow,

grooved band, clasping Lamella postvaginalis orally and ventrally.

Diagnosis. P. bentelii perlinii can clearly be distinguished from the other subspecies of

P. bentelii (ssp. bentelii Ratzer, 1890, ssp. alpmaritima Wehrli, 1924, ssp. panticosea

Wehrli, 1919, ssp. retyezatensis Bartha, 1933, ssp. zermattensis Wehrli, 1919) by its

dark soot-black ground colour. Phenotypically the most similar subspecies P. bentelii

zermattensis (from region of Zermatt) is, however, on average smaller and has a

yellowish scaling in its ground colour above all in the terminal area of the upperside of

wings which cannot be found on P. bentelii perlinii. The female genitalia of P. bentelii

perlinii slightly differ from those of the nominate subspecies. In contrast to P. bentelii

perlinii, the oral part of antrum of P. bentelii bentelii becomes narrower only at its end

whereas P. bentelii perlinii starts becoming narrower between the middle and the oral

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 47-54 53

MMe ee ee emt

Fig. 8. Habitat of Psodos bentelii perlinii near Refugio Mandrone, Northern Italy, 9.vii.1994.

end of the antrum. Furthermore, the lateroventral part of lamella postvaginalis is more

rounded in P. bentelii bentelii than in P. bentelii perlinii.

Distribution. In the region of Adamello in Northern Italy Psodos bentelii perlinii is

so far only known from the locus typicus “above the Lago Salarno” (3,000 m) and the

Refugio Mandrone (2,500—2,900 m).

Life history. Host-plant(s) and early stages are unknown. Flight period: early July

to mid—August. Preferred habitats are rocky areas with grassy tussocks and lichens

(Fig. 8).

Discussion

It is worth mentioning that Wehrli already interpreted Turati’s original description at an

early stage in a way that indicated that P. perlinii might be Psodos bentelii Ratzer, 1890

(Wehrli 1921: 167). Today, this interpretation can clearly be confirmed after examination

of the type specimen. Indeed, when looked at unambiguously, there is hardly a point in

Turati’s ambiguous original description that seriously contradicts this fact.

There is general agreement on what P. bentelii is. Good illustrations can be found in

Burmann & Tarmann (1983). As well as P. coracina, P. bentelii has a strong tendency

towards the formation of subspecies. Based on the geographical isolation of the

54 ERLACHER & JUNGHANS: On Psodos perlinii

Adamello population and its phenotypic adaptation to the parent granite stone, we

argue that it is justifiable to assign P. perlinii as a subspecies of P. bentelii. 3

Psodos bentelii perlinii was discovered in a glacier moraine above the Lago Salarno

at 3.000 m in the Val di Saviore, a side valley of Val Camonica, about 9 km southwest

of the Refugio Mandrone. According to present knowledge three species of Psodos,

P. bentelii perlinii, P. canaliculata and P. coracina, occur sympatrically close to the

Refugio Mandrone, the well-known collection area of K. Burmann and J. Wolfsberger. -

Due to the distinct phenotypic similarity of the species observed in this region, often an

examination of genitalia is required to confirm the species identification. Only in higher

regions from about 3,000 m, for instance at Passo del Maroccaro above the Refugio

Mandrone, there is a further species of Psodos, 1. e. Psodos alticolaria chalybaeus

Zerny, 1916 (examined from specimens collected by Kaesweber in 1986) which is

characterised by an unusual dark black ground colour with strikingly contrasted

underside of the wings. Presumably, it is here where P. alticolaria chalybaeus shares

its habitat with P. bentelii perlinii.

Acknowledgements

We are grateful to Prof. Dr. Gerhard Tarmann and Dr. Peter Huemer, Tiroler Landesmuseum Ferdinan-

deum, Innsbruck, Dr. Dieter Stiining, Museum Alexander Koenig, Bonn, Dr. Axel Hausmann, Zoologische

Staatssammlung, Munich, and Manfred Sommerer, Munich, for the loan of material and generous support.

Thanks to two anonymous reviewers for their useful comments and to John Green, London, for assistance

in checking the English.

References

Burmann, K. & G. Tarmann 1983. Neues zur Taxonomie der Gattung Psodos Treitschke, 1827. — Ento-

mofauna 4: 467-479.

Forster, W. & T. A. Wohlfahrt 1980. Die Schmetterlinge Mitteleuropas. Band V. Spanner (Geometridae). —

Franckh’sche Verlagshandlung, Stuttgart. 312 pp.

Miller, B. 1996. Geometridae. — /n: Karsholt, O. & J. Razowski (eds.), The Lepidoptera of Europe. A dis-

tributional checklist. - Apollo Books, Stenstrup, 380 pp.

Povolny, D. & J. Moucha 1955. On the high mountain Geometridae of the genus Psodos Treitschke, 1828

{sic!| with regard to their species in the mountains of Chechoslovakia and to the question of the origin

of a species in mountain regions (Lepidoptera — Geometridae). — Acta Entomologica Musei Nationalis

Pragae 30: 143-174. .

Raineri, V. & S. Zangheri 1995. Lepidoptera Drepanoidea, Axioidea, Geometroidea. — Jn: Minelli, A.,

Ruffo, S. & S. La Posta (eds.). Checklist delle speciie della fauna italiana. — Calderini, Bologna 90:

1-23.

Schwingenschuss, L. 1923. Die palaéarktischen Psodos-Formen. — Verhandlungen der Zoologisch-Bota-

nischen Gesellschaft Wien 73: 79-84.

Scoble, M. J. (ed.) 1999. Geometrid Moths of the World: a catalogue (Lepidoptera, Geometridae). Vols 1 eo

+ 2.—CSIRO Publishing and Apollo Books, Stenstrup. 1016 pp.

Turati, E. 1914. Contribuzioni alla Fauna d'Italia e descrizione di specie e forme nuove di eS (Con

due tavole). — Atti de la Societa Italiana di Scienze Naturali (Pavia) 53: 468-619. “a

Wehrii, E. 1919. Uber neue Formen und wenig bekannte Arten (Psodos). — Mitteilungen des Entomo- “a

logenvereins Basel und Umgebung 11: 1-8. SS

e reeves 1921. Monografische Bearbeitung der Gattung Psodos, nach mikroskopischen Untersuchtinge

1 ial pad @: sir high ee ae: erick emaab Gesellschaft 13: me

j abate

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 55—62 5D

Atomorpha punctistrigaria (Christoph, 1893) (Geometridae:

Ennominae) — a new geometrid species for the fauna of Europe

TATYANA A. TROFIMOVA

Samara State University, Laboratory of Animal Systematics and Faunistics, ul. Ac. Pavlova 1,

443011, Samara, Russia; e-mail: apame@mail.ru

Abstract. A little-known geometrid moth, Atomorpha punctistrigaria (Christoph, 1893), was found in the

Volgo-Ural sands (Ryn-sands, Western Kazakhstan) and is new to Europe. The type material of A. punc-

tistrigaria (Christoph, 1893), A. falsaria (Alpheraky, 1892) (type species of the genus), and A. hedemanni

hedemanni (Christoph, 1885) was examined in the collection of the Zoological Institute of the Russian

Academy of Sciences, St. Petersburg, Russia. Lectotypes for A. punctistrigaria (Christoph, 1893) and

A. falsaria (Alpheraky, 1892) are designated. Images of the adults and genitalia structures are also given.

Introduction

Atomophora Alphéraky, 1892 was established as a monotypic genus for Atomophora

falsaria Alphéraky, 1892 described from Gansu [China]. Later, Staudinger (1901:

282) proposed the name Atomorpha for genus Atomophora Alphéraky, 1892 because

the latter is a junior homonym of Atomophora Reuter, 1884 (Hemiptera). The genus

inhabits desert and semidesert zones of Central Asia, the Middle East, and north-

erm Africa (Tunisia) (Remm & Viidalepp 1981; Scoble 1999; Viidalepp 1975, 1988,

1996; Viidalepp et al. 1992). At present, the genus includes four species: A. falsar-

ia (Alphéraky 1892), A. hedemanni (Christoph, 1885), with subspecies A. h. khalia

Wiltshire, 1986, A. mabillearia Lucas, 1907, and A. punctistrigaria (Christoph, 1893).

An examination of moths collected in the eastern part of the Volgo-Ural sands

(Kazakhstan, Ryn-sands) has revealed one specimen of a little known geometrid moth,

Atomorpha punctistrigaria. The species is very rare in collections and insufficiently

known in bionomics. It was described from Turkmenistan in the environs of Ashkhabad

from seven specimens that are deposited now in the collection of the Zoological Institute

of the Russian Academy of Sciences (St. Petersburg — ZISP). A comparative study of

the genitalia structure of specimens from the Volgo-Ural sands with that of the type

specimens of A. punctistrigaria confirmed my determination. The occurrence of A.

punctistrigaria in the Volgo-Ural sands adds to its distribution. It was recently known

only from very few localities in Turkmenistan and from the Malye Barsuki sands in

Southern Kazakhstan. The new finding of A. punctistrigaria is especially interesting

because this point is the most northwestern and is in the territory of European Russia:

thus the species is for the first time recorded for the fauna of Europe (Fig. 1).

The Volgo-Ural sands (Fig. 6) are represented by hilly-ridge fixed sands and in some

areas weakly fixed sands on interfluve of the Volga and Ural rivers. The hilly sands

are covered with psammophytic shrubs and grass-sagebrush vegetation: Poa bulbosa

L. (Poaceae), Leymus racemosus (Lam.) Tzvel. (Poaceae), Agriophyllum squarro-

sum (L.) Mog. (Poaceae), Artemisia lercheana Web. ex Stechm. (Asteraceae),

Elaeagnus angustifolia L. (Elaeagnaceae), Tamarix ramosissima Ledeb. (Tamari-

caceae), Calligonum aphyllum (Pall.) Guerke (Polygonaceae), and others plants. In

Nota lepidopterologica, 15.5.2009, ISSN 0342-7536

—

56 TROFIMOVA: Atomorpha punctistrigaria new to Europe

Aral Sea

Sane ea ie

—_— —

Fig. 1. Distribution of Atomorpha punctistrigaria (scale bar in km).

depressions, where groundwater surfaces, there are communities of reed grass (Phrag-

mites australis (Cay.) Trin. ex Steud. (Poaceae)) and saltworts such as Salicornia,

Suaeda, Climacoptera, and Halocnemum (all Chenopodiaceae). Based on the previous

finding of Atomorpha punctistrigaria (Christoph 1893) and my data, it has become

more obvious that the occurence of this speciés is restricted to desert hilly sands.

| investigated the type specimens of Atomorpha punctistrigaria, A. hedemanni,

and A. falsaria deposited in St. Petersburg (ZISP). The latter taxon is the type spe-

cies of Atomorpha Staudinger, 1901. Here I am giving images of adults and genitalia

structures of these three species. The genitalia of Atomorpha punctistrigaria have

not been figured previously and those of A. falsaria have been figured schematically —

only once (Viidalepp 1975). Lectotypes are designated here for nomenclatorial stabi-

lization.

Abbreviations

Coll.P.Skou The collection of P. Skou (Denmark)

ie Laboratory of Animal Systematics and Faunistics, Samara State University

(Samara, Russia

ase | Pao eet Russian Academy of Sciences (St. Petersburg, Russia)

/ é

his, "

EE ee ee | aT

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 55-62 ba |

Atomorpha Staudinger, 1901

Type species: Atomophora falsaria Alphéraky, 1892

References: Alphéraky, 1892: 66 (Atomophora),; Staudinger 1901: Viidalepp 1975: 486; Scoble 1999: 76

(Atomorpha).

Redescription (Figs 2—7, 9-14). Medium to small sized geometrid moths. Wingspan

18—20 mm. Forewings triangular, hindwings rounded. Venation as in ennominae ground

plan. Forewing with 4 branches of R-veins, R-Cu cell wide and long, Sc and R1 joined,

R1 anastomosed with R2, R2+R3 on stalk, R4 originating from top of R-cell. Hindwing

with R and M1 without anastomosis. Antennae rather ciliate in male and with very short

rami in female. Eyes rounded, large. Frons protruding. Head, thorax, abdomen, and legs

covered with pale scales. Hind tibia with two pairs of spurs. Male and female genitalia

characters discussed in species accounts and illustrated below (Figs 9-14).

Atomorpha falsaria (Alphéraky, 1892) (Figs 2-3, 9-11)

Atomophora falsaria Alphéraky, 1892: 66. Type locality: [China], Gan-Sou.

References. Viidalepp 1975: 486; Scoble 1999: 76 Atomorpha).

Material. Lectotype (here designated) with the following labels: © Atomophora falsaria Alphéraky,

1892, with labels: *24.VI. 1886 Edsin prov.| Gan-Sou | leg. Potanin’ <green rectangle hand-written in black

ink>, ‘Kon. Ben. Ku. | Huxonas | Muxatinopuya’ [collection of Grand Duke Nikolay Mikhailovich] <white

rectangle, printed>, LECTOTYPUS. | Atomophora | falsaria Alpheraky, 1892 | T. Trofimova design 2009’

<red rectangle, printed>, ZISP. — Paralectotypes: 3 9 with the same data (ZISP). — Additional material.

110, 19 Mongolia, Southern-Gobi aimak, 60 km Eastern of brooks Talyn-Bilgah-Bulak, leg. M. Kozlov,

17.-19.viii.1969 (ZISP).

Redescription (Figs 2—3). Wingspan 20 mm in both sexes. Forewings triangular, with

yellowish white ground color, irrorate by brown scales, fringe pale yellowish. Two straight

transversal bands typical, submarginal one diffused in costal area and with large diffuse

brown discal spot. Hindwing of same ground color, with scattered brown scales and

fringe. Female somewhat darker and with same characters of wings colour and pattern.

Head, thorax, abdomen, and legs covered with yellowish white scales.

Male genitalia (Figs 9-10). Tergum VIII strongly sclerotized, dome-shaped, cov-

ering genitalia structures (Figs 9c, d). Valva very characteristically shaped: with ex-

panded sacculus curved by right angle to long cucullus, which is two times narrower than

sacculus, dorsal edge ribbon, sclerotized, with slightly extended basal process. Uncus

triangular, wide, gnathos triangular, taeniate, narrow apically, tegumen and vinculum

wide, juxta ovate slightly sclerotized, phallus slender weakly curved, almost in | ,2 time

shorter of valvae, vesica without cornuti.

Female genitalia (Fig. 11). Segment VIII cone-shaped, strongly sclerotized, an-

terior apophyses very short, rather rudimental. Papillae anales oval-shaped, posterior apo-

physes developed, antrum funnel-shaped with sclerotization, ductus bursae membrane-

ous, corpus bursae ovate without signa.

Distribution and life history. The species occurs in China and Mongolia. The biology

and immature stages are unknown.

Remarks. Atomophora falsaria Alphéraky, 1892, was described based on | male

and 3 females: “Un & et 39 de l’Atomophora Falsaria furent trouvés par l’expédition

}

58 TROFIMOVA: Atomorpha punctistrigaria new to Europe

» Va Lf i

Figs 2-8. Atomorpha Staudinger, 1901 (scale bar 10 mm). 2. A. falsaria male, lectotype (ZISP). 3. A.

falsaria female, paralectotype (ZISP). 4. A. hedemanni hedemanni, male, holotype (ZISP). 5. A. punc-

“istrigaria male, lectotype (ZISP). 6. A. punctistrigaria (Christoph, 1893), female, paralectotype (ZISP).

7. A. punctistrigaria from the Volgo-Ural sands (LSSU). 8. Habitat of A. punctistrigaria in the Volgo-

Lral sand

Potanine, entre le 24 Juin et le 1 Juillet, 1886, dans la province de Gan-Sou.”; they

are preserved in ZISP. One male is designated here as lectotype in order to clarify the

taxonomy of the species. The figures of the male genitalia structures (Figs 9-10) given

here are from a preparation made by Viidalepp of a specimen from the Southern Gobi

aimak of Mongolia (preparation K-213, Viidalepp det. in ZISP). They have been pub-

lished already ( Viidalepp 1975) and appended with a detailed description of the relative

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 55-62 59

sizes of some sclerites of the genitalia. The female genitalia of the paralectotype are in

Euparal (Fig. 11).

Atomorpha hedemanni hedemanni (Christoph, 1885)

Fidonia hedemanni Christoph, 1885: 121. Type locality: [Turkmenistan], Askhabad.

References. Staudinger 1901: 282; Wiltshire 1986: 285; Viidalepp 1988: 217; 1996: 84; Scoble 1999: 76

(Atomorpha).

Material. Holotype S Fidonia hedemanni, Christoph 1885, with the following labeis: <green cir-

cle>, “CS | Askha | bad’ <white rectangle, hand-written in black ink> ‘92 | 10 v. 82 | Chr’ <white rectan-

gle, hand-written in black ink>, ‘104 / 6.’ <white rectangle, hand-written in black ink>, ‘Kon. 6. Ben.

Ku. | Hukonaa Muxaitnosa’ [collection of Grand Duke Nikolay Mikhailovich] <white rectangle, printed>

(ZISP). — Additional material. 30°, 19 Turkmenistan Askhabad.

Redescription (Fig. 4). Wingspan 20 mm in both sexes. Head, body, and legs with

brown scales, abdomen pale brown. Forewings with yellowish white ground color irro-

rated with streaks of brown scales, fringe variegated and consisting of white and brown

scales. Forewings with 2 clear dark brown bands, marginal band zigzag, submarginal

band almost straight but slightly curved towards costa, discal spot brown and merged

with marginal band, marginal area consisting of separate brown spots. Hindwings with

yellowish grey ground color densely irrorated with pale brown scales, with distinct

marginal curved band and with slightly marked submarginal band.

Male genitalia (Fig. 12). Tergum VIII sclerotized, triangular. Sternum VIII strong-

ly sclerotized as in falsaria, triangular, posteriorly concave. Valvula with two ventral

lobes, cucullus exceeding valvula. Uncus triangular, wide. Gnathos arms conspicuously

narrow. Tegumen and vinculum wide. Juxta trapezoid, weakly sclerotized. Phallus slen-

der, straight almost long as long valva, vesica with 7 needle-shaped cornuti.

Female genitalia. Not examined.

Distribution and life history. This eremic species occurs in Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan,

Iran, and Balutschistan. The life history and immature stages are unknown.

Remarks. Variable species in coloration of the fore- and hindwing. In Balutschistan and

Iran it is known as form hedemanni baloutschistana Werhli, 1953. Subspecies hede-

manni khalia was described by Wiltshire (1986) from Saudi Arabia and Southern Iran

and differs from baloutschistana by the whiter ground colour of the wings and the less

irrorated dark scales of the wings than in form baloutschistana. In the original descrip-

tion Wiltshire (1986) described that this subspecies has no significant genitalic differ-

ences from those of the nominotypical hedemanni.

Atomorpha punctistrigaria (Christoph, 1893) (Figs 5-7, 13-14)

Atomophora punctistrigaria Christoph, 1893: 95. Type locality: [Turkmenistan], Askhabad.

References. Staudinger 1901: 282; Viidalepp 1988: 217; 1996: 84; Scoble 1999: 76 (Atomorpha).

Material. Lectotype (here designated) with the following labels: & Atomophora punctistrigaria

Christoph, 1893, with labels: <green circle>, *@ | Askha | bad’ <white rectangle with black frame, hand-

written in black ink>, ‘104’ <white rectangle with blue line, hand-written in black ink>, “Kon. Ben. Ku.

| Huxonaa | Muxaiinosuya’ [collection of Grand Duke Nikolay Mikhailovich]’ <white rectangle, print-

}

wee SERRE

WVEy eyes

;

TROFIMOVA: Atomorpha punctistrigaria new to Europe

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 55-62 6]

ed> ‘Atomophora | punctistrigaria | Chr’ <blue rectangle, hand-written in black ink>, ‘LECTOTYPUS.

| Atomophora | punctistrigaria | Christoph, 1893 | T. Trofimova design. 2009’ <red rectangle, printed>,

ZISP — Paralectotypes: 30°, 39 with same data (ZISP). — Additional material. 10, 19 [Kazakhstan]

Stepper, sands Malye Barsuki near Kara-Chokata, Turgai district, 1908.vii.22, leg. N.V. Andreev, (ZISP);

10, 30.v.2007, Kazakhstan, Atyrau district, N 48°28’35” E 51°18’46”, leg. T. Trofimova & D. Shovkoon

(LSSU); 1¢ [Turkmenistan], Repetek, 1988.v.12, leg. H. Ostrauskas (et coll. P.Skou).

Redescription (Figs 5—7). Wingspan 18 mm (male), 20 mm (female). Forewings trian-

gular, from pale yellowish to pale grayish, irrorated with brown scales, fringe chequered

as in A. hedemanni. Forewings with 4 almost straight bands consisting of separate grey-

ish brown spots. Hindwings of same ground color, with separate spot on edge and

indistinct grey submarginal band more visible on upper side. Head, thorax, abdomen,

and legs covered with pale brown scales. Antennae ciliate in male and with very short

pectination, rather filiform in female. Frons tapering, labial palpus protruding. Females

with rather lighter tone of both wings with less clear bands on forewings.

Male genitalia (Fig. 13). Similar to those of Atomorpha falsaria. Valva with wider

sacculus with pointed ventro-caudal angle, cucullus long and two times narrower than

sacculus, caudally expanded, dorsal edge without basal bifurcation. Uncus and gnathos

triangular. Vinculum and tegumen wide and rounded. Juxta triangular, lightly sclero-

tized, almost membranous. Phallus slender, with one dentate plate-like? cornutus.

Female genitalia (Fig. 14). Papillae anales disk-shaped, anterior and posterior

apophyses developed, anterior apophysis 1.5 times shorter than posterior ones, antrum

funnel-shaped with sclerotization, ductus bursae folded, anteriorly sclerotized, corpus

bursae ovate with one disc-shaped, spinous signum.

Distribution and life history (Fig. 8). This psammophilous species is very rare in the

hilly sands of Turkmenistan and Kazakhstan. The immature stages are unknown. Little

is known on the bionomics. Viidalepp et al. (1992) mentioned that A. punctistrigaria

occurs in 2 generations: the first in April-May and the second in October. Therefore in

my opinion, this species can expand further northwest towards to the Volga delta where

where the well-known (hilly-ridge fixed) Naryn sands are found.

Remarks. Atomophora punctistrigaria Christoph, 1893, was described based on 4

males and 3 females preserved in ZISP. One male is designated as lectotype. This spe-

cies was mentioned in some publications (Viidalepp 1988; Viidalepp et al. 1992), but

without detailed discussion and illustrations. It is mostly known from the very short and

insufficient original description. Therefore, I am providing a redescription and figures

here, including the type specimen and genitalia structures of male and female for the

first time.

Acknowledgements

The author is very grateful to Dr Vladimir G. Mironov (St. Petersburg, Russia) for the help in identifying

our material and for providing access to the collection of ZISP, to Dr Vadim V. Zolotuhin (Ulyanovsk,

Russia) for his valuable comments on the manusript, to Mr Igor Yu. Kostjuk (Kiev, Ukraine) for informa-

tion on specimens in collections of the Zoological Museum of Kiev State University and for providing rare

literature sources, to Dr Axel Hausmann for information on the species in the collections of the Zoologische

Staatssammlung (Munich, Germany), to Mr P. Skou who courteously provided materials from his collec-

tion, to Svetlana V. Nedoshivina (St. Petersburg, Russia) for providing rare literature sources, to Dmitriy

}

62 TROFIMOVA: Atomorpha punctistrigaria new to Europe

F. Shovkoon (Samara, Russia) for preparing the photos, and to Alexey S. Pazhenkov (Samara, Russia) for

heading the expedition.

References

Alphéraky, S. 1892. Lépidoptéres rapportés de la Chine et de la Mongolie par G.N. Potanine. II. Hetero-

cera. — Jn: Romanoff, Mémoires. Lépidoptéres 6: 66-68.

Christoph, H. 1893. Lepidoptera Nova Faunae Palearcticae. — Deutsche entomologische Zeitschrift Iris 6

(1): 95.

Remm, H. & J. Viidalepp 1981. On the fauna of Heterocera of Yashan and Uzboi valley. — Gidrobiological

investigations, Tallin 10: 28-32. (in Russian)

Scoble, M. J. (ed.). 1999. Geometrid Moths of the World: A Catalogue (Lepidoptera, Ceamiemaah): —

CSIRO Publishing, Apollo Books, Stenstrup Vol. 1: xxv + 482 pp.

Staudinger, O. 1901. Catalog der Lepidopteren des palaearctischen Faunengebietes 1. — Berlin, 282 pp.

Viidalepp, J. R. 1975. On the fauna of Geometrid moths (Lepidoptera, Geometridae) (Lepidoptera, Geo-

metridae) of the Mongolian st ees s Republic. Pp. 438-490. — Jn: Insects of Mongolia, Leningrad. (in

Russian).

Viidalepp, J. R. 1988. Fauna of Geometrid moths of the mountains of Middle Asia. — Moskow. 240 pp.

(in Russian).

Viidalepp, J. R. 1996. Checklist of the Geometridae (Lepidoptera) of the former U.S.S R. — Apollo Books, >

Stenstrup. 111 pp.

Viidalepp, J. R.,; G. A. Krassilnikova & M.A. Daritsheva 1992. Ecologo-faunistitsheskii obzor Be iaite

(Lepidoptera, Geometridae) Turkmenii. — Ecologia i raspredelenie nasekomyh Turkmenistana

{Ecology and distribution of Insects of Turkmenia], Ashkhabad: 89-152. (in Russian).

Wiltshire, E. P. 1986. Lepidoptera of Saudi Arabia: Fam. Cossidae, Sesiidae, Metarbelidae, Lasiocampidae,

Sphingidae, Geometridae, Lymantriidae, Arctiidae, Nolidae, Noctuidae (Heterocera); Fam. Satyridae

(Rhopalocera) (Part 5). — /n: Biittiker & Krupp (eds.), Fauna of Saudi Arabia 8: 262-323. ~

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 63—80 63

On the systematics of Anania Hiibner, 1823

(Pyraloidea: Crambidae: Pyraustinae)

ANDREAS TRANKNER !’?, HOUHUN LI? & Martruias Nuss !:4

' Museum of Zoology, Koenigsbruecker Landstrasse 159, 01109 Dresden, Germany

e-mail: andreas.traenkner@senckenberg.de

> College of Life Sciences, Nankai University, Tianjin 300071, China; e-mail: linouhun@nankai.edu.cn

* e-mail: matthias.nuss@senckenberg.de

Abstract. Currently, Pyraustinae (Lepidoptera: Pyraloidea: Crambidae) are split into many genera that

often contain a small number of species only. This classification is largely influenced by traditional and

typological concepts and do not necessarily reflect natural relationships. Thus, we encourage the idea

to fuse taxa based on synapomorphies, as suggested by Leraut (2005), who argued, that an elongated,

serrated sclerite of the phallus in males and a digitiform structure freely extending into the antrum in

females is apomorphic for members of Anania Hiibner, 1823. Screening the literature, we found four

further species belonging to this monophylum: Anania hasanensis (Kirpichnikova, 1998) (Opsibotys)

comb. n., Anania luteorubralis (Caradja, 1916) (Pyrausta) comb. n., Anania obtusalis (Yamanaka, 1987)

(Perinephela) comb.n., and Anania shafferi (Speidel & Hanigk, 1990) (Algedonia) comb. n. Investigating

Chinese Pyraustinae, we also found these characters in taxa which so far were not assigned to Anania.

As a result, Pronomis Munroe & Mutuura, 1968 syn. n., Tenerobotys Munroe & Mutuura, 1971 syn.

n., and Udonomeiga Mutuura, 1954 syn. n. are synonymized with Anania. The species formerly tretaed

in Pronomis are transferred to Anania: Anania delicatalis (South, 1901) (Pyrausta) comb. n., Anania

flavicolor Munroe & Mutuura, 1968 (Pronomis) comb. n., Anania profusalis (Warren, 1896) (Opsibotys)

comb. n. The species and subspecies formerly treated in Tenerobotys are transferred to Anania: Anania

subfumalis Munroe & Mutuura, 1971 (Tenerobotys) comb. n., Anania subfumalis continentalis (Munroe &

Mutuura, 1971) (Tenerobotys) comb. n., Anania teneralis (Caradja, 1939) (Hapalia) comb. n., and Anania

teneralis tsinlingalis (Munroe & Mutuura, 1971) (Tenerobotys) comb. n. Anania vicinalis (South, 1901)

comb. n. (Pyrausta) is transferred from Udonomeiga to Anania. The apomorphic characters of Anania are

also shared by the afrotropic Ethiobotys Maes, 1997, syn. n., and the species formerly treated therein are

transferred to Anania: Anania amaniensis (Maes, 1997) comb. n., Anania ankolae (Maes, 1997) comb. n.,

Anania bryalis (Hampson, 1918) (Lamprosema) comb. n., Anania camerounensis (Maes, 1997) comb. n.,

Anania elutalis (Kenrick, 1917) (Pyrausta) comb. n., Anania epipaschialis (Hampson, 1912) (Nacoleia)

comb. n., Anania lippensi (Maes, 1997) comb. n., and Anania ruwenzoriensis (Maes, 1997) comb. n. In

contrast, Crypsiptya Meyrick, 1894 stat. rev. is reinstated as a valid taxon, based on our investigation of

Crypsiptya coclesalis (Walker, 1859: 701) (Botys) comb. rev.

Introduction

The Pyraustinae in the sense of Solis & Maes (2003) comprises about | 400 species

placed in 239 valid genera. According to morphological characters of the copulatory

organs, the subfamily forms a rather uniform group. Their male terminalia do not bear

a gnathos, but show a sella and an editum on the mesal wall of the valva and there are

often deciduous cornuti on the vesica. Their female terminalia typically present an

appendix bursae and a rhomboid signum in the wall of the corpus bursae. Additional

pyraustine characters are given by Minet (1982) and Maes (1994). However, a cladistic

analysis of crambid subfamilies showed only one synapomorphy for the Pyraustinae: a

continuous median teguminal ridge forming two parallel lines (Solis & Maes 2003).

Within the Pyraustinae, the generic classification is mainly based on traditional,

typological views of wing pattern elements. Based on these studies, the group has been

split into numerous genera, most of them containing less than five species.

Nota lepidopterologica, 15.5.2009, ISSN 0342-7536

64 TRANKNER et al.: Systematics of Anania Hiibner

In 2005, Leraut synonymized pyraustine genera Algedonia Lederer, 1863, Ebulea

Doubleday, 1849, Eurrhypara Hibner, 1825, Opsibotys Warren, 1890, and Perinephela

Hiibner, 1825 with Anania Hiibner, 1823. All these genera and the species included in

them are well known to European lepidopterists (Goater 1986; Palm 1986; Karsholt

& Razowski 1996). At first glance, the species formerly included in these genera

do not look congeneric (Figs 1-8), but Leraut (2005) showed the common presence

of a digitiform sclerotization in the female antrum (Figs 18-21), which seems to be

related to the common presence of a spattle-like sclerotization (“languette” sensu

Leraut) in the phallic apodeme (Figs 13—17). He hypothesized that these structures are

synapomorphies for the species he included in Anania.

Additionally, Leraut (2005) listed Crypsiptya Meyrick, 1894 as a synonym of Anania.

Then, he synonymized Coclebotys Munroe & Mutuura, 1969 with Anania, although

Coclebotys had been already synonymized with Crypsiptya by Shaffer et al. (1996:

189), which is supported by Maes (2002).

Though the digitiform. sclerotization in the female antrum and the spattle-like

sclerotization of the phallus apodeme still deserve further investigation to clarify

their function, we support the idea to group species that share common, homologous

characters. Here we provide a morphological description of these charaters and discuss"

their presence in additional pyraustines that have not been assigned to Anania before.

Material and Methods

Our investigation for the presence or absence of phallus sclerotization and the inner

antrum digitiform structure involved pyraustine genera Achyra Guenée, 1849, Anania

sensu Leraut (2005), Callibotys Munroe & Mutuura, 1969, Carminibotys Munroe &

Mutuura, 1971, Circobotys Butler, 1879, Crocidophora Lederer, 1863, Crypsiptya,

Demobotys Munroe & Mutuura, 1969, Ecpyrrhorrhoe Hiibner, 1825, Euclasta Lederer,

1855, Eumorphobotys Munroe & Mutuura, 1969, Gynenomis Munroe & Mutuura,

1968, Loxostege Hiibner, 1825, Mimetebulea Munroe & Mutuura, 1968, Nascia Curtis,

1835, Nephelobotys Munroe & Mutuura, 1970, Ostrinia Hiibner, 1825, Paracorsia

Marion, 1959, Paranomis Munroe & Mutuura, 1968, Paratalanta Meyrick, 1890,

Parbattia Moore, 1888, Pronomis Munroe & Mutuura, 1968, Psammotis Hiibner,

1825, Pseudebulea Butler, 1881, Pyrausta Schrank, 1802, Sclerocona Meyrick,

1890, Tenerobotys Munroe & Mutuura, 1971, Thliptoceras Warren in Swinhoe, 1890,

Udonomeiga Mutuura, 1954, and Uresiphita Hiibner, 1825.

Nomenclatural data were edited using the online database of the Global Information

System on Pyraloidea (Nuss et al. 2009).

Genitalia were prepared and mounted according to the standards suggested by Robinson

(1976). The genitalia of several additional specimens were investigated and their

genitalia stored in microvials pinned on the specimens’ pin. Images of the genitalia

were taken using a NIKON Eclipse 600 microscope with a ZEISS AxioCam MRes : q

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 63—80 65

Abbreviations

AT Andreas Trankner

BMNH Natural History Museum, London

MTD Museum fiir Tierkunde Dresden

NKUM Insect Collection, College of Life Sciences, Nankai University, Tianjin

prep. gen. preparation of genitalia

TLMF Tiroler Landesmuseum Ferdinandeum, Innsbruck

ZDD Zhang Dandan

ZFMK Zoologisches Forschungsinstitut und Museum Alexander Koenig, Bonn

Taxa currently treated in Anania

Leraut (2005) synonymized seven generic and subgeneric names with Anania.

Unfortunately, he did not investigate all species-group taxa formerly treated in all

of these genera and transferred only some of them to Anania. Thus, he established a

confusing situation because a number of species-group taxa are left without generic

combination. Here is an overview of the current synonymic situation:

Anania Hubner, 1823 d: 27. Type species: Pyralis guttalis Denis & Schiffermiiller, 1775.

= Algedonia Lederer, 1863: 363. Type species: Pyralis luctualis Hiibner, 1796. Leraut 2005: 127

(syn.).

= Mutuuraia Munroe, 1976: 34-35. Type species: Botys terrealis Treitschke, 1829. Maes 2005:

74 (syn.).

= Nealgedonia Munroe, 1976: 32. Type species: Botys extricalis Guenée, 1854. Maes 2005: 74

(syn.).

= Ebulea Doubleday, 1849: 14. Type species: Pyralis crocealis Hiibner, 1796. Leraut 2005: 126

(syn.).

= Ennychia Treitschke, 1828: 318. Type species: Phalaena octomaculata Linnaeus, 1771. Guenée,

- 1854: 182. (syn.).

= Eurrhypara Hibner, 1825c: 360. Type species: Phalaena urticata Linnaeus, 1761. Leraut 2005: 129

(subgen.).

= Proteurrhypara Munroe & Mutuura, 1969a: 899-900. Type species: Opsibotys ocellalis Warren,

1892. Leraut 2005: 129 (syn.).

= Opsibotys Warren, 1890: 474. Type species: Pyralis fuscalis Denis & Schiffermiiller, 1775. Leraut

2005: 129 (subgen.).

= Perinephela Hiibner, 1825c: 357. Type species: Pyralis lancealis Denis & Schiffermiiller, 1775.

Leraut 2005: 126 (syn.).

= Phlyctaenia Hiibner, 1825c: 359. Type species: Pyralis sambucalis Denis & Schiffermiiller, 1775.

Leraut 2005: 126 (syn.).

= Trichovalva Amsel, 1956: 284. Type species: Trichovalva ledereri Amsel, 1956. Munroe 1995: 7,54,

164 (syn.).

Palaearctic species of Anania

The following is a list of the Palaearctic species placed in Anania according to published

records:

Anania albeoverbascalis Yamanaka, 1966: 32-33 pl. 1 figs 4, 88a, pl. 2 fig. 16. Type locality: Japan,

Honshu, Toyama Prefecture, Kurobe, Keyakidaira.

]

66 TRANKNER et al.: Systematics of Anania Hiibner

Anania chekiangensis (Munroe & Mutuura, 1969 a: 900-902, figs 4, 10, 16) (Proteurrhypara). Type

locality: China, Zhejiang province, West Tianmushan. Leraut 2005: 129 (Anania (Eurrhypara)). |

Anania coronata (Hufnagel, 1767: 616, pl. 20 fig. 14) (Phalaena). Type locality: Europe. Leraut 2005:

127 (Anania).

Anania crocealis (Hiibner, 1796 a: 13, 24, pl. 11 fig. 71) (Pyralis). Type locality: Hungary. Leraut 2005:

125-127 fig. 5 (Anania).

Anania egentalis (Christoph, 1881: 19) (Botys verbascalis var.). Type locality: Russia, Amur region. Inoue

1988: 91 (Anania, sp.).

Anania funebris (Strém, 1768: 339, pl. 16 fig. 17) (Phalaena). Type locality: Norway. Pierce & Metcalfe

1938: 28, pl. 16 (Anania).

Anania fuscalis (Denis & Schiffermiiller, 1775: 121) (Pyralis). Type locality: [Austria] Wienergegend.

Leraut 2005: 130 (Anania (Opsibotys)).

Anania fuscobrunnealis (South [in Leech], 1901: 498, pl. 15 fig. 7) (Pyrausta). Type locality: China, Hubei

Province, Changyang. Leraut 2005: 130 (Anania (Opsibotys)).

Anania fuscofulvalis Yamanaka, 2000: 63, ne 1386-1388, 1394, pl. 163 fig. 13. Type locality: Nepal,

Bagmati, Godavari.

Anania hortulata (Linnaeus, 1758: 529) (netdbee: (Geometra)). Type Weenie Not stated. Leraut 2005:

125 fig. 4 (Anania (Eurrhypara)).

Anania lancealis (Denis & Schiffermiiller, 1775: 121) (Pyralis). Type locality: [Austria] Wienergegend.

Leraut 2005: 127 (Anania).

Anania luctualis (Hiibner, 1796 a: 20, pl. 14 fig. 88) (Pyralis). Type locality: Germany, Sachsen, Leipzig.

Leraut 2005: 127 (Anania).

Anania oberthuri (Turati, 1913: 18) (Botys (Sylepta)). Type locality: Italy, Sardinia, Gennargentu. Leraut

2005: 127 (Anania). |

Anania ocellalis (Warren, 1892: 295) (Opsibotys). Type locality: Japan. Leraut 2005: 129 (Anania

(Eurrhypara)).

Anania occidentalis (Munroe & Mutuura, 1969 a: 902-904, figs 5, 11, 17). (Proteurrhypara). lye

locality: China, Yunnan, Lijiang. Leraut 2005: 129 (Anania (Eurrhypara)).

Anania perlucidalis (Hiibner, 1800-1809 b: pl. 22 fig. 143) (Pyralis). Type locality: Europe. Leraut 2005:

127 (Anania).

Anania stachydalis (Zincken [in Germar], 1821: 18, fig. 18) (Pyralis). Leraut 2005: 127 (Anania).

Anania terrealis (Treitschke, 1829: 110-111) (Botys). Type locality: Croatia, Dalmatia. Leraut 2005: 125

(Anania).

Anania testacealis (Zeller, 1847: 571-572) (Botys). Type locality: Italy, Sicily, Syracus, Acradina. Leraut

2005: 127 (Anania).

Anania verbascalis (Denis & Schiffermiiller, 1775: 121) ‘(Pyralis). Type logality. [Austria] Wienergegend

Pierce & Metcalfe 1938: 28, pl. 16 (Anania).

There are four additional Palaearctic species formerly assigned to Opsibotys and ? ve

Algedonia, but not yet transferred to Anania. We did not investigate these species, but _ _

_ their genitalia have been illustrated in the literature, which allows to associate them.

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 63—80 67

Anania species occurring outside the Palaearctic Region

The majority of Anania species occur outside of the Palaearctic Region (Munroe 1995;

Maes 2003; Leraut 2005). However, due to the synonymisation of some genera with

Anania by Leraut (2005), the correct number of valid species belonging to this genus

still has to be verified. For example, there are a number of species provisionally placed

in Phlyctaenia indicated as “misplaced” in Munroe (1995). Due to the synonymisation

of Phlyctaenia with Anania, all these species formally belong to the latter genus,

but their generic placement needs to be verified. Among them are Pionea adiposalis

Dognin, 1912 and Pionea teinopalpia Hampson, 1913, which have been transferred

to Anania by Leraut (2005), apparently without examination of the type specimens

because these two species probably belong to the crambine genus Erupa Walker, 1864

(B. Landry, unpubl.). A complete synonymic catalogue of Anania species can be found

in Nuss et al. (2009).

Taxonomic results

The type species of generic synonyms Algedonia, Ebulea, Eurrhypara, Opsibotys,

Perinephela, and Phlyctaenia treated by Leraut (2005) in Anania as well as Mutuuraia,

which was synonymized to Algedonia by Maes (2005), present male terminalia with

a elongated, asymmetric sclerite of the phallus apodeme and female terminalia with

a digitiform sclerotization inside the antrum. Among the taxa studied, we found

these characters also in three species of Pronomis, two of Tenerobotys, and one of

Udonomeiga.

Anania Hiibner, 1823

Anania Hiibner, 1823 d: 27. Type species: Phalaena octomaculata Linnaeus, 1771.

Material. A. funebris: 10, Germany, Jena, 10.vi.1918, Ernst leg., prep. gen. AT53; 10, Austria,

Kirchdorf, 1897, Hauder, coll. Wernicke via Kotzsch, prep. gen. AT59; 10, Switzerland, Ober Engadin,

1910, W. Heinitz leg., prep. gen. AT62, MTD. 19, Italy, Bozen, 26.vii.1898, coll. Wernicke via Kotzsch,

prep. gen. AT61; 19, France, Digne Provence, vii.1908, prep. gen. AT52; 19, Austria, Kapruner Tal,

vii.1942, E. Mobius, prep. gen. AT51; 19, Italy, South Tyrol, Klausen, 6.vi.1921, prep. gen. AT60, MTD. —

A. verbascalis: 1¢ , Switzerland, Stalden, Wallis, 20.v.1928, prep. gen. AT21; 19, same locality, 13.v.1928,

prep. gen. AT20, MTD. — A. terrealis: 1¢ , Germany, Loessnitz, Dresden, 20.iv.1907, prep. gen. AT33;

19, Germany, Meissen, leg. 1909, coll. E. Riedel, prep. gen. AT32, MTD. — A. crocealis: 16, Italy, Riva,

1911, W. Heinitz leg., prep. gen. AT19; 19, Italy, Mendel, 1913, W. Heinitz leg., prep. gen. AT18, MTD.

— A. hortulata: 16, Germany, Sachsen, Radeberg, 11.vi.1963, prep. gen. AT38; 19, Germany, Dresden,

Saubachtal, 29.v.1903, prep. gen. AT39, MTD. — A. fuscalis: 1¢, Germany, Dresden, 1990, prep. gen.

ATS8; 19, France, Alpes Maritimes, St. Martin-Vésubie, 18.vii.1914, prep. gen. AT7, MTD. — A. lancealis:

10, Germany, Chemnitz, vii.1908, prep. gen. AT29; 19, Germany, Dresden, Rabenauer Grund, vi.1909,

prep. gen. AT28, MTD. — A. coronata: 10, Germany, Hintere Sachsische Schweiz, GroBer Winterberg,

29 .vi.1967, prep. gen. AT31; 19, Germany, Chemnitz, vii.1908, prep. gen. AT30, MTD.

Male terminalia. In A. funebris (Fig. 13) uncus long and small, distally

pointed. Vinculum dorsally on each side with membrane adorned with loose-fitting

brush of hair-like coremata slightly exceeding posterior tip of valva. Mesal wall of

valva anteriorly with sella with sclerotized ventral border with small dents and process

directed posteriorly. Editum with many dorsally directed lamellae. Sacculus posteriorly

68 TRANKNER et al.: Systematics of Anania Hiibner

Figs 1-6. Adults of European Anania species. 1. A. funebris (= A. guttalis, A. octomaculata) S ,Germany,

Chemnitz, 21.vii.1944, W. Heinitz leg. (MTD). 2. A. luctualis (formerly Algedonia), 9, Germany,

Schleinbach (MTD). 3. A. terrealis (formerly Algedonia), 9, Germany, Sachsen, Moritzburg, 25.vii.1967,

Bembenek & Krause leg. (MTD). 4. A. crocealis (formerly Ebulea), &, Switzerland, St. Gallen, 1891,

Wernicke coll. (MTD). 5. A. hortulata (formerly Eurrhypara), & , Germany, Dresden-Wachwitz, 17.v.17,

M. Koch leg. (MTD). 6. A. fuscalis (formerly Opsibotys), 9, Germany, Dresden, Dippelsdorf, 5.vii.1941

(MTD).

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 63—80 69

ee SEF ay 4 % “ & pi tT = . ' 7 4

Ser aie ae enee wat =e = “Anan gas Oe 2 e - 2

J Fa = $5 ;

Figs 7-12. Adults of European and Chinese species of Anania and Crypsiptya. 7. A. lancealis (formerly

Perinephela), 9, Poland, Zabrze (“Hindenburg’’), 10.vi.43 coll. Ernst Limbach (MTD). 8. A. coronata

(formerly Phlyctaenia), 6, Germany, Radebeul-K6tzschenbroda, 1934, E. Mébius coll. (MTD). 9. A.

delicatalis (formerly Pronomis), S , Zhejiang Province, West Tianmushan, 15.v.1932, H. HGne (ZFMK).

10. A. teneralis (formerly Tenerobotys), S, Inner Mongolia, Motezuogi, Chasugi, 950 m, 11-.viii.2002,

Dandan Zhang & Zhigiang Li leg. (NKUM). Il. A. vicinalis (formerly Udonomeiga), &, Zhejiang

Province, Tianmushan, 29.v.1931, H. Héne (ZFMK). 12. C. coclesalis, 9, Hainan Province, Wanning,

Xingzhong Farm, 110 m, 3.viii.2008, Bingbing Hu & Li Zhang leg., prep. gen. AT67 (NKUM).

70 TRANKNER et al.: Systematics of Anania Hiibner

with long spine directed dorsally. Mesal wall of valva densely covered with hair-like

setae. Juxta U-shaped, deeply notched posteriorly.

Anellus attached along posterior third of phallus, but latter entirely anterior to dia-

phragma. Entrance of ductus ejaculatorius to phallus situated anterodorsally. Apodeme

of praephallus strongly reduced to one lateral spine-like extension directed posteriorly.

Conspicuously elongate sclerite attached to inner wall of phallic apodeme, ventrad of

spine-like extension; sclerite (“languette” sensu Leraut) slightly constricted medially

and reaching posterior end of phallus, asymmetrically enlarged at apex and with

serrated edges. Vesica without cornuti. Phallus apodeme varying in form and size from

an elongate sclerite in A. funebris (Fig. 13) to a deeply cleft sclerite in A. lancealis (Fig.

14) and A. fuscalis; in both cases lobes more or less serrated and concave in cross-

section in correlation with cylindrical shape of phallus.

Female terminalia. In A. funebris (Fig. 18), appendix bursae anteriorly situ-

ated and with rhomboid signum on corpus bursae. Ductus bursae membranous, thin

and long, with various folds and loops. Insertion of ductus seminalis situated fairly

posterad along ductus bursae. Colliculum small and short, followed directly by antrum,

showing specialized sclerotizations. Antrum sac-like, enlarged, with free digitiform

sclerotization extending up to posterior edge. In diameter, anterior part of digitiform.

structure slightly larger than posterior end of ductus bursae. Ostium bursae situated

ventro-anteriorly on digitiform structure. Lamella postvaginalis situated dorso-posteri-

orly in relation to antrum; its sclerotization extending ventrally towards segment VIII.

Ostium situated ventro-posteriorly on digitiform structure in A. verbascalis, posteri-

orly in A. crocealis.

Pronomis Munroe & Mutuura, 1968, syn. n.

Pronomis Munroe & Mutuura, 1968: 986-987, figs 1, 20, 25. Type species: Pyrausta delicatalis South,

1901, by original designation.

Material. A. delicatalis comb.n.: China, 20, 19, Zhejiang Province, Tianmushan, Chanyuansi,

310 m, 15.viii.1999, leg, Houhun Li et al., prep. gen. ZDD02073, 02140, 02141; [Koy Guangxi Zhuang

Autonomous Region, Guilin, Maoershan, ‘Jiuniutang, 1100 m, 9 iv.2002, leg. Shulian Hao & Huaijun

Xue, prep. gen. ZDD02244, NKUM. IC, Sichuan, Kangding (= Tatsienlu, Ta-Chien-Lu), 8300 ft, vii— |

vili.1890, Pyralidae Brit. Mus. Slide No. 17372: 19, Moupin, viii.1890, Pyralidae Brit. Mus. Slide No.

17373, BMNH. 10,19, Zhejiang Province, West Tianmushan, 15.v., 17.vi.1932, leg. H. Hone, gen. prep.

AT65, ZFMK.

Anania delicatalis comb. n. (Fig. 9) presents the typical characters regarded as synapo-

morphic for Anania, but phallus apodeme with undivided sclerite of 2/3 length of phal-

lus, apex of sclerite straight, truncated, slightly serrated, with asymmetrical lateral en-

largement (Fig. 15). Vesica with deciduous cornuti as long as 1/3 phallus length, with

dentate edges. Digitiform structure of females nearly as long as antrum, similar to open

cylinder with ostium located at blunt posterior tip; antrum strongly sclerotized, nearly

as long as broad and strongly swollen dorsally, with four folds on each side and many

small spines es >).

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 63-80 7]

Anania flavicolor (Munroe & Mutuura, 1968: 987-988, figs 1, 12) comb. n. (Pronomis). Type locality:

China, Taiwan, Takow.

Anania profusalis (Warren, 1896: 95) comb. n. (Opsibotys). Type locality: India, Khasia Hills. Munroe &

Mutuura 1968: 987 (Pronomis).

Tenerobotys Munroe & Mutuura, 1971, syn. n.

Tenerobotys Munroe & Mutuura, 1971: 174. Type species: Hapalia teneralis Caradja, 1939.

Material. A. subfumalis comb.n.: China, 1%, Hunan Province, Zhuzhou, vi.1965, prep. gen.

ZDD02344; 10°, 19, Henan Province, Xinyang, Jigongshan, 700 m, 13.vii.2001, leg. Dandan Zhang, prep.

gen. ZDD02065, 02064; 19, Henan Province, Tongbai, Shuiliandong, 300 m, 16.vii.2001, leg. Dandan

Zhang, prep. gen. AT08034, NKUM. — A. teneralis comb. n.: China, 10, Hebei Province, Yi County,

West Mausoleum of the Qing Dynasty, 100 m, 18.vii.2000, leg. Haili Yu, prep. gen. ZDDO01224; 1¢,

Sichuan Province, Batang, Zhubalong, 2500 m, 10.vii.2001, leg. Houhun Li & Xinpu Wang, prep. gen.

ZDD02160; 10%, Qinghai Province, Xunhua, Mengda, 2240 m, 15.vii.1995, Houhun Li & Shuxia Wang,

prep. gen. ZDD02069; 10°, Inner Mongolia, Motezuoqi, Chasuqi, 950 m, 11.viii.2002, leg. Dandan Zhang

& Zhigiang Li, prep. gen. ZDD02341; 10%, Qinghai Province, Xunhua, Mengda, 2240 m, 13.vii.1995,

leg. Houhun Li & Shuxia Wang, prep. gen. ATO8008; 39, Sichuan Province, Batang, Zhubalong, 2500 m,

10.vii.2001, leg. Houhun Li & Xinpu Wang, prep. gen. ZDD01840, ATO8009; Inner Mongolia, Motezuoqi,

Chasuqi, 950 m, 11.viii.2002, leg. Dandan Zhang & Zhiqiang Li, prep. gen. ATO08007, NKUM.

Anania teneralis comb. n. (Fig. 10), presents the typical characters regarded as synapo-

morphic for Anania, but phallus short and thick, with conspicuously undivided sclerite

half as long as phallus length and not constricted, with apex rounded and serrated.

Prephallus apodeme asymmetrically reduced as in A. funebris, forming only concave

tongue opposite sclerite (Fig. 16). Deciduous cornuti as long as 1/3 phallus length and

not serrated. Digitiform structure of females short and broad, with moderate coni-

cal tip. Ostium situated ventro-anteriorly as in A. funebris. Antrum broader than long.

Bursa copulatrix with asymmetrical signum (Fig. 20).

Species formerly placed in Tenerobotys:

Anania subfumalis (Munroe & Mutuura, 1971: 177-178, figs 4-5, 12, 16) comb. n. (Tenerobotys). Type

locality: China, Taiwan, Nan Tou Hsien, Hori (Puli), Wanta.

= Anania subfumalis continentalis (Munroe & Mutuura, 1971: 178, figs 6-7, 13, 17) comb. n. (Tene-

robotys). Type locality: China, Province of Hunan, Hoengshan.

Anania teneralis (Caradja, 1939: 23) comb. n. (Hapalia). Type locality: China, Sichuan, Batang, 2800 m.

Munroe & Mutuura, 1971: 174 (Tenerobotys).

= Anania teneralis tsinlingalis (Munroe & Mutuura, 1971: 176, figs 2-3, 11, 15) comb. n. (Tene-

robotys). Type locality: China, Shaanxi Province, Tsinling, Tapaishan.

Udonomeiga Mutuura, 1954, syn. n.

Udonomeiga Mutuura, 1954: 18. Type species: Pyrausta vicinalis South, 1901.

Material. A. vicinalis comb. n.: China, 20, Guizhou Province, Chishui, Suoluo, 240 m, 21.ix.2000,

leg. Haili Yu, prep. gen. ZDD02153, 02157, NKUM. 10, Zhejiang Province, Tianmushan 29.v.1931,

Hone, prep. gen. AT64, ZFMK. Korea, 19, Utikongo, im Kongosan, 500m, 25.vii.1940, H. Hone leg..

prep. gen. AT63, ZFMK.

Anania vicinalis comb. n. (Fig. 11) presents the typical characters regarded as synapo-

morphic for Anania, but entrance of ductus ejaculatorius in phallus situated anterio-

laterally on right side. Conspicuous phallus sclerite deeply cleft, smaller lobe situated

on same side as entrance of ductus ejaculatorius, bigger lobe situated on opposite side;

}

EZ TRANKNER et al.: Systematics of Anania Hiibner

two lobes constricted and serrated towards broadened tips (Fig. 17). Vesica with de-

ciduous cornuti half as long as phallus diameter and with small thorns. Ductus bursae

membranous with 9-10 loops and with spirally sclerotized band towards corpus bursae.

Digitiform structure extending beyond posterior edge of antrum, enclosing it narrowly.

Ostium bursae situated ventro-posteriorly on digitiform structure. Lamella postvagina-

lis stretching dorso-posteriorly from antrum ( Fig. 21).

Species formerly placed in Udonomeiga:

Anania vicinalis (South [in Leech], 1901: 502, pl. 15 fig. 30) comb. n. (Pyrausta). Type locality: China.

Ethiobotys Maes, 1997, syn.n.

Ethiobotys Maes, 1997: 390-392. Type species: Lamprosema bryalis Hampson, 1918.

According to the original description by Maes (1997), this taxon presents the characters |

that are apomorphic for Anania. We did not investigate the eight included species, —

but their genitalia are sufficiently described and figured in the original descriptions,

illustrating the presence of the asymmetric sclerite of the praephallus and the digitiform

structure in the antrum. Thus, Ethiobotys is synonymized with Anania and the species _

formerly treated in Ethiobotys are transferred to Anania.

Species formerly placed in Ethiobotys:

Anania amaniensis (Maes, 1997: 399-401, pl. 1 fig. 3, pl. 3 fig. a, pl. 4 fig. a), comb. n. Type locality:

Tanzania, Amani.

Anania ankolae (Maes, 1997: 398-399, pl. 1 fig. 8, pl. 3 fig. c), comb. n. Type locality: Uganda, Ankole,

Falinzu forest.

Anania bryalis (Hampson, 1918: 136) (Lamprosema), comb. n. Type locality: Kenya, N. Kavironio®

Anania camerounensis (Maes, 1997: 401, pl. 1 fig. 4, pl. 3 fig. b, pl. 4 fig. b), comb. n. Type locality:

Cameroon, Mt. Cameroon Bonakanda.

Anania elutalis (Kenrick, 1917: 100, pl. 6) (Pyrausta), comb. n. Type locality: Madagascar.

Anania epipaschialis (Hampson, 1912: 439) (Nacoleia), comb. n. Type locality: Sierra Leone.

Anania lippensi (Maes, 1997: 396-398, pl. 1 fig. 2, pl. 3 fig. d, pl. 4 fig. c), a n. Type locality:

Cameroon, S.W. Bonakanda 1325m.

Anania ruwenzoriensis (Maes, 1997: 394, pl. 1 aE 7,-pl. 2 fig. b), comb. n. Type Bang Uganda,

Ruwenzori, 6500—7500ft.

Crypsiptya Meyrick, 1894, stat. rev.

Crypsiptya Meyrick, 1894: 463. Type species: Botys nereidalis bade PBOAM 65/3

= Coclebotys Munroe & Mutuura, 1969 b: 1243-1245. Type species: Botys coclesalis Walker, 1859,

Shaffer et al. 1996: 189 (syn.). 3

63-80

Nota lepid. 32 (1)

74 TRANKNER et al.: Systematics of Anania Hubner

Material. C.coclesalis: China, 10%, Hainan province, Wanning, Jianfeng Ling, Beidazheng Primary

school, 110 m, 28.vii.2008, Bingbing Hu & Li Zhang, leg., prep. gen. AT58; 39, Hainan province, Wanning,

Xingzhong Farm, 110 m, 3., 8.viii.2008, Bingbing Hu & Li Zhang leg., prep. gen. AT57, 67; 19, Henan

Province, Tongbai, Shuiliandong, 300 m, 26.v11.2000, leg. Haili Yu, prep. gen. ATO8011, NKUM.

In Crypsiptya coclesalis (Fig. 12), phallus apodeme elongated shoehorn-shaped with

acuminate curved tip. This distal process constricted at end of phallus apodeme and

seamless extension of phallus sclerotization. Small thorn curved anteriorly, situated

at base of distal process (Fig. 22). Colliculum of females elongate and strongly

sclerotized, folded longitudinally. Inside colliculum blunt ending sclerotized tube as

broad as antrum (Fig. 23). In dorsal view, tube very flat and hard to identify as hollow

structure; dorsally and ventrally fixed to colliculum wall. Ostium situated at posterior

most tip of tube, situated in anterior part of antrum sac.

Leraut (2005: 127) listed Crypsiptya Meyrick, 1894 as a synonym of Anania and

mentioned by mistake that the synonymy was established by Shaffer et al. (1996), who

in fact treated Crypsiptya as a valid genus. In addition, Leraut (2005) synonymized

Coclebotys Munroe & Mutuura, 1969 with Anania, although Coclebotys had been

already synonymized with Crypsiptya by Shaffer et al. (1996: 189). Here, we reinstate -

Crypsiptya as a valid genus following Shaffer et al. (1996), as well as Maes (2002),

leaf roller Crypsiptya coclesalis from China shows that the structures of the terminalia

that are apomorphic to Anania are not present in Crypsiptya. We were not able to study

the type of Crypsiptya nereidalis, likely kept at the BMNH, but we do not doubt the

conclusions of Shaffer et al. (1996), as well as Maes (2002) about the synonymy of

Coclebotys with Crypsiptya.

Discussion

Our investigations of Pyraustinae confirm the unique characters of the male and female

copulatory organs in Anania, as shown by Leraut (2005). In males, the apodeme of

the praephallus is asymmetrically sclerotized, and a conspicuously elongated sclerite

(“languette” sensu Leraut) is present. In females, the antrum typically bears a digitiform

structure fixed to its anterior wall, enclosing the opening of the ductus bursae into the

antrum, and extending freely into the antrum sac. The ostium is translocated to the

digitiform structure and its position and shape vary between species. The common

presence and complexity of this structure suggests its homology among species. Since

we do not know any other pyraloid taxon possessing these structures, we argue in

conformity with Leraut (2005) that they are apomorphic for Anania.

The male and female structures identified to represent synapomorphies for Anania

have been repeadedly studied and figured, e.g. by Mutuura (1954), Inoue (1960), and

Yamanaka (1987). Speidel & Hanigk (1990) used the shape of the male phallus scle- —

frites to discriminate Algedonia and Mutuuraia as subgenera of Algedonia. Munnge aici

— J

St i

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 63-80 735

Figs 18—21. Female copulatory organs of Anania species; arrows pointing to digitiform structure (scale

bars 500 pm). 18. A. funebris, Austria, Klausen, Tirol, 6.vi.1921, prep. gen. AT60 (MTD). 19. A. delicatalis,

China, Moupin, viii.1890, prep. gen. 17373 (BMNH). 20. A. teneralis, China, Sichuan Province, Batang,

Zhubalong, 2500 m, 10.vii.2001, Houhun Li & Xinpu Wang leg., prep. gen. ATO8009 (NKUM). 21. A.

vicinalis, Korea, Utikongo, Kongosan, 500 m, 25.vii.1940. H. Hone leg., prep. gen. AT63 (ZFMK).

of these genera with Anania, based on the common presence of the same characters

mentioned by Maes.

In contrast to Leraut (2005), Crypsiptya is regarded here as distinct from Anania be-

cause of the different characters of the copulatory organs. The tubular structure inside

the colliculum of Crypsiptya can be confused with the digitiform structure in the an-

trum of Anania, but they are not ragarded here as homologous as they are in different

positions. Furthermore, it is questionable whether the phallic extension of Crypsiptya

is homologous to the elongated sclerite of the phallus in Anania because the phallic

extension of Crypsiptya is neither serrated nor distinctly sclerotized as in Anania.

The genitalia synapomorphies of Anania are found to be present in the three Chinese

genera synonymized here. Despite the very strong swollen antrum of the species formerly

treated in Pronomis, the digitiform structure and the asymmetric phallus apodeme can

be clearly identified. Maes (2005) already mentioned that Pronomis shares the Anania

characters we are now regarding as synapomorphies, but did not translate this into

nomenclatural acts.

These characters are also present in the species of Ethiobotys, which was basically

characterized by the dilated male antennae and dilated male mid tibia (Maes 1997).

76 TRANKNER et al.: Systematics of Anania Hiibner Ss

vreey '}}

eee ee 7d ed

Figs 22-23. Copulatory organs of Crypsiptya coclesalis (scale bars 500 um). 22. C Hainan province, |

Wanning, Jianfeng Ling, Beidazheng Primary school, 110 m, 28.vii.2008, Bingbing Hu & Li Zhang, leg., a

prep. gen. ATS8 (NKUM). 23. 9, China, Henan Province, Tongbai, Shuiliandong, 300 m, 26:vu.2000, — Sam

Haili Yu leg., prep. gen. ATO8011 (NKUM). “Ss

However, the dilated antennae are not synapomorphic for Ethiobotys because only

E. ankolae shows this trait. The dilated mid tibia is not restricted to the afrotropical =

species placed in Ethiobotys as it is also present in males of the Chinese Pronomis _

(Munroe & Mutuura 1968). Thus, Ethiobotys clearly belongs to the ingroup of

Special traits are present in the genitalia of Pronomis, such as an asymmetrical signum

of the corpus bursae (Fig. 19) and a strongly extended dent of the sella. However, the

__ asymmetrical signum is also present in species formerly placed in Tenerobotys (Fig. pie

_ Munro pet a uré +1971). sees oneracicatly present characters wine OW

! their rela with ee sore eio Nae to

ythe

’ ele ms es Ban ae Be.

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 63-80 qq

Though the nomenclatural changes introduced by Leraut (2005), which are largely

supported in this paper, may upset the non-specialist, we argue in favour of the necessity

to implement them in order to move to a natural generic classification of Pyraustinae.

Also, it is our opinion that a large genus Anania, currently comprising 110 species,

will provide more stability in the long term as the phylogenetic relationships between

species still needs to be investigated. In our view, this procedure can help to revise

the diversity of a species-rich group like Pyraustinae, containing approximately 1,400

species, currently still classified into 239 genera (Nuss et al. 2009). Regarding the fact

that there are pyraustine genera containing several species like Achyra Guenée, 1849,

Hahncappsia Munroe, 1976, Loxostege Hiibner, 1825 and Ostrinia Hiibner, 1825, or

the very species-rich genus Pyrausta Schrank, 1802, the majority of the genera contain

less than four species only. Because of the high number of species and genera within

Pyraustinae, the analysis of their phylogeny will take a long time still. We regard the

hypothesis of the monophyly of Anania just as one step towards the reconstruction of

the natural relationships of pyraustine lineages that we have undertaken and that will

be submitted to phylogenetic analysis.

In the future, the generic combination of the species provisionally assigned to

Anania should be checked. A fascinating task remains in the study of the functional

morphology of the copulatory organs of Anania species and their possible importance

for speciation.

Acknowledgements

We thank Li Weichun (Nankai University, Tianjin, China) for his support during AT and M. Nuss’ visit

to Tianjin and for the translation of Chinese label data. We are also grateful to Reinhard Gaedike, Dieter

Stiining (ZFMK, Bonn, Germany), Kevin Tuck (BMNH, London, Great Britain), and Peter Huemer

(TLMF, Innsbruck, Austria) for providing specimens for investigation. The work was funded by the

German Academic Exchange Service (DAAD) and the China Sholarship Council. We thank Bernard

Landry (Genéve, Switzerland) for critically reading our manuscript.

References

Amsel, H. G. 1956. Microlepidoptera Venezolana I. — Boletin de Entomologia Venezolana, Maracay 10

(1954) (1-2): 1-336.

Caradja, A. v. 1916. Beitrag zur Kenntnis der geographischen Verbreitung der Pyraliden und Tortriciden

des europdischen Faunengebietes, nebst Beschreibung neuer Formen. — Deutsche entomologische

Zeitschrift Iris, Dresden 30 (1): 1-88, errata p. 151-152.

Caradja, A. v. 1939. Materialien zu einer Mikrolepidopterenfauna des Yangtsetales bei Batang. — Deutsche

entomologische Zeitschrift Iris, Dresden 53: 15-26.

Christoph, H. T. 1881. Neue Lepidopteren des Amurgebietes. — Bulletin de la Société Impériale des

Naturalistes de Moscou 56: 1-80.

Denis, J. N.C. M. & I. Schiffermiiller 1775. Ankiindung eines systematischen Werkes von den Schmetter-

lingen der Wienergegend herausgegeben von einigen Lehrern am k.k. Theresianum. — Augustin

Bernardi, Wien. frontispiece, 1-323, pls 1-3.

Doubleday, H. 1849. A synonymic list of British Lepidoptera. — London. 27 pp.

Germar, E. F. 1821. Augusti Ahrensii Fauna Insectorum Europae, Fasc. 4, Halle, Kiimmel. — 25 pp.,

25 pls.

}

78 TRANKNER et al.: Systematics of Anania Hiibner a

Goater, B. 1986. British Pyralid Moths. A Guide to their Identification. — Harley Books, Colchester. fron-

tispiece, 1-175, pls 1-8. 4

Guenée, M. A. 1854. Deltoides et Pyralites. Pp. 1448. -— Jn: J. B. A. D. de Boisduval & M. A. Guenée,

Histoire Naturelle des Insectes. Species Général des Lépidoptéres 8. — Roret, Paris.

Hampson, G. F. 1912: Descriptions of new species of Pyralidae of the subfamily Pyraustinae. — Annals and

Magazine of Natural History, including Zoology, Botany and Geology, London (ser. 8) 9: 149-174,

242-269, 321-336, 433-444, 625-633.

Hampson, G. F. 1918: Descriptions of new Pyralidae of the subfamily Pyraustinae. — Annals and Magazine

of Natural History, including Zoology, Botany and Geology, London (ser. 9) 1: 125-136, 252-262,

265-280.

Hiibner, J. 1796-1833 [imprint ,,1796*] (a). Sammlung europdischer Schmetterlinge. 6. Horde. Die Ziins-

ler: nach der Natur geordnet, beschrieben und vorgestellt (continued by C. Geyer). — Augsburg. [i]— =

liv], [i-ii], [i-1i], 1-30, [1-11], [i-11], pls. 1-32.

Hiibner, J. 1796-1836 [imprint ,,1796*] (b). Sammlung europdischer Schmetterlinge. 8. Horde. Die Scha-

ben: nach der Natur geordnet, beschrieben und vorgestellt (continued by C. Geyer). — Augsburg. [1]—

{12}]—13-—70-[71]-[78], pls. 1-71.

Hiibner, J. 1816—1826 [imprint °1816"] (c). Verzeichni®B bekannter Schmettlinge [sic]. — bey dem Verfas- =

ser zu finden, Augsburg. (Verzeichnif&) [1]-[3]-4—6-[7]-8-431, (Anzeiger) [1]—2-72. =

Hiibner, J. 1819-1823 [imprint ~1823”] (d). Zutrage zur Sammlung exotischer Schmettlinge [sic], beste-

hend in Bekundigung einzelner Fliegmuster neuer oder rarer nichteuropaischer Gattungen: —Augsburg. =

{1 ]-(3]|4—6-[7]-8-3-33]-[40], pl. [36]-[69]. ~

Hufnagel, J.S. 1767. Fortsetzung der Tabelle von den Nachtvégeln, welche die 3te Art derselben, nehmlich =

die Spannenmesser (Phalaenas Geometras Linnaei) enthalt. — Berlinisches Magazin, Berlin 4 (5, 6): =

504-527; 599-626.

Inoue, H. 1960. Two new species of the Pyralididae from Japan (Lepidoptera). — Kontyi. Entomological

Society of Japan, Tokyo 28 (3): 170-171, pl. 10.

Inoue, H. 1988. A new species of Epipaschiinae from Japan, with some synonymic notes on the Pyralidae 3

from east Asia (Lepidoptera). — Tinea, Tokyo 12 (10): 85-95.

Karsholt, O. & J. Razowski 1996. The Lepidoptera of Europe. A distributional checklist. — Apollo Books,

Stenstrup, Denmark. 1-380, 1 CD-ROM.

Kenrick, G. H. 1917: New or little-known Heterocera from Madagascar. — Transactions of the Entomolo-

gical Society of London 1917: i-xli, 1-426.

Kirpichnikova, V. A. 1996. Species of the genus Opsibotys Warren of Russia (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). —

Zoosystematika Rossica, St. Petersburg 4 (2): 311-312.

Kristensen, N. P. 2003: Skeleton and muscles: adults. pp. 39-131. — Jn: N. P. Kristensen, Lepidoptera,

moths and butterflies. Vol. 2: Morphology, physiology, and development. — Jn: M. Fischer, Handbook

of Zoology IV (36). — Walter de Gruyter, Berlin and New York. | ~S E

Lederer, J. 1863. Beitrag zur Kenntniss der Pyralidinen. - Wiener Entomologische Monatschrift 7 (8,

10— 12): 243-280, 331-504, pls 2-18. —

Leech, J. H. 1901. Lepidoptera Heterocera from China, Japan, and Corea. With descriptions of new

species by Richard South, F.E.S.. — Transactions of the Entomological Sgaiety of London: 385-514, Bes

pls 14-15. Sie

Crambidae). —- Nouvelle Revue d’Entomologie, Paris 22 (2): 123-139. : =

5 sail C. 1758. Systema naturae per regna tria naturae, secundum classes, ordines, genera, sitlltane 2 x ~

erent, differentiis, synonymis, locis. — Laurentii Salvii, Holmiae. 1-824. : 3

‘

whet

aeNoM. aoe at on the taxonomic status of the oe (sensu Minet 198)

a , ae un hy

Saw ¥ y

‘

——-

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 63—80 79

Maes, K. V. N. 2002. The genus Crypsiptya in Africa with the description of a new species and a world

checklist of the genus (Lepidoptera Pyraloidea Crambidae Pyraustinae). — Belgian Journal of

Entomology, Bruxelles 4 (1): 27-32.

Maes, K. V. N. 2003. A world checklist of the genus Anania Hiibner, 1823 with the description of a new

species from Africa (Lepidoptera, Pyraloida, Crambidae, Pyraustiane).— Bulletin de la Société Royale

Belge d’Entomologie 139 (1-6): 94-96.

Maes, K. V. N. 2005. Revisionary notes on the genus Algedonia with emphasis on the Afrotropical region

(Lepidoptera, Pyraloidea, Crambidae, Pyraustinae). — Journal of Afrotropical Zoology, Tervuren 75:

75-103.

Marion, H. 1954. Révision des Pyraustidae de la faune frangaise (suite). - Revue francaise de Lépido-

ptérologie, Paris 14: 181-188, 221-227.

Marion, H. 1959. Classification et nomenclature des Pyraustinae d’Europe. — L’Entomologiste, Paris 15

(3): 44-45.

Meyrick, E. 1894. On Pyralidina from the Malay Archipelago. — Transactions of the Entomological Society

of London: 455-480.

Minet, J. 1982: Les Pyraloidea et leurs principales divisions systématiques (Lep. Ditrysia). — Bulletin de la

Société entomologique de France, Paris 86 (1981): 262-280.

Munroe, E. G. 1976. Pyraloidea Pyralidae comprising the subfamily Pyraustinae tribe Pyraustini (part).

Pp. 1-78, pls 1-4, A-H. — In: R. B. Dominick et al., The Moths of America north of Mexico 13.2A

13.2A.—E.W. Classey Ltd. and The Wedhe Entomological Research Foundation, London.

Munroe, E. G. 1995: Pyraustinae. pp. 53-79. — In: J. B. Heppner, Atlas of Neotropical Lepidoptera.

Checklist: Part 2. Hyblaeoidea - Pyraloidea - Tortricoidea 3. — Association for Tropical Lepidoptera &

Scietific Publishers, Gainesville.

Munroe, E.G. & A. Mutuura 1968. Contributions to a study of the Pyraustinae (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) of

temperate East Asia IV. — The Canadian Entomologist, Ottawa 100 (9): 986-1001

Munroe, E. G. & A. Mutuura 1969 a. Contributions to a study of the Pyraustinae (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae)

of temperate East Asia VI. — Canadian Entomologist, Ottawa 101 (9): 897-906.

Munroe, E. G. & A. Mutuura 1969 b. Contributions to a study of the Pyraustinae (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae)

of temperate East Asia VIII. — The Canadian Entomologist, Ottawa 101 (12): 1239-1248.

Munroe, E. G. & A. Mutuura 1971. Contributions to a study of the Pyraustinae (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae) of

Temperate East Asia XI. — Canadian Entomologist, Ottawa 103: (2) 173-181.

Mutuura, A. 1954. Classification of the Japanese Pyrausta group based on the structure of the male and

female genitalia (Pyr.: Lep.). — Bulletin of the Naniwa University, Ser. B, Sakai 4: 7-33.

Nuss, M. et al. 2009. Global Information System on Pyraloidea (GlobIZ). - URL: www.pyraloidea.org

Nuss, M. & W. Speidel 2005: Introduction. pp. 7-20. — In: B. Goater, M. Nuss & W. Speidel, Pyraloi-

dea I. — In: P. Huemer & O. Karsholt, Microlepidoptera of Europe 4. — Apollo Books, Stenstrup.

Palm, E. 1986. Nordeuropas Pyralider — med saerligt henblik paa den danske fauna (Lepidoptera: Pyra-

lidae). Pp. 1-287, pls 1-8. — In: L. Lyneborg, Danmarks Dyreliv. Fauna Béger 3 3. — National-Tryk-

kerit, Copenhagen.

Pierce, F.N. & J. W. Metcalfe 1938. The genitalia of the British Pyrales with the Deltoids and Plumes. —

Oundle, Northants. frontispiece, i—xiv, 1-67, pl. i—xxix.

Robinson, G. S. 1976. The preparation of slides of Lepidoptera genitalia with special reference to the

Microlepidoptera. — Entomologist’s Gazette, London 27: 127-132.

Shaffer, M.,E.S. Nielsen & M. Horak 1996. Pyraloidea. Pp. 164-199. — Jn: E. S. Nielsen, E. D. Edwards &

T. V. Rangsi, Checklist of the Lepidoptera of Australia. — Jn: E. S. Nielsen, Monographs on Australian

Lepidoptera 4. - CSIRO Division of Entomology, Canberra.

Solis, M. A. & K. V. N. Maes 2003. Preliminary phylogenetic analysis of the subfamilies of Crambidae

(Pyraloidea Lepidoptera). — Belgian Journal of Entomology, Bruxelles 4 (2002) (2): 53-95.

Speidel, W. & H. Hanigk 1990. Revision der paliarktischen Arten der Gattung A/gedonia (Lepidoptera,

Crambidae). — Bonner zoologische Beitrige 41 (3-4): 259-275.

Strém, H. 1768. Beskrivelse over Norske Insecter. — Kongelige Norske Videnskabers Selskabs Skrifter,

Copenhagen & Trondheim 4: 313-371, 590 pl. 16.

——

80 TRANKNER et al.: Systematics of Anania Hiibner

Treitschke, F. 1828. Die Schmetterlinge von Europa (Fortsetzung des Ochsenheimer’schen Werks) 6 (2). 2

Gerhard Fleischer, Leipzig. Pp. 1-319.

Treitschke, F. 1829. Die Schmetterlinge von Europa (Fortsetzung des Ochsenheimer’schen Werkes) 7. —

Gerhard Fleischer, Leipzig. Pp. i—vi, 1-252.

Turati, E. 1913. New species and new forms of Lepidoptera from Sardinia. — Entomologist’s Reeerd and

Journal of Variation, London 25 (1): 16-18.

Walker, F. 1859. Pyralides. — List of the Specimens of Lepidopterous Insects in the Collection of the

British Museum, London 18: 509-798.

Warren, W. 1890. Descriptions of some new genera of Pyralidae. — Annals and Magazine > of Natural _

History, including Zoology, Botany and Geology, London (ser. 6) 6: 474-479.

Warren, W. 1892. Descriptions of new genera and species of Pyralidae contained in the British Museum

collection. — Annals and Magazine of Natural History, including Zoology, Botany and Geology,

London (ser. 6) 9: 172-179, 294-302, 389-397, 429-442.

Warren, W. 1896. New genera and species of Pyralidae, Thyrididae, and Epiplemidae. — Annals and Maga-

zine of Natural History, including Zoology, Botany and Geology, London (ser.6) 17: 94-106, 131-150,

202-216.

Yamanaka, H. 1966. A revisional study of the Japanese Anania, with description of a new species. _

Bulletin of the Naniwa University, Ser. B, Sakai 15 (6): 31-40.

Yamanaka, H. 1987. Two new species of the Pyraustinae (Lepidoptera: SuELieae) from J apan. — Tinea,

Tokyo suppl. 12: 192-196.

Yamanaka, H. 2000. Pyralidae of Nepal (III). — Tinea, Tokyo 16, suppl. 1 (iene of Nepal 6): 63-69, =

pl. 163.

Zeller, P.C. 1847. Bemerkungen iiber die auf einer Reise nach Italien und Sicilien beobachteten Schmetter-

lingsarten. — Isis von Oken, Leipzig (2-4, 6-12): 121-159, 213-233, 284-308, 401-457, 483-522,

561-594, 639-67.

zm i eee

Sorts zs , Shatd rh - Muires

oO teeee 2”

= - "ah al n uals

Seba 3 ¢ - igh ORO 5 jl = te

Pet SE ea p

Roa .

\ ;

Mor

pw ta a wh ae Z gt ; :

a, wie ake higes ea : re at ree 3 YS. Des

i? * - ie vie NE oe See: Pca .

Nota lepid. 32 (1): 81—82 |

First record of Cacyreus marshalli (Lycaenidae) from the

Balkan Peninsula

KosMAc Marko! & Rubi VEROVNIK 2

| Zupanéiéeva 8a, 5270 Ajdov8éina, Slovenia; e-mail: kosmacmarko@ volja.net

* University of Ljubljana, Biotechnical Faculty, Department of Biology. Veéna pot 111, 1000 Ljubljana,

Slovenia; e-mail: rudi.verovnik @bf.uni-lj.si

Cacyreus marshalli Butler, 1898, a native of South Africa, was accidentally introduced

in the Balearic archipelago in about 1990 by imported, ornamental Pelargonium

(Geraniaceae), one of its larval food plants (Eitschberger & Stamer 1990; Raynor

1990; Sarto 1 Monteys 1992). Since then it has become one of the best studied invasive

butterfly species in Europe and its range expansion has been well documented. Records

from mainland Spain (Sarto 1 Monteys 1992) and surprisingly Belgium (Troukens

1991) were soon to follow. Unlike in Belgium, the discoveries in mainland Spain refer

to established breeding populations that mark the beginning of its large scale range

expansion in Europe. The expansion continued in neighbouring France, Portugal and

Morocco (Tarrier 1998), and quickly followed in Italy, where the butterfly was first

recorded from Rome (Trematerra et al. 1997). Since then, there have been records from

most of Italy, including Sardinia (Quacchia et al. 2008). Despite its recent publication

the distribution map in Quacchia et al. (2008) is already outdated as the species has

been observed further eastwards as far as Vicenza (Stefano Beretta, pers. comm.). The

butterfly was recently found also on Malta Island (Sammut 2007), which represents its

easternmost record in Europe. Given the fast colonization speed of C. marshalli it is

surprising that the species has not so far been observed along the western coast of the

Balkan Peninsula together with its offshore islands.

During summer holidays the first author visited LoSinj Island, a well-known tourist

destination in Croatia. On August 8, 2008 he observed a small dark lycaenid flying

along the coast and settling on low bushes of Inula crithmoides L. (Asteraceae). The

butterfly was not shy and upon close inspection was immediately recognised as C.

marshalli. It was observed on the west coast of a small peninsula at about 2 km NW

of the town of Mali LoSinj (44° 32° 10°. N, 14° 26° 42° E) (Fig. 1). There were no

Pelargonium plants nearby, but they are abundantly grown in Mali LoSinj. Despite an

intensive search no further specimens were found in the following days. Therefore,

it is still too early to state that this single record represents a successful colonization

and that there is a breeding population on the island. However, the mild climate in

the region is favourable for the reproductive success of the species and hence its

permanent colonization, both being factors that may eventually trigger further spread

of C. marshalli in the Balkan Peninsula in the forthcoming years.

Nota lepidopterologica, xx.5.2009, ISSN 0342-7536

82 Kosmaé & VEROVNIK: Cacyreus marshalli in the Balkan Peninsula

scgiadibiinsice: 7

Italy

Fig. 1. Approximate position of the observation site of Cacyreus marshalli in Croatia. : =

References

Eitschberger, U. & P. Stamer 1990. Cacyreus marshalli Butler, 1898, eine neue Tagfalterart fiir die euro-

paische Fauna? (Lepidoptera, Lycaenidae). — Atalanta 21 (1/2): 101-108. SS 3

Quacchia, A., C. Ferracini, S. Bonelli, E. Balletto & A. Alma 2008. Can the Geranium Bronze, a hes E 4 a

marshalli, become a threat for European biodiversity? — Biodiversity and Conservation 17: 1429-1437. _

Raynor, E.M. 1990. The occurrence of a Cacyreus species (Lep.: Lycaenidae) in Majorca. — 7 Eaegee st 's

Record 102: 250. —

Sammut, P. 2007. Cacyreus marshalli Butler, [1898] reaches the Maltese Islands (Lepidoptera: ‘Lyeaeni- Ss

dae). - SHILAP Revista de lepidopterologia 35 (139): 317-319. aa

Sarto i Monteys, V. 1992. Spread of Southern African Lycaenid butterfly, Cacyreus marshalli Butler, 1898, ri

(Lep: Lycaenidae) in the Balearic Archipelago (Spain) and considerations on its mare ingedectiory :

to continental Europe. — Journal of Research on the Lepidoptera 31: 24-34 ee

“roc. - ~ Alexanor 20 (3): 143-144.

P.,A. Zilli, V. Valentini & P. Mazzei 1997. Cacyeus marshal nk pidott

ao st gore i in Italia. ~ Informatore Fitopatologico 7-8: 2-6.

phere oe: 1898 aangetroffen in Belge

ae Hee ap hee a i

Book review 3

Gilligan, T.M., D.J. Wright and L.D. Gibson 2008. Olethreutine Moths of the Midwestern

United States. An Identification Guide. — Ohio Biological Survey Bulletin New Series, 16(2):

vii + 334 pp. ISBN 978-0-86727-160-7. 75.00 USD. Hardcover, 220 x 285 mm format.

The microlepidoptera fauna of North America is not so well known as the European and new

species are described on a regular basis. Perhaps due to this unstable taxonomic knowledge the

production of identification guides is not so frequent at the other side of the Atlantics. Three

well known experts on the Tortricidae fauna of the United States have challenged this scenario

with the publication of a finely edited book on the Olethreutine Moths of the Midwestern

United States. The Midwestern United States, generally referred to simply as the Midwest or

The Heartland, is one of the four main geographic regions within the United States of America.

It extends over twelve states. Really the coverage of this long term research is biased toward

the central and eastern portions of this region, including Kentucky, really a Southern state. The

Olethreutinae is one of the major three subfamilies of the Tortricidae. It includes 306 species

in the area covered by this survey, what represents approximately one-third of the Nearctic

fauna. The book is organized in three parts. The first part is a general introduction to the

subfamily, including a wonderfully illustrated morphological overview that clearly states the

characters that are going to be used in the rest of the text. The main second part, called ‘Species

Accounts’, is systematically arranged. Each genus is introduced with comments on species

richness, general distribution, larval habits and characteristic features of genitalia and wing

pattern. Every species is then treated with sections devoted to forewing length, flight period,

distribution, biology and remarks, where comments on diagnostic discrimination and variation

are given. A full colour image of the adult, scaled to a standard size of about half page width, is

included. When necessary, underside photographs have also been added. For those interested in

relative size, five full colour plates have also been included where all the adults are represented

at same scale. Male and female genitalia are separately illustrated through more than 650

black and white photographs grouped in 106 plates. The 19 pages third part is a collaboration

authored by Steven Passoa and devoted to immature stages. Eggs, larvae and pupae of the most

common species, frequently of economic importance, are treated and full colour illustrated, with

a key of identification of larvae based on Mackay’s classical treatment of the North American

olethreutines. Literature, general indexes as well as hot plant index complete the publication.

The book is dedicated to William E. Miller, one of the most influential tortricid experts of North

America.

This is a carefully edited and beautifully illustrated book, a reference for those intending similar

projects in other parts of the world. It is obviously essential for those interested in the Nearctic

microlepidoptera and in general on the tortricoid fauna. But in spite of its geographic coverage,

the European microlepidopterists will find this book also useful. Those unfamiliar with the

systematic treatment generally accepted by our American colleagues will be curious about some

arrangements especially around the genera Eucosma and Olethreutes what certainly compel

us to remain open minded on a more Holarctic view. It is clearly presented, with lots of useful

general information and definitely an attractive publication at a reasonable price.

The book may be obtained through the Ohio Biological Survey, P.O. Box 21370, Columbus,

Ohio 43221-0370, email:ohiobiosurvey@rrohio.com, http://www.ohiobiologicalsurvey.org.

JOAQUIN BAIXERAS ALMELA

Nota lepidopterologica, 15.5.2009, ISSN 0342-7536

_ de Lattin, G. 1967. Grundriss der Zoogeographie. — Gustav Fischer, Jena. 602 pp.

84 Book review

Alexander Schintlmeister 2008. Notodontidae. Palaearctic Macrolepidoptera. Volume 1. —

Apollo Books, Stenstrup. 482 pp. (incl. 40 colour-plates). ISBN 978-87-88757-77-4. Price:

€ 140.00. (See www.apollobooks.com)

Alexander Schintlmeister has been working on the taxonomy of the Notodontidae of the

Palaearctic and Oriental Regions for more than 25 years. He is running a private business and

therefore might be called an amateur entomologist, but in 1987, he defended his dissertatio

at Humboldt University in Berlin on the systematics and biogeography of West-Palaearctic

notodontids. Since that time, he extensively collected notodontids in many countries like

Russia, China, Vietnam, Indonesia, and the Philippines and also accumulated material from

other collectors. Based on this comprehensive collection, he fundamentally contributed to our

knowledge on the Notodontidae from the Old World by numerous publications.

Alexander Schintlmeister’s most recent publication on the Notodontidae of the Palaearctic

Region is a synthesis of the available knowledge so far only available in scattered publications.

But it is also an original publication including numerous nomenclatural acts such as the

descriptions of 38 new species, 21 new subspecies, as well as 16 new generic combinations,

44 new synonyms, and 17 status changes. ;

The book starts with an introduction on some historical aspects of the history on taxonomic

research on Notodontidae and explains the main morphological features used in the book.

The classification of the group is shortly explained, followed by a checklist of Palaearctic

Notodontidae, comprising 716 species. A short chapter on biogeography is reminiscent of

Gustaf de Lattin’s work (1967) in using terms like ‘faunal elements’, ‘centre of origin,’ and

‘centre of expansion,’ that, however, often represent a guess rather than a precise scientific

reasoning. The systematic part, comprising nearly 400 pages, is a concise treatment of the

716 species. For every species, the text provides information on type locality, diagnosis, life

history, and distribution. Male and female genitalia illustrations are provided as black & white

photographs and the distribution is represented on a map. The concise treatments focus on the

identification of the species and refrain from extensive descriptions, which would have made

the book uneconomical. The distribution maps can be regarded as very comprehensive as they

are based on the author’s large collection. The book concludes with biographical notes on

entomologists who contributed to ‘Notodontology’, a synopsis of taxonomic changes, a list

of references, 40 colour plates, and an index to scientific names of Notodontidae. The colour

plates illustrate spread moths in excellent quality.-They are the eye-catcher of the volume and

certainly contribute much to an easy identification of the species, which is supported by arrows

pointing to differences of closely related species.

| regard this volume as a successful work, outstandingly suiibte and efficient to use for the

identification of Palaearctic Notodontidae. I fully recommend it to anybody interested in

Palaearctic Lepidopterology, biogeography of Lepidoptera, or just notodontids. The book might

be also taken as an example on how to prepare such a comprehensive topic economically.

MartrtuiAs Nuss

References

> Jil a a

a : sv 4

it A j / ye Pet Pra) ee ,

Me: * iy 5 er

a “ec atta Col ‘the boats at

Cate ae at HS Dis an nf

#3} Matte * eo

. 2 =

SOCIETAS EUROPAEA LEPIDOPTEROLOGICA e.V.

Nota lepidopterologica wird als wissenschaftliche Zeitschrift von der Societas Europaea

Lepidopterologica (SEL) herausgegeben und den Mitgliedern der SEL zugesandt. Autoren, die

Manuskripte fiir die Publikation in der Nota lepidopterologica einreichen méchten, finden die

jeweils giiltigen Autorenrichtlinien auf der Homepage der SEL unter http://www.soceurlep.eu.

Der Verkauf von Einzelheften und alteren Jahrgingen von Nota lepidopterologica sowie der Ver-

kauf der Zeitschrift an Nichtmitglieder erfolgt durch Apollo Books, Kirkeby Sand 19, DK-5771

Stenstrup; e-mail: apollobooks@vip.cybercity.dk. Die Mitgliedschaft bei der SEL steht Einzel-

personen und Vereinen nach Mafgabe der Satzung offen. Der Aufnahmeantrag ist an den

Mitgliedssekretér Willy De Prins, Dorpstraat 401 B, B-3061 Leefdaal, Belgien; e-mail:

willy.de.prins@telenet.be zu richten. Das Antragsformular ist im Internet auf der Homepage der

SEL erhaltlich. Der Mitgliedsbeitrag ist jahrlich am Jahresanfang zu entrichten. Er betraet fiir

Einzelpersonen € 35,00 bzw. fiir Vereine € 45,00. Die Aufnahmegebiihr betragt € 2,50. Die

Zahlung wird auf das SEL-Konto 19 56 50 507 bei der Postbank K6In (BLZ 370 100 50) erbeten

(IBAN: DE63 3701 0050 0195 6505 07; BIC: PBNKDEFF). Mitteilungen in Beitragsangelegen-

heiten werden an den Schatzmeister Dr. Robert Trusch, Staatliches Museum fiir Naturkunde,

Erbprinzenstr. 13, 76133 Karlsruhe, Germany; e-mail: trusch@smnk.de erbeten. Adresseniande-

rungen sollten umgehend dem Mitgliedssekretér oder dem Schatzmeister mitgeteilt werden.

Published by the Societas Europaea Lepidopterologica (SEL), Nota lepidopterologica is a scientific

journal that members of SEL receive as part of their membership. Authors who would like to submit

papers for publication in Nota lepidopterologica are asked to take into consideration the relevant

instructions for authors available on the SEL homepage at http://www.soceurlep.eu. The sales

of single and back issues of Nota lepidopterologica as well as sales to non-members of SEL are

under the responsibility of Apollo Books, Kirkeby Sand 19, DK-5771 Stenstrup; e-mail: apollo-

books @vip.cybercity.dk. The membership is open to individuals and associations as provided for by

the statutes of SEL. Applications for membership are to be addressed to the Membership Secretary

Willy De Prins, Dorpstraat 401 B, B-3061 Leefdaal, Belgium; e-mail: willy.de.prins@telenet.be.

The application form is available on the SEL homepage. The annual subscription is to be paid at

the beginning of the year. It is 35.00 € for individuals or 45.00 € for associations. The admission

fee is 2.50 €. Dues should be paid to SEL account no. 19 56 50 507 at Postbank K6ln [Cologne]

(bank code 370 100 50; IBAN: DE63 3701 0050 0195 6505 07; BIC: PBNKDEFF) or to local

treasures as mentioned on the website. Communications related to membership contributions

should be sent to the Treasurer Dr Robert Trusch, Staatliches Museum fiir Naturkunde,

Erbprinzenstr. 13, 76133 Karlsruhe, Germany; e-mail: trusch@smnk.de. Changes of addresses

should be immediately communicated to the Membership Secretary or the Treasurer.

Publié par la Societas Europaea Lepidopterologica (SEL), Nota lepidopterologica est un périodique

scientifique envoyé a tous les membres de la SEL. Les auteurs qui désirent publier des manuscrits

dans la revue sont priés de tenir compte des Instructions aux auteurs disponibles sur le site Web de

la SEL: http://www.soceurlep.eu. Les ventes de numéros supplémentaires ou d'anciens numéros

de Nota lepidopterologica, ainsi que les ventes de numéros aux personnes n'étant pas membres

de la SEL sont sous la responsabilité de Apollo Books, Kirkeby Sand 19, DK-5771 Stenstrup:

courriel: apollobooks@vip.cybercity.dk. Tel que prévu dans ses statuts, les individus de méme que

les associations peuvent devenir membres de la SEL. Les demandes d'adhésion doivent étre

envoyées au Secrétaire responsable des adhésions, Willy De Prins, Dorpstraat 401 B, B-3061

Leefdaal, Belgique; courriel: willy.de.prins@telenet.be. Le formulaire d'adhésion est disponible sur

le site Web de la SEL. L'adhésion se paie au début de l'année. Elle est de 35 € pour les

individus et de 45 € pour les associations. Les frais d'admission sont de 2,50 €. Les paiements

peuvent étre envoyés au compte de la SEL: no. 19 56 50 507, Postbank K6In [Cologne] (code

bancaire 370 100 50; IBAN: DE63 3701 0050 0195 6505 07; BIC: PBNKDEFF) ou au trésorier

local tel que mentionné sur le site Web.. Toute question en rapport avec l'adhésion doit étre envoyée

au Trésorier, Dr. Robert Trusch, Staatliches Museum fiir Naturkunde, Erbprinzenstr. 13, 76133

Karlsruhe, Germany; courriel: trusch@smnk.de. Tout changement d'adresse doit étre mentionne

immédiatement au Secrétaire responsable des adhésions ou au Trésorier.