Sufetula culshawi Young, Hall, Richards & Lees, 2025, sp. nov.
Creators: name: Young, Mark R.
name: Hall, Peter R.
name: Richards, Nigel G. J.
name: Lees, David C.
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2025
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Lepidoptera
Crambidae
Sufetula
Sufetula culshawi

description: Sufetula culshawi sp. nov.
Figs 1 a – d, 2 a, 3 a – e
Material examined.
Type material. Holotype: NHMUK 013706270 | “ Holo-type ” | “ Ibusuki Kagosima Kyusyu 13. XI. 1987 M. Kobayashi ” | “ Host アレカヤシ の 新根 ” [Host Arekayashi / Areca Palm new roots of] | Sufetula culshawi sp. nov. Holotype ♀ | Brit. Mus 1988-80 ” | Slide no. NHMUK 014332671; Paratype: NHMUK 013699321 | “ Para-type ” | “ UNITED KINGDOM, Scotland, Killearn, Stirlingshire, VC 86, NS 504852, 12. vii. 2022. ” | “ Sufetula culshawi sp. nov. Paratype ♂ ”. Accidental import probably from Chrysalidocarpus lutescens palm. Leg. M. Culshaw ” | Slide no. NHMUK 014331873.
Diagnosis.
A comprehensive differential diagnosis is beyond the scope of this paper as it would necessitate a full revision of the genus. However, a combination of four superficial characters appears to be diagnostic for S. culshawi, when compared to other described species (see Other material examined, and Remarks).
First, comparing both Scottish and Japanese specimens to other members of Sufetula, the rather uniform greyish forewing pattern distinguishes this species, whilst most other species show a ground pattern relatively more marbled with dark scaling. Second, the broad and relatively straight white, internally black, hindwing fascia appears distinctive (“ Diplopseustis ” sp. BOLD: AAO 6767 has such a straight median hindwing fascia but lacks the broad white internal band: Fig. 2 a). Third, the right angled fascia below M 2 in the forewing that meets perpendicularly to the tergum is one of the more distinctive features of S. culshawi (in S. sunidesalis, for example, the forewing postdiscal white fascia, rather, curves distad again to meet the tergum; see other configurations in Fig. 2 a). Fourth, there is a marked distinction between a white bar on A 2 dorsum (Fig. 1 c; Fig. 1 d, where visible although worn) and the otherwise darker grey abdomen is accentuated by the black basal hindwing area / fascia and whitish median fascia of the hindwing, when S. culshawi is at rest (Figs 1 c, 2 a). This white tergum A 2 is not unique, though, to S. culshawi; it recurs in S. diminutalis and the type specimen of S. sunidesalis (https://oumnh.ox.ac.uk/collections-online#/item/oum-catalogue-3160).
Other possibly diagnostic characters were not assessed widely among species. The species is rather larger at least than members of the S. diminutalis group (Walker’s type specimen of S. diminutalis, NHMUK 013699687, measures 6.5 mm in forewing length). On the head, ocelli are present, unlike in S. diminutalis (Hayden 2013). The genitalia are likely to be diagnostic, but this awaits dissection of a larger range of species. For example, the uncus of S. diminutalis is relatively longer, its valves longer and thinner, and its juxta different (Hayden 2013: fig. 26). The extent of the two scobinate areas on the female bursa is likely diagnostic. Finally, at the base of the tympana, the posterior depressions of the male (Fig. 3 c) are typical of the sexually dimorphic condition where they are invaginated in the female as in S. carbonalis and S. diminutalis (Hayden 2013: figs 18, 21; J. Hayden, pers. comm.), but the utility of this character also remains to be investigated among a wider range of species.
Description.
Wingspan. c. 14.75–16.2 mm (apex to apex), fwl 7–8.5 mm.
Head. Compound eyes normal for genus, ocelli present, between pale scale tufts, chaetosemata absent. Frons with pale scales directed forward. Maxillary palp arising above labial palp and about 2 / 3 its length, with pale fawn scales on outer face, alternately banded. Labial palp mainly covered with paler scales on inner face and mainly darker ones on outer face, pale fawn at the tip of the third meron. Basal segment relatively short, curving up from head; second and third segments porrect, extended well beyond head (about diameter of compound eye). Second segment ventrally with forward-directed tuft of fawn and darker scales. Haustellum light fawn scaled, well-developed. Antenna almost half length of forewing (male). Antennal scape and pedicel unmodified, dark scaled. Flagellum with two rows of scales per flagellomere, flagellomere count around 31 (male) to at least 40 (in female), tapering towards tip, strongly ciliate. Flagellomeres darker basally, paler distally, ventral surface flattened and more uniformly brown.
Thorax. dorsal side dark grey-brown (male), fawn scaled in female. Crown (collar) with long cream scales, contrasting with background, laterally overlain by darker grey scales which are pale tipped. Patagia with uniformly dark scales. Tegulae brown scaled, with pale tips with a few darker scales distad.
Legs. Femur of foreleg pale ochreous underneath with mostly darker scales on outer surface, epiphysis present. Femur of mid leg similarly pale ochreous, tibia with two long unequal spines with black ring before pale tip, tarsal segments ochreous above and dark basally but whitish distally. Hindleg uniformly pale fawn on underside, distal half dark scaled in both dorsal tibia and tarsus, inner spur 1.5 times length outer spur, both with distal dark scales on dorsal surface (female); see also habitus photo of male (Fig. 1 c).
Wings. (Largely based on freshly scaled male). Apex falcate. Forewing background colour composed rather uniformly of grey-brown scales. Premedian paler fascia indistinct, bent acutely near costa. Postmedian pale fascia bent inwards at right angle below M 3, then perpendicular to tergal edge of forewing. Submarginal pale line with dark distal border in shape shadowing termen, which is concave or strongly indented between M 1 and M 2. Discal black spot at 2 / 3 large and somewhat crescentic with pale border. Three v-shaped pale marks from level of discal spot to post median line along costa, enclosing dark grey triangles, and interspersed with blackish scales that are prevalent along costa; pale mark on costa at 1 / 3. White mark just before apex. One hindwing frenular bristle (both sexes). Hindwing at least as broad as forewing but more quadrate. Hindwing about 5.7 mm long, with variable grey, dark and white scales. Large discal black spot as in forewing but at 1 / 3 not 2 / 3. Hoary dark scaling in basal third of wing, concentrated below discal, white-bordered spot to 2 / 3 anal margin, almost forming itself an irregular fascia. Broad white median streak at 1 / 2 tapering before costal margin, bordered distad by thin relatively straight and thin dark fascia and highlighted also by white scales distad. Distal third of hindwing with intermingled brown and dark grey scales, more dark grey scales proximad. Submarginal line at similar spacing to forewing, on basal side white, black distad, in uneven scalloped pattern (with four convexities), following termen. As in forewing the area to fringe is uniformly greyer than basal parts of wings, and wider than in most Sufetula. Fringe mostly white at base, grey tipped, as in forewing (fringe largely worn in female, apparently accounting for the narrower gap between termen and subterminal fascia). Underside (Fig. 1 b) with similar patterning but less pronounced.
Abdomen. Dark greyish (see Figs 1 c, 2 a on live male specimen) with prominent cream segment on tergite A 2. As in other lathrotelines, tympanic organs proximally on sternum A 2 proximad (Fig. 3 c). Balloon-like paired tympanic bullae at proximal end of abdomen meeting at posterior origin of A 2 as for other lathrotelines.
Male genitalia (Fig. 3 a, b). Uncus fairly narrow but rather short, edged ventrally with proximally facing fine setae, approximately 3.5 × longer than wide. Gnathos absent. Tegumen (single arm indicated, Fig. 3 a) from dorsal view widening out approaching the distad corners of the valvae. Vinculum proximad with barely a protrusion indicating a saccus, and with a transtilla-like structure just above this, reinforcing the posterior corners of the valves. Valva broad and fairly short, approximately 1.65 × as long as wide; costal margin only slightly convex from the tegumen towards the apex until around half, but strongly convex up to the apex, widest in central section, distal margin tongue-like but its apex not protruding beyond the anterior margin of the valve. Costal margin curving gently and convexly towards tip of valve. Edge of entire valva with fine setae interspersed with much longer stouter setae. Juxta composed of two inwardly folded broad arms jointly forming an ovoid shape. Phallus straight, tubular, approximately 7.5 × longer than wide (excluding the manica), slightly tapering at caecum end and slightly pinched towards manica. Manica itself lacking sclerotised lamellae but with long, pointed needle-like section sitting in the sheath followed by two areas of short stout spines, followed by an area of slightly longer finer spines and culminating with a cap of long dense hair like spines.
Female genitalia (Fig. 3 d). Ovipositor elongate. Papillae anales fused. Apophyses thin; apophyses posteriores slightly longer than apophyses anteriores and both moderately long. Colliculum small and triangular, slightly sclerotised at the margins and clear centrally. Ductus bursa long and slender, widening before the bursa copulatrix. Anteriorly the edges are rippled becoming straight around halfway and as it thickens it becomes ringed. Bursa copulatrix is rounded. Signa absent but one edge of bursa exhibits a prominent scobinate patch with numerous scale-like sclerotisations covering around 20 % of the surface area of the bursa and on the opposite side there is a much less dense scobinate patch covering a larger area and slightly denser towards the ductus bursa opening.
Pupal exuvium. Length 7 mm, light brown, otherwise not markedly differing from the pupa of Sufetula anania (Solis et al. 2015).
Etymology.
Named for the discoverer in Scotland, Martin Culshaw. The species epithet is a noun in the genitive case.
Distribution.
Japan, Ibusuki, in the extreme south of Kyushu (type locality). Accidentally imported into Scotland (Stirlingshire, VC 86), likely of horticultural origin via the Netherlands. Apparently widespread in Southeast Asia (See Referred records).
Biology.
Living roots of Arecaceae. The Scottish specimen was found in the vicinity of two imported plants, an undetermined Araliaceae which the live moth initially flew out of, and the probable hostplant, a young multistemmed palm, confirmed as Areca Palm Chrysalidocarpus lutescens purchased from a nursery around May 2022, originating via horticultural trade from the Netherlands. No exuvium was detected in this case. The Japanese specimen was bred from the living roots of a palm species, likely an Areca Palm C. lutescens (according to our interpretation of the hostplant label) in the extreme south of Kyushu, Japan (about 31.24 ° N), suggesting that the species might not be native there. C. lutescens comes from Madagascar but is very widespread in horticulture.
Other material examined.
S. bilinealis Hampson, 1912 (New Guinea; holotype); S. brunnealis Hampson, 1917 (Philippines; holotype); S. choreutalis (Snellen, 1879) (New Guinea, Solomon Island, New Britain); S. chagosalis (Fletcher, 1910) (Chagos I.; holotype); S. cuprealis Hampson (Borneo; holotype); S. cyanolepis Hampson, 1912 (Sulawesi; holotype); S. diminutalis (Walker, 1866) (Limas, Honduras; holotype; = Hydrocampa dematrialis Druce, 1896); S. dulcinalis (Snellen, 1899) (Central and South America); S. hemiophthalma (Meyrick, 1884) (Australia; = Cangetta minuscula Turner, 1937); S. macropalpia Hampson, 1899 (Papuan region; holotype); S. minimalis Fletcher, 1910 (Seychelles, Ghana); S. nigrescens Hampson, 1912 (West Africa; holotype); S. nitidalis Hampson, 1908 (India, Sri Lanka; holotype); S. obliquistrialis Hampson, 1912 (Rossel I.; holotype,? Assam); S. polystrialis Hampson, 1912 (2 syntypes); S. rectifascialis Hampson, 1896 (Sri Lanka; holotype); S. sunidesalis Walker, 1859 (Malaysia, Sarawak) [see below]; S. sufetuloides (Hampson, 1917) (West Africa; 3 syntypes); S. trichophysetis Hampson, 1912 (Ghana; holotype); (Caribbean, South America); also S. sp. (Sud-Est Island); S. sp. (Nigeria); S. sp. (Borneo, Tahiti, Sanguir).
Remarks.
The NHMUK does not certainly hold examples of the following nine species (type locality indicated): Sufetula alychnopa (Turner, 1908) (Australia, Queensland); S. anania Solis, Hayden, Sanabria, Gonzalez, Ujueta & Gulbronson, 2019 (Costa Rica); S. boileauae Nel, 2022 (France); S. carbonalis Hayden, 2013 (USA, Florida); S. grumalis Schaus, 1920 (Cuba); S. hypocharopa Dyar, 1914 (Panama); S. hypochiralis Dyar, 1914 (Panama); S. melanophthalma Hering, 1901 (Sumatra); S. pygmaea Hampson, 1912 (Mexico); S. sacchari (Seín, 1930) (Puerto Rico); S. sufetuloides (Hampson, 1917) (Peru); S. sythoffi (Snellen, 1899) (Java) [holotype is in Leiden; T. Leger, comm. pers to DL]. We could rule out S. carbonalis, S. grumalis as well as S. sacchari illustrated by Hayden (2013, figs 1–7). Furthermore, the species described here does not match the descriptions nor illustrations of S. sythoffi (Snellen, 1899), S. melanophthalma (Hering, 1901), S. anania (Solis et al. 2019). The Neotropical S. pygmaea from Mexico and S. hypochiralis from Porto Bello and the Canal zone and S. hypocharopa from Trinidad are much too small, according to their original descriptions (9.5–10 mm wingspan). The NHMUK has 36 specimens, likely a mixed series, currently arranged under S. sunidesalis and its supposed synonyms (Mirobriga albicans Walker, 1863, Sarawak, holotype; Loetrina flexalis Walker, 1863, holotype from Sarawak. NHMUK also has 12 Japanese exemplars from Ogasawara islands possibly referable to S. minuscula Inoue, 1996 (or an undescribed species: Y. Matsui pers. comm. to DL), but not the male holotype and paratype, which are deposited at HUS (Inoue 1966: 76, 88). Inoue (1966) states, however, that the only difference in the male genitalia from S. sunidesalis, which is of similar size and appearance (about 9 mm wingspan), is a more slender phallus; however, this remark was made without dissection of the primary type of S. sunidesalis (at OU); the specimen illustrated as such by Robinson et al. (1994: pl. 30) is in fact a larger species (ca. 17 mm wingspan) resembling the type of L. flexalis but unlike either S. culshawi or S. sunidesalis. There are possibly four species of Sufetula in the Southern Japanese islands, at least two of them undescribed, but the Japanese female from Kyushu does not resemble any of these (Y. Matsui, pers. comm. to DL).
Referred records.
The following six photographs checked on 23 / 11 / 2024 are considered diagnostic for S. culshawi according to the possession of at least the second and third diagnostic character: Sufetula species, Thma Bang, Cambodia [Cardamom Mountains rain forests] (11.58, 103.128), Gerard Chartier, Jan 10, 2023 (https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/146602192); Sufetula species, Thma Bang, Cambodia [Cardamom Mountains rain forests] (11.580, 103.127), Gerard Chartier, Jan 18, 2023 (https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/146953865); Sufetula species, Cebu City, Cebu, Philippines (10.403, 123.918), Ann Lazaro, Apr 17, 2018 (https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/11046594); Sufetula species, Tai Po, Hong Kong (22.418, 114.129), Artur Tomaszek, Oct 2024 (https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/248236172); Sufetula species, Futian District, Shenzhen, Guangdong Province, China (22.546, 114.009), J. Smith, May 21, 2022 (https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/118136868); Sufetula species, Aosnak, Oecussi-Ambeno, Timor-Leste [Mount Cutete Protected Area] (- 9.184, 124.407), Rui Da Silva Pinto, Feb 17, 2020 (https://www.inaturalist.org/observations/38752316). The last photograph is attributed with caution to S. culshawi. No matching photographs were found on INaturalist on 23 / 11 / 2024 from any other region of the World.
description: Published as part of Young, Mark R., Hall, Peter R., Richards, Nigel G. J. & Lees, David C., 2025, Sufetula culshawi sp. nov. (Lepidoptera, Crambidae, Lathrotelinae): a previously unrecognised species affecting cultivated palms, pp. 1-14 in Nota Lepidopterologica 48 on pages 1-14, DOI: 10.3897/nl.48.126042