Chlorodontoperini , 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: Chlorodontoperini Murillo-Ramos, Sihvonen &amp; Brehm, <b>new tribe</b> LSIDurn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:0833860E-A092-43D6-B2A1-FB57D9F7988D Type genus: <i>Chlorodontopera</i> Warren, 1893 Material examined: Taxa in the molecular phylogeny: <i>Chlorodontopera discospilata</i> (Moore, 1867) and <i>Chlorodontopera mandarinata</i> (Leech, 1889). Some studies (<i>Inoue, 1961</i>; <i>Holloway, 1996</i>) suggested the morphological similarities of <i>Chlorodontopera</i> Warren, 1893 with members of Aracimini. Moreover, <i>Holloway (1996)</i> considered this genus as part of Aracimini. Our results suggest a sister relationship of <i>Chlorodontopera</i> with a large clade comprising Aracimini, Neohipparchini, Timandromorphini, Geometrini, Nemoriini and Comibaenini. Considering that our analysis strongly supports <i>Chlorodontopera</i> as an independent lineage (branch support SH-like = 99 UFBoot2 = 100, RBS = 99), we introduce the monobasic tribe Chlorodontoperini. This tribe can be diagnosed by the combination of DNA data from six genetic markers (exemplar <i>Chlorodontopera discospilata</i>) CAD (MG015448), COI (MG014735), EF1a (MG015329), GAPDH (MG014862), MDH (MG014980) and RpS5 (MG015562). <i>Ban et al. (2018)</i> did not introduce a new tribe because the relationship between <i>Chlorodontopera</i> and <i>Euxena</i> Warren, 1896 was not clear in their study. This relationship was also been proposed by <i>Holloway (1996)</i> based on similar wing patterns. Further analyses are needed to clarify the affinities between <i>Chlorodontopera</i> and <i>Euxena</i>. The tribe Chlorodontoperini is diagnosed by distinct discal spots with pale margins on the wings, which are larger on the hindwing; a dull reddish-brown patch is present between the discal spot and the costa on the hindwing, and veins M3 and CuA1 are not stalked on the hindwing (<i>Ban et al., 2018</i>). In the male genitalia, the socii are stout and setose and the lateral arms of the gnathos are developed, not joined. Sternite 3 of the male has setal patches (see <i>Holloway, 1996</i> for illustrations). Formal taxonomic changesare listedin Table 2. Aracimini, Neohipparchini, Timandromorphini, Geometrini and Comibaenini were recovered as monophyletic groups. These results are in full agreement with <i>Ban et al. (2018)</i>. However, the phylogenetic position of <i>Eucyclodes</i> Warren, 1894 is uncertain (unnamed G2). The monophyly of Nemoriini and Synchlorini is not supported. Instead, Synchlorini are nested within Nemoriini (support branch SH-like = 98.3, UFBoot2 = 91, RBS = 93). Our findings are in concordance with <i>Sihvonen et al. (2011)</i> and <i>Ban et al. (2018)</i>, but our analyses included a larger number of markers and a much higher number of taxa. Thus, we formally synonymize Synchlorini <b>syn. nov.</b> with Nemoriini (Table 2). The monophyly of Pseudoterpnini <i>sensu Pitkin, Han &amp; James (2007)</i> could not be recovered. Similar results were shown by <i>Ban et al. (2018)</i> who recovered Pseudoterpnini <i>s.l</i>. including all the genera previously studied by <i>Pitkin, Han &amp; James (2007)</i>, forming a separate clade from <i>Pseudoterpna</i> Hübner, 1823 + <i>Pingasa</i> Moore, 1887. Our results showed African <i>Mictoschema</i> Prout, 1922 falling within Pseudoterpnini <i>s.str</i>., and it is sister to <i>Pseudoterpna</i> and <i>Pingasa</i>. Asecond group of Pseudoterpnini <i>s.l</i>. was recovered as an independent lineage clearly separate from Pseudoterpnini <i>s.str</i>. (SH-like = 88.3, UFBoot2 = 64). <i>Ban et al. (2018)</i> did not introduce a new tribe due to the morphological similarities and difficulty in finding apomorphies of Pseudoterpnini <i>s.str</i>. In addition, their results were weakly supported. Considering that two independent studies have demonstrated the paraphyly of Pseudoterpnini <i>sensu</i> Pitkin et al. (2007), we see no reason for retaining the wide concept of this tribe. Instead, we propose the revival of the tribe status of Archaeobalbini.
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 23-24, DOI: 10.7717/peerj.7386, http://zenodo.org/record/5767530
description: {"references": ["Inoue H. 1961. Lepidoptera: Geometridae. Insecta Japonica 4: 1 - 106.", "Holloway J. 1996. The moths of Borneo, part 9: Geometridae (incl. Orthostixini), Oenochrominae, Desmobathrinae, Geometrinae. Ennominae Malayan Nature Journal 49: 147 - 326.", "Ban X, Jiang N, Cheng R, Xue D, Han H. 2018. Tribal classification and phylogeny of Geometrinae (Lepidoptera: Geometridae) inferred from seven gene regions. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 184 (3): 653 - 672 DOI 10.1093 / zoolinnean / zly 013.", "Sihvonen P, Mutanen M, Kaila L, Brehm G, Hausmann A, Staude HS. 2011. Comprehensive molecular sampling yields a robust phylogeny for geometrid moths (Lepidoptera: Geometridae). PLOS ONE 6 (6): e 20356 DOI 10.1371 / journal. pone. 0020356.", "Pitkin LM, Han HX, James S. 2007. Moths of the tribe Pseudoterpnini (Geometridae: Geometrinae): a review of the genera. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 150 (2): 343 - 412 DOI 10.1111 / j. 1096 - 3642.2007.00287. x."]}