European Journal of Taxonomy 22: 1-16

http://dx.doi.org /10.5852/ejt.2012.22

ISSN 2118-9773

WWW. europeanj oumaloftaxonomy. eu

2012 • Antonio Durante

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 License.

Research article

New genera and problematic species in African Lithosiinae

(Lepidoptera, Arctiidae, Lymantriidae)

Antonio DURANTE

Museo di Storia Naturale del Salento, viaEuropa, 95. 73021 Calimera, Italy.

E-mail: [email protected]

Abstract. This paper deals with some problematie speeies in the subfamily Eithosiinae. Two new

monospeeifie genera are proposed: Parafrasura gen. nov. and Palaeugoa gen. nov. The former presents

the following autapomorphies: tegumen strong and large; uneus long and slightly elaviform; typieal

seaphium-gnathos eomplex. The latter presents as autapomorphies the disposition of the bands of the

wings pattern, and the male genitalia shape. Asura naumanni Kiihne, 2005 is eonsidered incertae sedis

within Eithosiinae and Asura phaeosticta Kiriakoff, 1958 is transferred to Euproctis Htibner, [1819]

(Eymantriidae) (eomb. nov.).

Key words. Eithosiinae, Eymantriidae, new genera, problematie speeies, Afrotropieal Region.

Durante A. 2012. New genera and problematic species in African Lithosiinae (Lepidoptera, Arctiidae, Lymantriidae).

European Journal of Taxonomy 22: 1-16. http://dx.doi.org/10.5852/eit.2012.22

Introduction

Some studies on Eithosiinae in the Afriean fauna led to the review of the genus Tumicla Wallengren,

1860 (Durante 2008) and to the deseription of the genus Afrasura Durante, 2009 (Durante 2009).

The examined material was eonstituted by speeies formerly ineluded mainly in the genus Asura Walker,

1854 (Hampson 1900, 1914; Strand 1922; Seitz 1943; Vari et al. 2002; Kemal & Ko 9 ak 2007), whieh is

at the present limited to the Oriental and Australian regions (Common 1990; Edwards 1996; Holloway

2001; Durante 2009). In the eourse of the survey, several speeimens eould not be assigned to the genera

Tumicla, Afrasura md Asura, being elearly different in genitalie morphology, though similar in external

appearanee.

The present eontribution aims at providing a solid base of systematie knowledge on Air lean Eithosiinae,

even if some new taxonomie aets have not been supported by a large number of examined speeimens,

due to the objeetive seareeness of Afriean material in the eolleetions.

Some reeent revisionary studies of the Noetuoidea (Fibiger & Eafontaine 2005; Eafontaine & Fibiger

2006; Mitehell et al. 2006; Zahiri et al. 2010) proposed several nomenelatural ehanges at supragenerie

level, although a eonsensus view will probably still take some time to emerge. Until sueh time, this

paper follows a eonservative nomenelature leaving the rank of family to the Aretiidae; see also Conner

(2009) for more extensive remarks.

European Journal of Taxonomy 22 : 1-16 ( 2012 )

Material and methods

Techniques for dissecting, staining, mounting, and photographing are described in Durante (2008).

Morphological terms follow Birket-Smith (1965), Klots (1970), Tikhomirov (1979), Kristensen (2003).

Abbreviations

BMARCT = Arctiidae collection of the BMNH; BMNH: The Natural History Museum (formerly

British Museum (Natural History)), London,

g.sl. = genitalia slide.

NHRS = Naturhistoriska Riksmuseet, Stockholm.

All the examined material is part of the BMNH collection, except for the type of Tumicla sagenaria

(Wallengren, 1860) housed in the NHRS. TheAsura naumanni type is in Lars Kiilme’s private collection

(Kiihne 2005).

Results

Phylum Arthropoda Latreille, 1829

Class Insecta Linnaeus, 1758

Order Lepidoptera Linnaeus, 1758

Family Arctiidae Leach, 1815

Subfamily Lithosiinae Billberg, 1820

Four cases of interesting and problematic species are hereafter reported. The fourth of them deals with

a Lithosiinae species here transferred to the family Lymantriidae.

Parafrasura gen. nov.

Type species

Asura pectinella Strand, 1922, by present designation.

Diagnosis

Monospecific genus externally very similar to Afrasura and Tumicla. Differential characters: two basal

bands on the forewings upperside (a single basal band in Tumicla)', bipectinate antennae of the male

(filiform or serrate in Afrasura and Tumicla)', spur formula 0-4-4 (0-2-2 in Tumicla)', coremata absent;

uncus long and slender, clubbed (shorter, often curved, ending in a point in Afrasura and Tumicla)',

tegumen strong; scaphium well sclerotized; distal end of the valva undivided, with a finger-like process

(valve clearly divided valva in Afrasura', a different kind of distal process present in Tumicla)', presence

of the processus distalis plicae (absent in Afrasura)', vinculum without saccus; vesica with a cluster of

very small and sparse thorns; no strong comuti.

Etymology

The prefix “para”, from ancient Greek, means “similar to” and indicates the probable relationship with

the genus Afrasura. The gender of the new name is feminine.

Description

The descriptions of Bethune-Baker (1911) and Hampson (1914) of Asura pectinata are comprehensive

enough with regard to external appearance of its body and wings (Fig. lA-E).

DURANTE A., New and problematic African taxa (Lepidoptera)

BrItcMus.

1939-83.

MDStE DU CONGO

Klnsla-Tombolo

, -X-1921

L. Verlaine

Ari-tiidac

Bril. Mus. slide

No- 5?55

Jolcey

Bequest.

BritfM US-

1934-120.

Bltil. Ja Ulver.

C'amernonn,

W, Seuscm. u. L. Hbten.

ir. r. 1912.

Arctiiiluv ^

Brit. Mils, siiiic

Nm. 5 a

Basal bands

process

Scaphium-gnathos

complex

Uncus

Inner margin

swelling

Vinculum

Processus

distal is plicae

Thorns

Fig. 1. Parafrasura pectinella (Strand, 1922). A. Holotype S, Angola, in BMNH. B. (J, Democratic

Republic of the Congo, in BMNH. C. S, Cameroun, in BMNH. D. Enlarged Fig. B, showing the basal

bands of the forewing. E. S, head of Fig. C enlarged, showing the bipectinate antennae. F. S genitalia,

g.sl. BM ARCT 5741, Chad. G. Aedeagus, g.sl. BM ARCT 5741, Chad.

European Journal of Taxonomy 22 : 1-16 ( 2012 )

Male abdomen. With Vll and Vlll urites smaller than the previous ones. Vlll sternum with anterior

margin slightly waved; Vlll tergum anterior margin with a bar-like reinforeement with two small

apodemes at its lateral extremities.

Genitalia. (Fig. IF-G) With uneus long and slender, elaviform. Tegumen large and short, stronger than

usually found inAsura-WkQ genera (i.e. Asura, Afrasura, Tumicla). Posteriorly to the tegumen, two strong

arms arise and suddenly meet together, forming a strong selerotized strueture (gnathos), whieh ineludes

the selerotized dorsal surfaee of the tuba analis (seaphium). Vineulum. Slender, semieireular, without

saeeus, tightly linked to the valvae. Anellus dorsally with a slightly selerotized W-shaped transtilla, and

ventrally with a quite large dome-shaped membranous juxta, not visible in the slide preparation.

Valva. Slightly widening from the base to the distal margin, linked to the vineulum exeept for the eosta.

Two longitudinal swellings extending parallel from base to the distal 4/5: the first one just under the

eostal margin, the seeond one along the inferior margin (ala valvae of Birket-Smith 1965). At the apex,

the valva possesses a keel-like enlargement; at the middle of the distal margin a finger-like proeess.

Aedeagus. Small, tubular, with a bulbous eoeeum. Vesiea with sparse tiny thorns.

Female genitalia. These have not been direetly examined, but the deseribed eharaeteristies (Kiihne,

2007: 365) seem to be exelusive, partieularly the selerotizations of the ostium bursae and the bag-shaped

invagination proximad of the ostium.

Remarks

Asura pectinella Strand, 1922 was firstly deseribed by Bethune-Baker (1911) in the genus Asura as

A. pectinata (nom. praeocc.); the genitalia morphology, however, leads to the eonelusion, that it should

be ineluded in a genus of its own. Already Kiihne (2007) rightly separated this speeies in a group of

itself, however leaving it in the genus Asura.

A new genus is here deseribed after the examination of speeimens from Western and Central Afriea,

whose size and wing pattern are very similar to Afrasura (Fig. 2A) and Tumicla (Fig. 2B). However the

genit'slia &lide

No. I

O I

„ (5

Fig. 2. — A. Afrasura indecisa, holotype Congo, in BMNH. — B. Tumicla sagenaria, holotype

South Afriea, in NHRS.

DURANTE A., New and problematic African taxa (Lepidoptera)

male bipectinate antennae and genitalic peculiarities are here considered strongly distinctive and have

never before been observed in the aforementioned, probably related genera.

The new genus shows a wing venation and pattern very similar to that of Afmsura, so that the venation

and the two basal bands are considered synapomorphic characters of the Afrasura-Parafmsura group.

Probable autapomorphies of Parafrasura are: tegumen strong and large; uncus long, slender, slightly

claviform; shape of the scaphium-gnathos complex.

Other relevant characters are: male antennae bipectinate; female with short anterior apophyses and sinus

vaginalis conformation.

Parafrasura pectinella (Strand, 1922) comb. nov.

(Fig. lA-E)

Asurapectinella Strand, 1922: 793.

Asurapectinata^Qt\mnQ-Q?ksx, 1911: 537.

Diagnosis

Species characterized by the strong scaphium firmly connected with the gnathos arms; valva with

digitiform process at the middle of the outer margin; aedeagus small, tubular, with a bulbous coecum;

vesica with sparse tiny thorns.

Type locality

Angola, N’Dalla Tando (holotype S examined, genitalia not dissected, in BMNH).

Material examined

CHAD: (? Arct. g.sl. n. 5741 BMNH. CAMEROUN: (? Arct. g.sl. n. 5884 BMNH. DEMOCRATIC

REPUBEIC OF THE CONGO: (? Arct. g.sl. n. 5755 BMNH.

Distribution

Asura pectinella was originally described by Bethune-Baker (1911) from Angola; Hampson (1914)

and Strand (1922) report the species from Cameroon; to these countries, the Chad and the Democratic

Republic of the Congo (BMNH collection) are added here.

Description

See under the generic account.

Palaeugoa gen. nov.

Type species

Xanthetis spurrelli Hampson, 1914, by present designation.

Diagnosis

Forewings larger than in Xanthetis, as observed after comparison with the type species X. luzonica

(Felder, 1875), with rounded apex. Wing pattern superficially similar to Afrasura, but more punctuate

and with different distribution of bands (see differential diagnosis below). Male genitalia resembling

Eugoa Walker, 1857 (type species Eugoa aequalis Walker, 1857 from Borneo) with dorsal processes of

the tegumen and short and stout uncus, but differing in valvae structure.

European Journal of Taxonomy 22 : 1-16 ( 2012 )

Coatt.

fiibianaha.

700 ft.

XII.1011. 5

H.G.F^punrell^

I9ia-S75. :

W.AFRICA.

Kumasi.

Lt.Sanders.

E.R. Bankes

Collojction.

B.M.1928—208.

Arc'tiidae ^

Brit. Mus. slide

No. S?5G

Fig. 3 . Palaeugoa spurrelli (Hampson, 1914). A. Syntype $, Ghana, inBMNH. B. Ghana, inBMNH.

C. (f genitalia, g.sl. BM ARCT 301, Ghana. D. Aedeagus, g.sl. BM ARCT 301, Ghana. E. $ genitalia,

g.sl. BM ARCT 5756, Ghana.

DURANTE A., New and problematic African taxa (Lepidoptera)

Etymology

The name Palaeugoa has no phylogenetic implications, it simply refers to its Western Palaeotropical

distribution. The gender is feminine.

Description

The description of Hampson (1914) about the external features is very accurate (Fig. 3A-B).

Male genitalia. (Fig. 3C-D) With a more robust general structure than in Asura md Afmsum. Uncus

short but large; tegumen with conspicuous paratergal sclerites; vinculum slender with a large and shallow

saccus; valvae rectangular with straight costa turning inwards at three-quarters. Ala valvae (sacculus)

membranous as long as the costal margin, ending in a strong hom-like process. The proximal three-

quarters of valva surmounted by a distal flap-like formation with a slightly waved margin.

Aedeagus. Tubular, slender, slightly curved; vesica with a sparse group of granicula (see Tuxen 1970,

for grammatical gender).

Female pheromone gland. With a large base and two anterior quite deep lobes.

Female genitalia. (Fig. 3E) With sinus vaginalis anteriorly delimited by posterior margin of the seventh

stemite, forming a slightly sclerotized plica. Posteriorly it is delimited by the scarcely sclerotized eighth

stemite, whose anterior margin forms a short backward plica. This is interrupted medially by a funnel-

shaped excavation that probably serves as a functional ostium bursae and antrum, whereas the true

ostium bursae lies deeper at its anterior end, membranous, concealed by the VII sternum plica.

Ductus bursae. After a very short, narrow and membranous portion, enlarging in a sac-like structure

(cervix?) more sclerotized and transversally displaced with scattered spines inside.

Corpus bursae. Spherical, membranous, without signa; ductus seminalis arising caudally from it.

Anterior apophyses short, posterior apophyses long and slender. Papillae anales ventrally concealing

two small pseudopapillae {sensu Maes 1984).

NATAL:

Durban

Umhlanga

13_20. August 1049.

H. B. D. Kettlewell,

B.M.I951--185.

Arctiidae ?

Brit. Mu». slide

No. 5^5?

Fig. 4. — A. Xanthetis luzonica (Felder, 1875), holotype 3, Philippines, in BMNH. — B. Afrasura

ichorina (Butler, 1877), $, South Alfica, in BMNH.

European Journal of Taxonomy 22 : 1-16 ( 2012 )

Remarks

Xanthetis spurrelli from the Gold Coast is a problematic species; it was not placed in the genus Afrasura

Durante, 2009, despite of its similar appearance.

The genus Xanthetis Hampson, 1900 was described based on the type species X. luzonica (Fig. 4A)

from the Philippines and on X. ichorina (Butler, 1877) (Fig. 4B) from Natal, which share a s im ilar

wing venation, but differ in wing shape and pattern, and in the genitalic morphology. On the basis of

these differences ichorina was transferred to Afrasura by Durante (2009), whereas luzonica is retained

in Xanthetis, a genus here considered at least apparently similar to the Australian Asura (the question

whether the similarity is due to shared common ancestry is not discussed herein).

The description of spurrelli in Hampson (1914) starts with the statement of the coincidence of veins 3

and 4 in the hindwings, whereas they are stalked in luzonica. It should be remarked once more (Durante

2004) that this character is inconstant at least among the Lithosiinae, in fact veins 3 and 4 are coincident

only in the right hindwing of the examined female of spurrelli from Kumasi, whereas they are stalked in

the left hindwing (see also the case of Afrasura ichorina in Durante 2009).

Palaeugoa

spurrelli

median

system

basal

system

Afrasura

indecisa

marginal

system

Fig. 5. Forewing of Afrasura indecisa (top) and Palaeugoa spurrelli (bottom) and their related pattern

symmetry systems. AB, antemedian bands; BB, basal band(s); BD, basal dot; MB, median band; MD,

marginal dots; PB, postmedian band(s); SB, submarginal band.

DURANTE A., New and problematic African taxa (Lepidoptera)

The new genus is here proposed due to the instability of the venational characters used by Hampson

(loc. cit.) to delineate the taxa, differences in wing pattern and markedly different genitalic morphology.

It could be significant to compare the wings pattern of Palaeugoa gen. nov. to the one of Afrasura.

In their general appearance, the two genera present a quite similar pattern, suggesting a similar response

to the selective pressure; however, the substantial differences in the position of the different elements

of the pattern and differences in genitalic morphology indicate that they are in fact not closely related.

In fact, Afrasura presents a sequence of band systems that is well defined and shared by all of its species,

with the presence of two basal bands considered an apomorphic character (Durante 2009). The bands

correspond as follows:

Afrasura

Palaeugoa

Symmetry systems

two basal

one median

one postmedian

one submarginal

one basal

two antemedian

two postmedian

one submarginal

basal system

median system

marginal system

The different number of bands in the basal and median systems is noteworthy (Fig. 5), and the relative

position of the corresponding bands in different areas of the wings is emphasized (i.e. the basal band

in Palaeugoa is slightly more basally positioned than the more proximal of the two basal bands in

Afrasura, and the two antemedian (AB) bands of the former are more proximally located than the single

band (MB) of Afrasura). A potential inference of this is that the respective positions of wing bands

within the symmetry systems of Afrasura and Paleugoa are not homologous.

The second important character complex that should be examined is the genitalic apparatus.

The differences between Asura and Afrasura are both in the general appearance and in the details:

the uncus shape of Palaeugoa is never seen in Asura and Afrasura, the tegumen of the former bears

two very strong processes (paratergal sclerites), the saccus is very large and shallow, valva with well

separated dorsal (supravalva) and ventral (ala valvae) regions ending together in a fiap-like structure

(perhaps corresponding to the cucullus of Koda 1987), whereas, in the latter two genera, the paratergal

sclerites are only weakly developed, the saccus is deeper and more narrow, valva with the two regions

hard to delimit, apart from their two terminal processes. A similar condition is seen in Tumicla, with the

exception of the valva, which is even more simple (see Durante 2008).

A more similar genitalia structure is found in the Oriental genus Eugoa (type species Eugoa aequalis

(Walker, 1857), Fig. 6A). This genus has recently been revised by Holloway (2001) for the Bornean

fauna, but some uncertainties still remain; in the present work Eugoa is considered in a very strict sense

taking into account only the type species and the very similar Eugoa trilacunata Holloway, 2001, even

if some other species could be included (e.g. Eugoa hipunctata (Walker, 1862)). Essentially, similarities

in the male genitalia of the two genera {Palaeugoa and Eugoa) are limited to the short uncus and the

well-developed processes of the tegumen, otherwise they are quite different. In Eugoa the uncus itself

is of a different shape and surmounted by strong setae (absent in Palaeugoa)', the saccus is practically

absent; the valvae represent the most diverging character: they are entire, bearing on the inner margin

long costally directed setae, with the sacculus not ending in a distal process (Fig. 6B).

European Journal of Taxonomy 22 : 1-16 ( 2012 )

Some additional observations are useful in separating the two genera: the forewing shape is reetangularish

in Eugoa (quite rounded in Palaeugoa); in Eugoa the pattern eonsists of dark faseiae on white-grey

ground; forewings venation with Se anastomosing with R; Rsl free; the stalked pairs (Rs2+Rs3),

(Rs4+Ml) and (M2+M3); whereas in Palaeugoa the pattern is as seen in the deseription above, the

anastomosis is laeking, vein Rs2 is absent, all veins are free, but Rs3+Rs4 are stalked.

Taking into aeeount these differenees, a elose relationship between the two genera is at least doubtful,

even though they are referable to the same tribe.

Holloway (2001) did not inelude Eugoa in any deseribed tribus (aeeording to Bendib & Minet 1999),

similarly Palaeugoa is at the moment unassigned.

Setae

Uncus

Paratergal

sclerite

Sacculus

Fig. 6. Eugoa aequalis (Walker, 1857). A. Holotype $, Borneo, in BMNH. B. S genitalia, g.sl. BM

ARCT 5057, Borneo. C. Aedeagus, g.sl. BM ARCT 5057, Borneo.

DURANTE A., New and problematic African taxa (Lepidoptera)

Palaeugoa spurrelli (Hampson, 1914) comb. nov.

(Fig. 3A-E)

Xanthetis spurrelli Yi?im^son, 1914: 728.

Diagnosis

This species is easily separable from all members of the gQxmsAfrasura on account of its highly distinctive

genitalic morphology (uncus, valvae and aedeagus shape). In particular, the composite structure of the

valva and its flap-like distal end permit ready distinction from Eugoa aequalis.

Material examined

3 syntypes (1 3 and 2 $$); 1 (jArct. g.sl. n. 301 BMNH; 1 $ Arct. g.sl. n. 5756BMNH (all inBMNH).

Type locality

GOED COAST [Ghana], Bibianaha (1 (?, 2 $ $ syntypes examined, abdomens not dissected, in BMNH).

Description

See under the generic account.

Distribution

Ghana.

naumanni Ktilme, 2005

Asura naumanni Ktilme, 2005: 486-493.

Diagnosis and description

See the original description (Ktihne 2005).

Material examined

Only known from the original description.

Type locality

RWANDA, Akagera riv., S Kibungo/Ibanda-Makera (holotype S not examined, in the author’s private

collection).

Remarks

'Asura'' naumanni is a further problematic species. In fact, after the revision of the afrotropical species

formerly included in Asura, leading to their inclusion in the genera Tumicla and Afrasura (Durante

2008, 2009), it is difflcult to assign this species to one of these genera or to Asura itself

The external aspect of this species markedly differs from Afrasura and Tumicla as regards to distribution,

shape, origin and development of the wing pattern bands. Male genitalia confirm such differences,

mainly the very short uncus and the general shape of the valvae.

Judging from the illustration (Ktihne 2005: 493), the processus distalis plicae seems to be present and

the vesica seems to have two clusters of strong thorns without a single big comutus, as opposed to

Afrasura, for which they are distinctive characters.

European Journal of Taxonomy 22 : 1-16 ( 2012 )

At the moment this speeies should be eonsidered as being incertae sedis within the Lithosiinae, pending

a eomparison with other genera.

Female genitalia are neither deseribed nor figured in the original work.

Distribution

Rwanda, Uganda, Kenya.

Euproctis phaeosticta (Kiriakoff, 1958) eomb. nov.

(Fig. 7A-H)

Asur a phaeosticta YAxidkoff, 1958: 4.

Diagnosis

Male genitalia (figs. 7D-E) with valvae not visibly divided into supravalva and ala valvae; the latter

presents a small proeess at half of its inner margin (also deseribed by Kiriakoff 1958, but not illustrated

in the aeeompanying pieture); the uneus is elearly more robust and large at the base than it is in Asura

md Afrasura; vesiea without eomuti.

Female abdomen with A7 prominent and weakly selerotized; A8 generally membranous, but eighth

sternum selerotized with a median ineision of the eaudal margin, whereas the anterior margin extends to

wrap the sinus vaginalis {in Asura and in Afrasura the eighth segment is small and membranous).

Duetus bursae stiff and short (Fig. 7F), serving as point of origin of the duetus seminalis {in Asura and

Afrasura the duetus seminalis arises from the eervix bursae). Anterior apophyses extremely redueed;

posterior apophyses missing. The strueture of abdominal segments 9-10 eomplex is plurilobate, with

two big ventral papillae, an unpaired dorsal papillary strueture, two median eaudal elubbed lobes, at

whieh base, in latero-ventral position, two other small papillary proeesses arise (Fig. 7G).

Finally, it should be noted that the apodemes of the stemite of A2 are short and stout (Fig. 7H), instead

of long and slender as normally in the tribus Nudariini (Bendib & Minet, 1999).

Material examined

UGANDA, Ruwenzori: f Arct. g.sl. n. 5740 BMNH. TANZANIA: $ Aret. g.sl. n. 5751 BMNH, (both

in BMNH).

Type locality

Uganda (holotype f examined, laeking the end of the abdomen, in BMNH).

Distribution

Uganda, Ruwenzori. Tanzania (BMNH).

Remarks

Examination of the male genitalia of this speeies shows that it does not belong to Asura or Afrasura,

but is a representative of the Eymantriidae, whieh is also eonfirmed by the presenee in males of 3-1

divergent setae at the apex of the ramus of eaeh fiagellomere (Kitehing & Rawlins 1999: 386); by the

plurilobate strueture of abdominal segments 9-10 eomplex (papillae anales and pseudopapillae; see

Maes 1984); and by the absenee of female pheromone dorsal glands between A8 and A9 (see Holloway

1988; Bendib & Minet 1998).

DURANTE A., New and problematic African taxa (Lepidoptera)

UGANDA;

Ruwenzqri Range.

Bugoye.4,500ft.

5.IO.ix.l952.

D.S. Fletcher.

RuwenzoVi Exped.

B.M. 1952-566.

Neg. No.

S. G. Kiriakoff <^et., 19.S^

l£|. 07 q

UGANDA;

Ruwenzori Range.

Dundibugyo. 3.440 ft.

22.vni>3.ix.l952.

D.S. Fletcher.

'Ruwenzori Exped.

6.M,1952-566.®

Arctliilee ^

Brit Min. xlitie

5740

TanzaEila

, !<: cat 1965

, K. U.C&KASSOTl

Pf-{F)(=osTt erfl-

Arctiidee ^

Brit Mus. slide

No. 5?5f

Corpus

bursae

Ventral

papillae

A8 ventral

incision

Dorsal papillary

structure

Ductus

bursae

Fig. 7. Euproctis phaeosticta (Kiriakoff, 1958) comb. nov. A. Holotype S, Uganda, in BMNH. B.

S, Uganda, in BMNH. C. $, Tanzania, in BMNH. D. S genitalia, g.sl. BM ARCT 5740, Uganda.

E. Aedeagus, g.sl. BM ARCT 5740, Uganda. F. $ genitalia, g.sl. BM ARCT 5751, Tanzania.

G. $, ventro-caudal view of papillae anales, g.sl. BM ARCT 5751, Tanzania. H. S, sternum A2

apodemes, g.sl. BM ARCT 5740, Uganda.

European Journal of Taxonomy 22 : 1-16 ( 2012 )

The generic position of this species is not very clear. According to the wing venation, similar to Afrasura,

and without considering the anastomosis between veins 11 and 12 in phaeosticta, it could be assigned

to such genera as Leucoma Htibner, 1822 or Naroma Walker, 1856, however the genitalia are clearly

different. The Malagasy genus Leptepilepta Collenette, 1929 (Griveaud 1977) has been considered too,

whose genitalia are quite similar, mostly with regard to the shape of the valva which possesses a similar

process at the inner margin. It has been, however, excluded on account of the general colour and shape

of the wings, the presence of an areola in the forewing venation, the geographic distribution (only

Madagascar), the female genitalia being unknown, in addition to some differences of the male genitalia.

Lastly, but not without some reservations, the genus Euproctis Htibner, [1819] has been selected since

it includes species with similar general appearance, a large geographical range, and similarity of some

male genitalia (e.g. E. lemuria (Hering, 1926) or E. imerina Griveaud, 1977) (particularly the general

similarity of the uncus, the valvae and the aedeagus).

Discussion

The revisionary work on African Lithosiinae, and on the whole Arctiidae as well, is just in its early stage

(see Weller et al. 2009 for a quick outline) and it is normal that papers such as the present will formulate

questions rather than find solutions.

Many researchers will agree on the fact that several ways will be explored before reaching a sufficiently

complete knowledge of this group. The creation of new genera is believed necessary when a large distance

in morphological characters is discerned between different species, even if clear autapomorphies are

not established at the same time. The expected better knowledge of new morphological traits together

with molecular data, ecological information and life cycle description will single out new apomorphies

agreed on by most scientists and founded on a more objective and large basis. It is probable that in

Africa, like in other regions (such as in the Oriental Tropics), the Lithosiinae had a quite strong adaptive

radiation with many species becoming so specialized that they reach what we consider generic level.

This could explain the quite high number of monotypic genera.

At the present, the first goal should be a general knowledge of the main African groups for an initial

realistic systematic account.

Many cases like the cited Asura naumanni or some others that are not reported for lack of direct

knowledge (i.e. Asura friederikeae Kiihne, 2007 ?in& Asura pinkurata Ktihne, 2007) are probably better

placed in monotypic genera to emphasize their morphological and probably phylogenetic distance from

the already known genera.

Acknowledgements

The author thanks Martin Honey, The Natural History Museum, London, UK, for permission to study

and dissect the specimens housed there; and Bert Gustafsson, Naturhistoriska riksmuseet, Stockholm,

Sweden, for making the holotype of Asuroides sagenaria available.

He also thanks Martin Kruger, Transvaal Museum, Pretoria, South Africa, an anonymous reviewer, and

Koen Martens, University of Ghent, Belgium for acutely reviewing the draft.

Finally he thanks Daniela Errante and Emanuele Sponsiello, Oxford Institutes, Eecce, Italy, for linguistic

suggestions.

DURANTE A., New and problematic African taxa (Lepidoptera)

References

Bendib A. & Minet J. 1998. Female pheromone glands in Arctiidae (Lepidoptera). Evolution and

phylogenetic significance. Comptes Rendus de VAcademic des Sciences, 321: 1007-1014.

Bendib A. & Min et J. 1999. Lithosiine main lineages and their possible interrelationships. I. - Definition

of new or resurrected tribes (Lepidoptera: Arctiidae). Annales de la Societe entomologique de France

(N.S.), 35 (3-4): 241-263.

Bethune-Baker G.T. 1911. Descriptions of new African Heterocera. The Annals and Magazine of Natural

History, vol. 1, VIII series: 530-552.

Birket-Smith J. 1965. A revision of the West African Eilemic Moths, based on the Male Genitalia. (Lep.,

Arctiidae, Lithosinae; incl. gen. Crocosia, Eilema, Lithosia, Pelosia, Phryganopsis a. o.). Papers from

the Faculty of Science. Series C (Zoology) No. 1, Haile Sellassie I University, Addis Ababa.

Common I.F.B. 1990. Moths of Australia. Melbourne University Press, Melbourne.

Conner W.E. 2009. Tiger Moths and Woolly Bears. Behavior, ecology, and evolution of the Arctiidae.

Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Durante A. 2004. I Lepidotteri del Delta del Niger (Sesto contributo) (Arctiidae, Lithosiinae).

Lambillionea, CIV, 4: 717-722.

Durante A. 2008. Asuroides, a new genus of lithosiine moths (Lepidoptera, Arctiidae, Lithosiinae).

Zootaxa, 1713: 53-68.

Durante A. 2009. Revision of the Afrotropical species of Asura Walker, 1854 (Lepidoptera: Arctiidae,

Lithosiinae), with the description of a new genus. Zootaxa, 2280: 27-52.

Edwards E.D. 1996. Arctiidae. In: Nielsen E.S., Edwards E.D. & Rangsi T.V (eds) Checklist of the

Lepidoptera of Australia, Monographs on Australian Lepidoptera: 278-286. CSIRO, Clayton.

Fibiger M. & Lafontaine J.D. 2005. A review of the higher classification of the Noctuoidea (Lepidoptera)

with special reference to the Holarctis fauna. Esperiana, 11: 7-92.

Griveaud P. 1977. Insectes Lepidopteres: Lymantriidae. Faune de Madagascar 43: 1-588.

Hampson G.F. 1900. Catalogue of the Lepidoptera Phalaenae in the British Museum. Arctiadae

(Nolinae, Lithosianae). Vol. II. British Museum (Natural History), London.

Hampson G. F. 1914. Catalogue of the Lepidoptera Phalaenae in the British Museum. Supplement.

Volume I. British Museum (Natural History), London.

Holloway J.D. 1988. The Moths of Borneo [Part 6]: family Arctiidae, subfamilies Syntominae,

Euchromiinae, Arctiinae, Noctuidae misplaced in Arctiidae (Camptoloma, Aganainae). Southdene,

Kuala Lumpur.

Holloway J.D. 2001. The Moths of Borneo [Part 7]: Arctiidae, Lithosiinae. Malayan Nature Journal,

55: 279-486.

Kemal M. & Ko 9 ak A.O. 2007. Synonymous Checklist of the South African Lepidoptera. CESA

Publications on African Lepidoptera, 2, Musee royal de LAfrique centrale, Tervuren.

Kiriakoff S.G. 1958 Ruwenzori Expedition, 1952, vol. 1, 2, Arctiidae (except Nolinae), Thyretidae and

Notodontidae. Trustees of the British Museum, London.

Kitching I. J. & Rawlins J. E. 1999. The Noctuoidea. In: Kristensen N.P (ed.), Lepidoptera, Moths and

Butterflies, vol. 1, Evolution, Systematics, and Biogeography, part 25: 355^01. De Gruyter, Berlin -

New York.

Klots A.B. 1970. Lepidoptera. In: Tuxen S.L. (ed.). Taxonomist’s glossary of genitalia in insects. Ed. 11:

115-130. Munksgaard, Copenhagen.

European Journal of Taxonomy 22 : 1-16 ( 2012 )

Koda N. 1987. A generic classification of the subfamily Arctiinae of the Palaearctic and Oriental regions

based on the male and female genitalia (Lepidoptera, Arctiidae). Part 1. Tyo to Ga, 38 (3): 153-237.

Kristensen N.P 2003. Skeleton and muscles: adults. In\ Kristensen N.P (ed.), Lepidoptera, Moths and

Butterflies, vol. 2, Morphology, Physiology, and Development, part 26: 39-131. De Gruyter, Berlin -

New York.

Kiihne L. 2005. Neue Taxa und neue Synonyme afrikanischer Arctiidae (Lepidoptera). Lambillionea,

CV, 3: 486^93.

Kiihne L. 2007. Beschreibung neuer Flechtenbarenarten aus Afrika nebst taxonomischen Anmerkungen

(Arctiidae: Lithosiinae). Esperiana Memoir, 3: 353-394, pis. 44, 45.

Lafontaine J.D. & Fibiger M. 2006. Revised higher classification of the Noctuoidea (Lepidoptera). The

Canadian Entomologist, 138: 610-635. http://dx.doi.org/10.4039/n06-012

Maes K. 1984. Some remarks on the genus Euproctis Htibner, [1819] 1816 (Lepidoptera: Lymantriidae).

Nota Lepidopterologica, 1 (1): 55-58.

Mitchell A., Mitter C. & Regier J.C. 2006. Systematics and evolution of the cutworm moths (Lepidoptera:

Noctuidae). Evidence from two protein-coding nuclear genes. Systematic Entomology, 31: 21-46. http://

dx.doi.org/10.1111/i.l365-3113.2005.00306.x

Seitz A. 1943 (edition fian 9 aise). Les Macrolepidopteres du Globe. Tome XIV. E. Ee Moult, Paris.

Strand E. 1922. Arctiidae: Subfam. Eithosiinae. In: Wagner H. (ed.), Lepidopterorum Catalogus, 15-16

(26): 501-899. Junk, Berlin & The Hague.

Tikhomirov A.M. 1979. The phylogenetic relationship and classification of European Arctiidae

(Eepidoptera) as indicated by the functional morphology of the male genitalia. Entomological Review,

58: 63-69.

Tuxen S.E. 1970. Taxonomist’s Glossary of Genitalia in Insects. 2*^^^ edition. Munksgaard, Copenhagen.

Vari E., Kroon D.M. & Kruger M. 2002. Classification and checklist of the species of Lepidoptera

recorded in Southern Africa. Published by the authors. Sasolburg, South Africa.

Weller S., Da Costa M., Simmons R., Dittmar K. & Whiting M. 2009. Evolution and Taxonomic

Confusion in Arctiidae. In: Conner W.E. (ed.) Tiger moths and Woolly Bears, Behavior, ecology, and

evolution of the Arctiidae: 11-30. Oxford University Press, Oxford.

Zahiri R., Kitching l.J., Eafontaine J.D., Mutanen M., Kaila E., Holloway J.D. & Wahlberg N. 2010.

A new molecular phylogeny offers hope for a stable family level classification of the Noctuoidea

(Eepidoptera). Zoologica Scripta: 1-16.

Manuscript received: 12 March 2012

Manuscript accepted: 6 September 2012

Published on: 20 September 2012

Topic editor: Koen Martens

In compliance with the ICZN, printed versions of all papers are deposited in the libraries of the institutes

that are members of the EJT consortium: Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle, Paris, France; National

Botanic Garden of Belgium, Meise, Belgium; Royal Museum for Central Africa, Tervuren, Belgium;

Natural History Museum, Eondon, United Kingdom; Royal Belgian Institute of Natural Sciences,

Brussels, Belgium; Natural History Museum of Denmark, Copenhagen, Denmark.