Nemophora augites
Creators: name: Kozlov, Mikhail V.
Publisher: name: Zenodo
Year: 2023
Subjects: Biodiversity
Taxonomy
Animalia
Arthropoda
Insecta
Lepidoptera
Adelidae
Nemophora
Nemophora augites

description: Nemophora augites (Meyrick, 1938)
(Figs. 1, 7, 13)
Nemotois augites: Meyrick 1938: 29.
Lectotype ♁ (here designated): China, Yunnan, Lijiang (26° 52′ N, 100° 14′ E); labelled: 8 mm circle with violet border, print ‘Lecto-| type’; 8 mm circle with yellow border, print ‘Para-│ type’; 5 × 10 mm, black ink ‘Likiang │ China │ H[öne]..[19]35’; 12 × 14 mm, black ink + print ‘ Nemotois │ augites │ Car. & Meyr. 1/1 │ E. Meyrick det. │ in Meyrick Coll.’; 3 × 18 mm, black ink ‘ augites Meyr. ’; 10 × 12 mm, print ‘B. M. │ Genitalia slide │ No. 27828’; 8 × 19 mm, print: ‘ Lectotype ♁ Nemotois │ augites Meyrick, 1938 │ M. Kozlov design. 1999’ (NHM) [examined].
Nemotois augites: Clarke 1955: 59; Popescu-Gorj 1992: 137.
Nemophora augites: Kozlov 1997a: 43.
Nemophora amatella: Sun et al. 2022: 304‒305, Figs. 1, 2, 27, 48 (misidentification).
Diagnosis. Differs from N. amatella (Figs. 3‒6) by narrower forewing with narrowly rounded (nearly pointed) apex, less expressed (i.e., narrower and shorter) longitudinal stripes in the apical part of forewing, longer vinculum, longer anterior processes of transtilla and absence of carinae in apical part of phallus. From N. yunnanica (Fig. 2) it differs by a glossy bronze frons and longer vinculum without deep medial indentation on the distal margin. From both these species it also differs by the presence of a single finger-like process near the tip of phallus in male genitalia.
Description. Male (Fig. 1). FWL 11.8 mm, WLR 0.29. Vertex with ochreous piliform scales; frons glossy bronze with coppery tint, with a row of ochreous piliform scales below antennal sockets. PLB 1.4 × vertical eye diameter (1.75 × length of scape), yellow, with sparse raised dark brown piliform scales; apical segment dark brown. Proboscis dark brown, base with coppery brown scales. Eyes not enlarged; interocular index 0.55. Antenna 3.6 × FWL. Scape and base of flagellum dark coppery brown; at the level of forewing fascia the colour of flagellum abruptly changes to light yellowish grey. Tegulae and thorax dark brown. Forewing (Fig. 7) with narrowly rounded (nearly pointed) apex. Basal part of forewing pale ochreous brown, with glossy coppery to lead bronze costal margin and with several dark brown to coppery bronze lines along main veins. Medial band of fascia pale yellow, on both sides bordered by narrow dark brown lines, followed by brown bands with coppery lustre and by dotted dark brown lines. Apical part of forewing with 8‒9 narrow ochreous brown longitudinal stripes over coppery bronze background; terminal margin dark bronze, apically with coppery tint. Fringe dark bronze along costal margin; at wing apex the colour of fringe changes abruptly, and fringe along terminal margin is pale yellow; then its colour gradually changes to bronze near fascia. Hindwing dark brown; costal area yellowish-grey; fringe bronze to brown. Fore legs dark brown dorsally and yellow ventrally; medial and hind legs light brownish yellow; spores and apices of tibiae dark brown. Epiphysis at 0.5, not reaching apex of tibia. Abdomen brown.
Female. See Sun et al. (2022).
Male genitalia (Fig. 13). Tegumen dome-shaped, with nearly flat distal margin and weak medial ridge. Socii 1.2 × diameter of phallus. Vinculum 3.3 × length of valva, with slightly concave lateral margins and almost straight distal margin. Distal part of vinculum laterally with two relatively narrow (0.2 × length of valva) depigmented areas, which are parallel to the distal margin. Tip of tegumen extend beyond tips of valvae. Valvae (see from ventral side) nearly triangular, with concave ventral margin. Valvae fused basally up to 0.33 × total length; internal valvar margins distinct. Anellus 0.3 × length of valva. Transtilla with long pointed medial process. Juxta 0.6 × length of phallus; arrow head narrow (WLR 0.35), with pointed tip and short pointed lateral arms. Phallus 1.1 × length of vinculum, proximal part (0.7 × total length) almost straight, distal part projected posteroventrally; three thin processes (two at left side and one at right side) are articulated at 0.7 × length of phallus (counting from its base) and two strongly sclerotized, relatively short (2.5 × diameter of phallus) carinae attached to the membrane at the base of lateral processes; apex of phallus narrowly funnel-shaped, with short finder-ike process at the dorsal wall; base of phallus with parallel margins, only slightly wider that the medial part of it.
Comments. The name of this species was attributed to Meyrick in Caradja & Meyrick by Clarke (1955), to Meyrick alone by Popescu-Gorj (1992) and to Caradja & Meyrick by Kozlov (1997a) and by Sun et al. (2022). This inconsistency had emerged due to a ‘nested’ structure of the respective publication, which has three parts: an introduction co-authored by Caradja & Meyrick (1937; in German), description of pyraloid moths by Caradja (in German), and description of other ‘microlepidoptera’ (including Adelidae) by Meyrick (1937, 1938; both in English). The latter part was split between the two volumes of the journal (vol. 51 published in 1937 and vol. 52 published in 1938) and should therefore be cited as two publications with different dates. Unfortunately, the typesetter provided the continuation of the Meyrick’s part of this study with the German title of the entire paper (copied from p. 137 in Caradja & Meyrick 1937) instead of the English title of this part (p. 169 in Meyrick 1937). This is an obvious error, and the author of the name ‘ Nemotois augites ’ is Meyrick alone.
The species was described from three specimens (two males and one female). Although Meyrick (1938) explicitly indicated that the ‘type’ is kept in the Caradja collection, the original description contains no information that can be used to identify the holotype. Thus, the three specimens mentioned in the original description are to be considered as syntypes.
Popescu-Gorj (1992) designated a lectotype of N. augites and mentioned two further specimens (referred to as a male and a female) from the same locality as paralectotypes. However, only the lectotype was properly labelled and placed in the MINGA collection of type specimens under the name “ Nemotois augites Meyrick ”. The two other specimens were discovered in MINGA among unsorted Chinese material collected by Höne in 1935; their identity was established from collecting dates published by Popescu-Gorj (1992). However, there exists no proof that these two specimens are actual syntypes. Moreover, they both are males, whereas the description of N. augites was based on two males and one female.
Meyrick usually retained at least one syntype of species he had described, and one male syntype of N. augites (labelled as paratype) was discovered among Meyrick’s material in the NHM collection. Thus, only one of the tree male specimens investigated by Popescu-Gorj (1992) could be a syntype.
According to the original description, the frons of N. augites is “metallic coppery-bronze” (Meyrick 1938: 29). However, the frons of the male specimen, which was designated by Popescu-Gorj (1992) as a lectotype of N. augites, is light yellowish-white, without any metallic lustre. Thus, either the specimen mentioned above is not a syntype, or the type series of N. augites included two or three different species. Under both assumptions, the lectotype designation by Popescu-Gorj (1992) is invalid (ICZN 1999: Art. 74.2); therefore the earlier lectotype fixation is set aside, and the specimen kept in Meyrick’s collection in NHM, which is properly labelled as a ‘type’ and which fits the original description, is here designated as the lectotype.
Based on this designation, I attribute the specimens figured by Sun et al. (2022) under the name ' Nemophora amatella (Staudinger, 1892) ’ to N. augites. If all specimens (35 ♁ and 12 ♀) listed by Sun et al. (2022) belong to this species, then N. augites is one of most common and widespread species of the degeerella species-group in China. However, literature-based distribution records ('Caucasia, Finland, Japan, Korea, Mongolia, Russia’) published by Sun et al. (2022) should not be attributed to N. augites.
description: Published as part of Kozlov, Mikhail V., 2023, The identities of Nemophora augites (Meyrick, 1938) and Nemophora amatella (Staudinger, 1892): correction of misidentifications and description of a new species (Lepidoptera: Adelidae) from China, pp. 94-104 in Zootaxa 5301 (1) on pages 95-97, DOI: 10.11646/zootaxa.5301.1.4, http://zenodo.org/record/8016514