Drepanogynini , Murillo-Ramos, Sihvonen &amp; Brehm 2019, new tribe
Creators: name: Murillo-Ramos, Leidys
name: Brehm, Gunnar
name: Sihvonen, Pasi
name: Hausmann, Axel
name: Holm, Sille
name: Ghanavi, Hamid Reza
name: Õunap, Erki
name: Truuverk, Andro
name: Staude, Hermann
name: Friedrich, Egbert
name: Tammaru, Toomas
name: Wahlberg, Niklas
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2019
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Lepidoptera
Geometridae

description: Drepanogynini Murillo-Ramos, Sihvonen &amp; Brehm <b>new tribe</b> LSIDurn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:AA384988-009F-4175-B98C-6209C8868B93 Type genus: <i>Drepanogynis</i> Guenée, (1858) The African genera <i>Thenopa</i>, <i>Sphingomima</i> and <i>Drepanogynis</i> appear as a strongly supported lineage (SH-like, UFBoot2 and RBS = 100). <i>Krüger (1997</i>, p. 259) proposed " Boarmiini and related tribes as the most likely sister group" for <i>Drepanogynis</i>, whereas more recently <i>Drepanogynis</i> was classified in the putative southern hemisphere Nacophorini (<i>Krüger, 2014</i>; <i>Sihvonen, Staude &amp; Mutanen, 2015</i>). In the current phylogeny, <i>Drepanogynis</i> is isolated from Nacophorini <i>sensu stricto</i> and from other southern African genera that have earlier been considered to be closely related to it (<i>Krüger, 2014</i> and references therein). The other southern African genera appeared to belong to Diptychini in our study. The systematic position of <i>Drepanogynis tripartita</i> (Warren, 1898) has earlier been analyzed in a molecular study (<i>Sihvonen, Staude &amp; Mutanen, 2015</i>). The taxon grouped together with the Palaearctic species of the tribes Apeirini, Theriini, Epionini and putative Hypochrosini. <i>Sihvonen, Staude &amp; Mutanen (2015)</i> noted that <i>Argyrophora trofonia</i> (Cramer, 1779) (representing <i>Drepanogynis</i> group III <i>sensu Krüger, 1999</i>) and <i>Drepanogynis tripartita</i> (representing <i>Drepanogynis</i> group IV <i>sensu Krüger, 2002</i>) did not group together, but no formal changes were proposed. Considering that the current analysis strongly supports the placement of <i>Drepanogynis</i> and related genera in an independent lineage, and the aforementioned taxa in the sister lineage (Apeirini, Theriini, Epionini and putative Hypochrosini) have been validated at tribe-level, we place <i>Drepanogynis</i> and related genera in a tribe of their own. Material examined and taxa included: <i>Drepanogynis mixtaria</i> (Guenée, 1858), <i>D. tripartita</i>, <i>D. determinata</i> (Walker, 1860), <i>D. arcuifera</i> Prout, 1934, <i>D. arcuatilinea Krüger, 2002</i>, <i>D. cnephaeogramma</i> (Prout, 1938), <i>D. villaria</i> (Felder &amp; Rogenhofer, 1875), “ <i>Sphingomima</i> ” <i>discolucida</i> Herbulot, 1995 (genus combination uncertain, see taxonomic notes below), <i>Thenopa diversa</i> Walker, 1855, “ <i>Hebdomophruda</i> ” <i>errans</i> Prout, 1917 (genus combination uncertain, see taxonomic notes below). Taxonomic notes: We choose <i>Drepanogynis</i> Guenée, 1858 as the type genus for Drepanogynini, although it is not the oldest valid name (ICZN Article 64), because extensive literature has been published on <i>Drepanogynis</i> (<i>Krüger, 1997</i>, <i>1998</i>, <i>1999</i>, <i>2014</i>), but virtually nothing exists on <i>Thenopa</i>, Walker, 1855, except the original descriptions of its constituent species. Current results show the urgent need for more extensive phylogenetic studies within Drepanogynini. <i>Thenopa</i> and <i>Sphingomima</i> are embedded within <i>Drepanogynis</i>, rendering it paraphyletic, but our taxon coverage is too limited to propose formal changes in this species-rich group. Drepanogynini, as defined here, are distributed in sub-Saharan Africa. <i>Drepanogynis sensu Krüger (1997</i>, <i>1998</i>, <i>1999</i>, <i>2014</i>) includes over 150 species and it ranges from southern Africa to Ethiopia (<i>Krüger, 2002</i>, <i>Vári, Kroon &amp; Krüger, 2002</i>), whereas the genera <i>Sphingomima</i> (10 species) and <i>Thenopa</i> (four species) occur in Central and West Africa (<i>Scoble, 1999</i>). <i>Sphingomima</i> and <i>Thenopa</i> are externally similar, so the recovered sister-group relationship in the current phylogeny analysis was anticipated. In the current analysis, <i>Hebdomophruda errans</i> Prout, 1917 is isolated from other analyzed <i>Hebdomophruda</i> species (the others are included in Diptychini), highlighting the need for additional research. <i>Krüger (1997</i>, <i>1998</i>) classified the genus <i>Hebdomophruda</i> into seven species groups on the basis of morphological characters, and <i>H. errans</i> group is one of them (<i>Krüger, 1998</i>). We do not describe a new genus for the taxon <i>errans</i>, nor do we combine it with any genus in the Drepanogynini, highlighting its uncertain taxonomic position (<i>incertae sedis</i>) pending more research. In the current analysis, <i>Sphingomima discolucida</i> Herbulot, 1995 is transferred from unassigned tribus combination to Drepanogynini, but as the type species of <i>Sphingomima</i> (<i>S. heterodoxa</i> Warren, 1899) was not analyzed, we do not transfer the entire genus <i>Sphingomima</i> into Drepanogynini. We highlight the uncertain taxonomic position of the taxon <i>discolucida</i>, acknowledging that it may eventually be included again in <i>Sphingomima</i> if the entire genus should be transferred to Drepanogynini. Diagnosis: Drepanogynini can be diagnosed by the combination of DNA data with up to 11 genetic markers (exemplar <i>Drepanogynis mixtaria</i> (Guenée, 1858)) ArgK (MK738841), COI (MK739615), EF1a (MK739960), IDH (MK740862), MDH (MK741181), Nex9 (MK741630), RpS5 (MK741991) and Wingless (MK742540). In the light of our phylogenetic results, the <i>Drepanogynis</i> group of genera, as classified earlier (<i>Krüger, 2014</i>), is split between two unrelated tribes (Drepanogynini and Diptychini). More research is needed to understand how other <i>Drepanogynis</i> species and the <i>Drepanogynis</i> group of genera <i>sensu Krüger (1997</i>, <i>1998</i>, <i>1999</i>, <i>2014)</i> (at least 11 genera), should be classified. Boarmiini are the sister group to a clade that comprises Macariini, Cassymini, Abraxini and Eutoeini. We found that many species currently classified as Boarmiini are scattered throughout Ennominae. Boarmiini <i>s.str</i>. are strongly supported but are technically not monophyletic because of a large number of genera which need to be formally transferred fromothertribestoBoarmiini (G. Brehmetal., 2019, unpublisheddataforNeotropicaltaxa and L. Murillo-Ramos et al., 2019, unpublished data for other taxa). The results are principally in concordance with <i>Jiang et al. (2017)</i>, who supported the monophyly of Boarmiini but with a smaller number of taxa. The divided valva in male genitalia was suggested as a synapomorphy of Macariini + Cassymini + Eutoeini by <i>Holloway (1994)</i>. In addition, he proposed the inclusion of Abraxini in Cassymini. Although our findings support a close relationship, this group requires more study and a more extensive sampling effort. Similar findings were provided by <i>Jiang et al. (2017)</i> who suggested more extensive sampling to study the evolutionary relationships of these tribes.
description: Published as part of <i>Murillo-Ramos, Leidys, Brehm, Gunnar, Sihvonen, Pasi, Hausmann, Axel, Holm, Sille, Ghanavi, Hamid Reza, Õunap, Erki, Truuverk, Andro, Staude, Hermann, Friedrich, Egbert, Tammaru, Toomas &amp; Wahlberg, Niklas, 2019, A comprehensive molecular phylogeny of Geometridae (Lepidoptera) with a focus on enigmatic small subfamilies, pp. 1-39 in PeerJ 7</i> on pages 29-31, DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7386, http://zenodo.org/record/5767530
description: {"references": ["Kruger M. 1997. Revision of Afrotropical Ennominae of the Drepanogynis group I: the genus Hebdomophruda Warren, Part 1. Annals of the Transvaal Museum 36: 257 - 291.", "Kruger M. 2014. A revision of the Mauna Walker, 1865 and Illa Warren, 1914 group of genera (Lepidoptera: Geometridae: Ennominae: Nacophorini). Annals of the Ditsong National Museum of Natural History 4: 77 - 173.", "Sihvonen P, Staude HS, Mutanen M. 2015. Systematic position of the enigmatic African cycad moths: an integrative approach to a nearly century old problem (Lepidoptera: Geometridae, Diptychini). Systematic Entomology 40 (3): 606 - 627 DOI 10.1111 / syen. 12125.", "Kruger M. 1999. Revision of Afrotropical Ennominae of the Drepanogynis group III: the genera Argyrophora Guenee, Pseudomaenas Prout and Microligia Warren. Annals of the Transvaal Museum 36: 427 - 496.", "Kruger M. 2002. Revision of Afrotropical Ennominae of the Drepanogynis group IV: the genus Drepanogynis Guenee (Lepidoptera: Geometridae). Transvaal Museum Monograph 13: 1 - 220 incl. 442 figs.", "Guenee A. 1858. Histoire naturelle des insectes (Lepidoptera), Species General des Lepidopteres. Tom IX. X. Uranides et Phalenites I. II. Paris: Roret, 304.", "Kruger M. 1998. Revision of Afrotropical Ennominae of the Drepanogynis group II: the genus Hebdomophruda Warren, Part 2. Annals of the Transvaal Museum 36: 333 - 349.", "Vari L, Kroon DM, Kruger M. 2002. Classification and checklist of the species of Lepidoptera recorded in Southern Africa. Chatswood: Simple Solutions.", "Scoble MJ. 1999. Geometrid Moths of theWorld: a catalogue (Lepidoptera, Geometridae) 1, 2. Collingwood: CSIRO.", "Jiang N, Li X, Hausmann A, Cheng R, Xue DY, Han HX. 2017. A molecular phylogeny of the Palaearctic and Oriental members of the tribe Boarmiini (Lepidoptera: Geometridae: Ennominae). Invertebrate Systematics 31 (4): 427 - 441 DOI 10.1071 / IS 17005.", "Holloway J. 1994. The moths of Borneo, part 11: family Geometridae, subfamily Ennominae. Malayan Nature Journal 47: 1 - 309."]}