Print
Revision of the genus Emphylica Turner, 1913 based on morphology and molecular data (Lepidoptera, Crambidae, Pyraustinae)
expand article infoKai Chen, Qingming Liu, Jianhua Jin, Dandan Zhang
‡ Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China
Open Access

Abstract

Moths of the genus Emphylica Turner, 1913 resemble species of Achyra Guenée, 1849, Loxostege Hübner, 1825 and Sitochroa Hübner, 1825 in having a conical frons. In order to examine the monophyly of Emphylica, and its relationship to other genera with a conical frons, a molecular phylogenetic framework is reconstructed based on sequence data of COI, 16S rRNA, 28S rRNA, EF-1α and Wg gene regions. The results robustly support the monophyly of Emphylica. Achyra + (Loxostege + Sitochroa) is in a sister position to Emphylica. A new species, E. crassihamata sp. n., is described from Southern China and two new combinations, E. diaphana (Caradja & Meyrick, 1934), comb. n. and E. cruoralis (Warren, 1895), comb. n., are proposed. An identification key based on males is provided for all Emphylica species. The adult habitus and genitalia of all species are figured.

Keywords

Achyra, China, conical frons, Loxostege, molecular phylogeny, new combinations, new species, Sitochroa

Introduction

Emphylica was established by Turner (1913) and remained monotypic until now, with the type species E. xanthocrossa Turner, 1913 endemic in the north of Australia. In appearance, E. xanthocrossa can be best distinguished from other pyraustine species by the small wingspan (less than 15 mm), the reddish brown forewing with a yellow costal spot and the characteristic conical frons.

The frons of pyraustine species is usually flat or round, seldom projecting conically. Based on current knowledge, only the Australian genus Emphylica Turner, the genus Achyra Guenée with a worldwide distribution, the mainly Holarctic genera Loxostege Hübner and Sitochroa Hübner, as well as the New World genera Hahncappsia Munroe, Neohelvibotys Munroe and Helvibotys Munroe have a conical frons. These genera (except Emphylica) were considered closely related to each other based on external characters (Munroe 1976a).

While examining pyraustine collections from southern China and Southeast Asia, Loxostege diaphana Caradja & Meyrick, 1934, Pyrausta cruoralis (Warren, 1895) and an undescribed species, all resembling Emphylica xanthocrossa in the conical frons and the relatively small wingspan (less than 20 mm), attracted our attention. Further studies based on the genitalic characters suggested that the two described species definitely did not belong to their current genera and these three species were closely related to Emphylica. In order to evaluate the generic placement of these species, the phylogenetic relationships of Emphylica and potentially related genera, Achyra, Loxostege, and Sitochroa, were studied based on genetic data. The taxonomic composition and morphology of Emphylica are redefined.

Material and methods

Molecular phylogenetic analysis

In total eleven species of five genera were included for molecular phylogenetic analysis (Table 1). Pseudebulea fentoni Butler, 1881 was chosen as the outgroup because it was considered as a basal lineage of the Pyraustinae (Zhang 2003). The New World genera Hahncappsia Munroe, Neohelvibotys Munroe and Helvibotys were not included in the current study because no specimens could be accessed.

Species sampled for the molecular phylogenetic analysis.

Taxon Voucher Locality GenBank accession number References
COI 16S 28S EF1-α Wg
Pseudebulea fentoni SYSULEP0074 Hunan MG739570 MG739582 MG739605 MG739594 MK506279 Chen et al. 2018; present study
Emphylica crassihamata SYSULEP0190 Guangdong MK506732 MK506755 MK506767 MK506744 MK506728 present study
Emphylica crassihamata SYSULEP0191 Hunan MK506733 MK506756 MK506768 MK506745 MK506727 present study
Loxostege deliblatica SYSULEP0200 Xinjiang MK506734 MK506757 MK506769 MK506746 MK506726 present study
Loxostege sticticalis SYSULEP0227 Xinjiang MK506735 MK506758 MK506770 MK506747 MK506725 present study
Achyra massalis SYSULEP0242 Shanxi MK506736 MK506759 MK506771 N/A MK506724 present study
Sitochroa verticalis SYSULEP0257 Xinjiang MK506737 MK506760 MK506772 MK506748 MK506723 present study
Sitochroa palealis SYSULEP0258 Xinjiang MK506738 MK506761 MK506773 MK506749 MK506722 present study
Emphylica diaphana SYSULEP0263 Fujian MK506739 MK506762 MK506774 MK506750 MK506719 present study
Emphylica diaphana SYSULEP0264 Guangdong MK506740 MK506763 MK506775 MK506751 MK506720 present study
Emphylica xanthocrossa SYSULEP0307 Western Australia MK506741 MK506764 MK506776 MK506752 MK506730 present study
Emphylica cruoralis SYSULEP0377 Tibet MK506742 MK506765 MK506777 MK506753 MK506721 present study
Sitochroa umbrosalis SYSULEPT014 Fujian MK506743 MK506766 MK506778 MK506754 MK506731 present study

Total DNA was extracted from two legs and sometimes in addition from the abdomen of the dry specimens using the TIANGEN DNA extraction kit following the manufacturer’s instructions. The nucleotide sequences of two mitochondrial genes, cytochrome c oxidase subunit I (COI) and 16S ribosomal RNA (16S rRNA), and three nuclear genes, 28S ribosomal RNA (28S rRNA), Elongation factor-1 alpha (EF-1α) and Wingless (Wg) were selected for study. Primers used in this study are as follow: LCO/Nancy for COI and LepWg1/LepWg2 for Wg (Wahlberg and Wheat 2008), LR-J-12888/ LR-N-13398 for 16S rRNA (Simon et al. 2006), Oscar-6143/Bosie-6144 for EF-1α (Hundsdöerfer et al. 2009) and 28S-f1/28S-r1 for 28S rRNA (Lee and Brown 2008). PCR cycle conditions were set to an initial denaturation of 5 min at 95 °C, 35 cycles of 30 seconds at 94 °C, 30 seconds at 48 °C (COI, Wg and 16S rRNA) or 52 °C (EF-1α, 28S rRNA) and 1 min at 72 °C for amplification, and a final extension at 72 °C for 10 min. PCR products were confirmed with 1.5% agarose gel electrophoresis in TAE buffer, then were direct-sequenced at Majorbio Bio-pharm Technology Co., Ltd (Guangzhou), utilizing the same primers used for PCR amplification.

The sequences were aligned using Clustal W (Thompson et al. 1994) in MEGA 6 (Tamura et al. 2013) with default settings. The aligned matrix was corrected by eye. Gaps were treated as missing data. Phylogenetic analyses were inferred using Bayesian inference (BI) method in MrBayes 3.2.6 (Ronquist et al. 2012) and maximum likelihood (ML) in RAxML 8.2.10 (Stamatakis 2014). BI analysis was run with independent parameters for the COI gene partition under the GTR + I model, the 16S rRNA and 28S rRNA gene partitions under the GTR + G model, the EF-1α gene partition under the K80 + I model, and the Wg gene partition under the HKY + G model as suggested by jModelTest 0.1.1 (Posada 2008). Two independent runs, each with four Markov Chain Monte Carlo (MCMC) simulations, were performed for 10 million generations sampled every 1000th generation. The first 25% trees were discarded as burn-in, and posterior probabilities (PP) were determined from remaining trees. ML analysis was executed under the GTR + G model for all gene partitions and with 1000 iterations for the bootstrap test. The pairwise Kimura 2-Parameter (K2P) distances between species were calculated from the COI gene using MEGA 6 (Tamura et al. 2013).

Morphological analysis. The specimens studied, including the types of the newly described species, are deposited in the Museum of Biology, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou (SYSBM), except for those held at the following institutions: the Insect Collection of the College of Life Sciences, Nankai University (NKU), the Australian National Insect Collection (ANIC), and the Natural History Museum, London, United Kingdom (NHMUK). Slides of dissected genitalia were prepared according to the protocols of Robinson (1976) and Li and Zheng (1996). Terminology of genitalia follows Maes (1995), except for the terms “phallus” and “colliculum” for which we follow Kristensen (2003). Images of the specimens were taken using a Canon EOS 1DX camera provided with a Canon 100 mm macro lens; images of specimen of Emphylica cruoralis were taken using a Canon EOS 5DS R camera provided with a Canon 65 mm macro lens. The genitalia pictures were taken using a Zeiss Axio Scope.A1 in combination with a Zeiss AxioCam camera and the Axio Vision SE64 program on a Windows PC; genitalia pictures of Emphylica cruoralis were taken using a Zeiss Axioskop in combination with a Canon EOS 700D camera and Helicon Remote. Source images were then aligned and stacked with Helicon Focus to obtain a composite image.

Results

Phylogenetic relationships

The concatenated dataset of five genes consisted of 2873 nucleotide positions (658 for COI, 466 for 16S, 612 for 28S rRNA, 753 for EF-1α and 384 for Wg). Both BI and ML analyses of the concatenated dataset inferred congruent topologies with only subtle differences in posterior probability and bootstrap values probability (Fig. 1). The monophyly of Emphylica is robustly supported (PP = 1.00, BS = 92). The clade Achyra + (Loxostege + Sitochroa) is in a sister position to Emphylica with robust support (PP = 1.00).

Figure 1. 

Phylogenetic hypothesis inferred from Maximum likelihood (ML) analysis. Numbers on branches indicate Bayesian posterior probabilities and ML bootstrap values, respectively.

The results of the current phylogenetic analyses support that the undescribed species (here named as E. crassihamata sp. n.) should be placed in Emphylica, and that E. diaphana comb. n. should be transferred from Loxostege to Emphylica and E. cruoralis comb. n. should be transferred from Pyrausta to Emphylica. Emphylica xanthocrossa and E. crassihamata + E. cruoralis form a sister group, although with low support in the ML analysis (BS = 40).

Pairwise distances of the barcoding region (COI) are given in Table 2. The genetic distances between Emphylica and other genera range from 8.3% (Loxostege) to 14.6% (Pseudebulea). Interspecific genetic distances within Emphylica range from 4.0% (E. crassihamata to E. cruoralis) to 8.3% (E. crassihamata to E. diaphana), while intraspecific genetic distances in Emphylica range from 0% (E. crassihamata) to 0.8% (E. diaphana).

Pairwise distances of the COI barcode region based on Kimura-2-parameter model (intraspecific distances are highlighted in bold).

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
1 LEP0190 Emphylica crassihamata
2 LEP0191 Emphylica crassihamata 0.000
3 LEP0263 Emphylica diaphana 0.083 0.083
4 LEP0264 Emphylica diaphana 0.079 0.079 0.008
5 LEP0307 Emphylica xanthocrossa 0.066 0.066 0.081 0.075
6 LEP0377 Emphylica cruoralis 0.040 0.040 0.077 0.074 0.063
7 LEP0200 Loxostege deliblatica 0.108 0.108 0.112 0.112 0.086 0.096
8 LEP0227 Loxostege sticticalis 0.102 0.102 0.087 0.085 0.083 0.090 0.076
9 LEP0242 Achyra massalis 0.100 0.100 0.092 0.096 0.098 0.089 0.090 0.083
10 LEP0257 Sitochroa verticalis 0.123 0.123 0.112 0.108 0.104 0.116 0.090 0.087 0.116
11 LEP0258 Sitochroa palealis 0.092 0.092 0.106 0.102 0.085 0.094 0.073 0.086 0.090 0.058
12 LEPT014 Sitochroa umbrosalis 0.123 0.123 0.129 0.122 0.118 0.120 0.089 0.102 0.112 0.060 0.056
13 LEP0074 Pseudebulea fentoni 0.133 0.133 0.144 0.141 0.135 0.146 0.147 0.144 0.148 0.155 0.137 0.159

Taxonomy

Emphylica Turner, 1913

Emphylica Turner, 1913: 159. Type species: Emphylica xanthocrossa Turner, 1913, by monotypy.

Diagnosis

Species of Emphylica have a conical frons (Figs 2–5), similar to species of Achyra, Loxostege and Sitochroa (Figs 6–10), and by this differing from most genera of Pyraustinae. They can be best distinguished from the genera mentioned above in male genitalia by the narrowly triangular to trapezoid, sparsely to moderately setose uncus, the scale-liked editum, the sclerotized ventral process of the sella pointing towards the ventral margin of the valva, the nearly U-shaped juxta, the well-developed, distally rounded saccus, and the interlaced spicules in the phallus. In female genitalia, the antrum is sclerotized and the signum is rhombic.

Figures 2–10. 

Head profiles of species of Emphylica, Loxostege, Achyra and Sitochroa 2 Emphylica diaphana 3 E. crassihamata 4 E. cruoralis 5 E. xanthocrossa. 6 Loxostege sticticalis 7 L. deliblatica 8 Achyra massalis 9 Sitochroa umbrosalis 10 S. palealis. Scale bar: 0.5 mm.

Description

Head. Frons conical. Vertex with moderately raised scales projecting between antennae. Labial palpus slightly upwardly curved, approximately twice as long as diameter of eye; first segment with white scales at base; second segment obliquely directed upward; third segment long, porrect. Maxillary palpus prominent, curved upward. Proboscis well developed, with creamy white scales at base. Antenna in male with cilia shorter than or as long as width of corresponding flagellomeres. Thorax. Dorsal side whitish brown to brown; ventral side whitish to pale yellow. Legs unmodified, hindleg with basal inner spur longer than apical inner spur, approximately three times as long as basal outer spur. Wings. Forewing elongate-triangular, costa straight to near apex, then slightly arched to apex; apex sharp; termen weakly arched, oblique to tornus; dorsum straight; upperside usually with reddish or pale brown scales; frenulum hook in male well developed, retinaculum made up a tuft of curved bristles from below base of discal cell. Hindwing broad, fan-shaped; terminal margin usually brown; frenulum simple in male, with 2 acanthae in female. Wing venation as in Fig. 11. Abdomen. Apical margin of segments tinged with yellowish white. Male genitalia. Uncus narrowly triangular to narrowly trapezoid, more or less bulging near base. Tegumen trapezoid. Vinculum U-shaped. Saccus well developed, rounded triangular, approximately as long as uncus. Valva of medium width, tongue-shaped, slightly narrowed or tapering to rounded apex, ventral margin straight to slightly curved; transtilla short, triangular, usually with sclerotized ventral process extending to distal end of juxta; costal sclerotized band broad, slightly curved; dorsal sella short, lamellar, set with thick scale-like setae forming editum, more or less curved, apically with several filaments; ventral sella strongly sclerotized, usually perpendicularly pointing towards ventral margin of valva, usually curved apically; sacculus broad, usually with pointed sclerotized dorsal process (absent in E. xanthocrossa). Juxta usually U-shaped, distal arms sclerotized. Phallus tubular, usually with interlaced cornuti, in distal end with spine-like or teeth-like area of teeth. Female genitalia. Ovipositor lobes flat, densely setose. Posterior apophysis simple, anterior apophysis usually bulging near basal third. Antrum sclerotized. Ductus seminalis originating from anterior end of colliculum. Ductus bursae long and slender, more than 1.5× as long as diameter of corpus bursae. Corpus bursae globular, spinulose; accessory bursa present, arising from corpus bursae mediolaterally; signum narrowly rhombic to sea-star-shaped.

Figure 11. 

Wing venation of Emphylica crassihamata.

Biology

All of the Chinese material has been collected during the night at light. Host information is currently unavailable.

Distribution

(Fig. 24). India, China, Australia.

Key to species of Emphylica based on males

1 Wingspan usually less than 15 mm (Fig. 15). Uncus concave distally, ductus ejaculatorius originating from the middle of the phallus (Fig. 19A, C) E. xanthocrossa Turner, 1913
Wingspan usually larger than 17 mm. Uncus not concave distally, ductus ejaculatorius originating from the anterior end of the phallus 2
2 Ground colour of the wings whitish (Fig. 12). Uncus triangular, ventral sella reaching ventral margin of valva or beyond (Fig. 16A) E. diaphana (Caradja & Meyrick, 1934), comb. n.
Ground colour of the wings reddish brown or yellow. Uncus trapezoid, ventral sella not reaching ventral margin of valva (Figs 17A, 18A) 3
3 Basal 2/3 of forewing predominantly reddish brown (Fig. 14). Ventral sella triangular, overlaid by a folded, distally blunt process (Fig. 18A, B) E. cruoralis (Warren, 1895), comb. n.
Basal 2/3 of forewing yellow, sprinkled with reddish brown scales (Fig. 13). Ventral sella hook-like (Fig. 17A, B) E. crassihamata sp. n.

Emphylica diaphana (Caradja & Meyrick, 1934), comb. n.

Figs 2, 12, 16, 20, 24

Loxostege diaphana Caradja & Meyrick, 1934: 164.

Material examined

CHINA, Fujian: 1♂, Letu rain forest, Hexi, Nanjing, 24.90N, 117.22E, alt. 270 m, 10.VII.2014, leg. Zhang Dandan, genitalia slide no. SYSU1040, molecular voucher no. SYSU-LEP0263; Guangdong: 1♂, Sanyue Reserve, 24.03N, 111.57E, alt. 272 m, 6.VII.2013, leg. Chen Xiaohua, genitalia slide no. SYSU1041, molecular voucher no. SYSU-LEP0264; Hainan: 1♂, Mt. Limushan, 5.V.2011, leg. Zhang Dandan and Yang Lijun; Chongqing: 1♀, Daheba, Mt. Jinfoshan, alt. 800–850 m, 15.VII.2010, leg. Du Xicui and Song Lifang, genitalia slides no. SYSU0969; 1♂, Daheba, Mt. Jinfoshan, alt. 800–850 m, 16.VII.2010, leg. Du Xicui and Song Lifang, genitalia slides no. SYSU0965.

Figures 12–15. 

Adults of Emphylica spp. 12 E. diaphana, male (Hexi, Fujian) 13 E. crassihamata, holotype, male (Shixing, Guangdong) 14 E. cruoralis, male (Khasis, India) 15 E. xanthocrossa, female (Hidden Valley, Western Australia). Scale bar: 5.0 mm.

Diagnosis

Emphylica diaphana resembles other Emphylica species in the conical frons and the scale-like setae of the sella. It can be best distinguished from its congeners by the whitish ground colour suffused with pale brown scales on both wings, the dark brown lines at termen, in male genitalia by the triangular, distally narrowly-rounded uncus bearing only few short setae and the long, strongly sclerotized ventral sella usually projecting beyond the ventral margin of the valva. In female genitalia of E. diaphana, the antrum is strongly sclerotized, shorter than the length of the anterior apophysis, slightly wider than the ductus bursae; the maximal length of the signum is approximately 2/3 as long as the diameter of the corpus bursae; the two opposing angles of the signum without carinae are well-developed, almost as long as the other two. In E. xanthocrossa the antrum is broad, lightly sclerotized, no more than twice as wide as the ductus bursae; the two opposing angles of the signum without carinae are fairly short; in E. crassihamata the antrum is longer than the anterior apophysis, in E. cruoralis the antrum is as long as the anterior apophysis and the signum of both species is small (less than half of the diameter of the corpus bursae).

Redescription

(Figs 2, 12). Head. Frons and vertex pale yellow mixed with few white scales. Antenna pale brown, cilia in male less than half as wide as corresponding flagellomeres. Labial palpus brown mixed with pale yellow medially, with white scales at base. Maxillary palpus brown, pale brown at tip. Thorax. Whitish brown at dorsum, whitish ventrally. Foreleg: femur yellow, ventrally white, tibia pale brown, first tarsus pale brown, second tarsus white mixed with pale brown, third and fourth tarsus dark brown, fifth tarsus white. Midleg: femur dorsally and tibia pale yellow, remainder whitish; inner spur about twice as long as outer one. Hindleg: pale yellow; basal inner spur approximately three times as long as basal outer spur; apical inner spur about twice as long as apical outer spur. Wingspan 17–19 mm. Forewing whitish sprinkled with pale brown. Antemedial line pale brown from basal third of costa, oblique, reaching beyond basal 1/4 of dorsum; reniform stigma a short streak, pale brown mixed with dark brown scales posteriorly; postmedial line brown, arched from beyond basal 2/3 of costa to about 2/3 of CuA1, bent inwards to posterior angle of cell, then oblique to beyond half of dorsum; subterminal band whitish, with anterior 1/3 faint, gradually narrowed to tornus; termen line dark brown; fringe white at base and brown posteriorly. Hindwing white; postmedial line brown, darkened and thickened posteriorly, from base of Rs, weakly curved to about 2/3 of CuA1, bent inwards to beyond base of CuA1, then bent at right angle outwards to 3/4 of inner margin, latter section with pale brown anteriorly; subterminal line faint, from about 7/10 of M2, weakly curved inwards to 3/4 of CuA2, then slightly darkened, curved outwards to end of 2A; area between posterior part of posterior line and subterminal line sprinkled with few pale brown scales; terminal margin with few pale brown scales medially; termen edged by dark brown line; fringe as in forewing, entirely white near tornus. Abdomen. Dorsal segments pale brown, apical margins of basal four segments brown, edged by white scales, apical margins of remainder segments with white scales, 8th segment with two small dark brown spots posterolaterally; segments whitish ventrally. Male genitalia (Fig. 16). Uncus narrow, triangular, bearing few hair-like setae at distal third. Valva with ventral margin curved, gradually narrowed towards obtusely rounded apex; costal sclerotized band wide, slightly curved to 2/3 of dorsal margin; sacculus broad, distal half expanded, with a pointed, strongly sclerotized process projecting dorsally, sparsely setose; dorsal sella sub-rectangular; ventral sella long and slender, strongly sclerotized, distally curved, usually reaching or extending beyond ventral margin of valva. Juxta plate-shaped with lateral part strongly sclerotized, distal half slightly divided medially. Phallus tubular, straight, approximately 4/5 as long as length of valva, distal half with interlaced spicules, distal end dorsally with several small, teeth-like spines. Female genitalia (Fig. 20). Anterior apophysis with triangular expansion near basal third. Antrum cup-shaped, slightly wider than ductus bursae, medially somewhat constricted. Ductus bursae slender, approximately 2× as long as diameter of corpus bursae; colliculum well developed, slightly sinuate laterally, approximately as long as antrum. Corpus bursae globular; accessory bursa globular; signum sea-star-shaped, with two angles bearing carinae disconnected medially, distally pointed, other two angles well developed, distally rounded.

Figures 16–17. 

Male genitalia of Emphylica spp. 16 E. diaphana, Chongqing (genitalia slide no. SYSU0965) 17 E. crassihamata, Guangdong (genitalia slide no. SYSU0933) A Whole genitalia B Base of valva dorsally C Distal part of phallus. Scale bar: 0.5 mm.

Distribution

(Fig. 24). China (Fujian, Guangdong, Hainan, Chongqing).

Remarks

This species was formerly placed in the genus Loxostege, probably based on the conical frons. However, genitalia traits of Loxostege moths, e.g. the cylindrical uncus with dense, scale-like setae, the few hair-like setae of the dorsal sella, the ventrobasally directed ventral sella and the usually coiled ductus bursae, are different in Emphylica diaphana. Although in appearance the wing colour and pattern of this species are somewhat dissimilar to those of other Emphylica species, the genitalia traits agree with the diagnostic characters of Emphylica xanthocrossa Turner, the type species. Moreover, according to the molecular phylogeny, this species was inferred as terminal lineage within Emphylica, rather than in Loxostege. Consequently, this species is considered as correctly placed in Emphylica.

Emphylica crassihamata Chen & Zhang, sp. n.

Figs 3, 11, 13, 17, 21, 24

Material examined

Type material. Holotype ♂ (Fig. 13); CHINA, Guangdong: Chebaling National Nature Reserve, Shixing County, 24.72N, 114.26E, alt. 496 m, 28.V.2017, leg. Chen Kai. Paratypes: Hunan: 1♂, Mt. Huilongshan, Zixing, 26.08N, 113.39E, alt. 886 m, 8.VI.2016, leg. Chen Kai and Duan Yongjiang; 1♂, Jinyinpu, Bamianshan Reserve, Guidong County, 25.97N, 113.71E, alt. 973 m, 16.VI.2015, leg. Chen Kai; 2♀, Gaowangjie National Nature Reserve, Guzhang County, 28.66N, 110.08E, alt. 890 m, 18.VI.2017, leg. Zhang Dandan, genitalia slides no. SYSU0994 (molecular voucher no. SYSU-LEP0191), 0957; Guangdong: 1♂, same data as holotype; 2♂, idem except leg. Duan Yongjiang, genitalia slide no. SYSU0993, molecular voucher no. SYSU-LEP0190; 2♂, idem except leg. Kou Zongqing, genitalia slide no. SYSU0933.

Diagnosis

In appearance, E. crassihamata resembles E. cruoralis in the reddish brown subterminal band, but can still be recognized by the predominantly yellow basal 2/3 of the forewing sprinkled with reddish brown scales and the presence of a faint antemedial line on the forewing and postmedial lines on both wings. In male genitalia it differs from E. diaphana and E. xanthocrossa by the distally rounded, moderately setose uncus, the pointed and recurved dorsal process of the sacculus, and the long and slender phallus, which is longer than the length of the valva; from E. cruoralis it differs by the wider distal uncus, the small triangular, strongly sclerotized process near the distal sacculus as well as the hook-like ventral sella. In female genitalia, the sclerotized antrum is approximately 1.5× as long as the anterior apophysis whereas in E. cruoralis the sclerotized antrum is as long as the anterior apophysis.

Description

(Figs 3, 13). Head. Frons and vertex yellowish brown, frons with cream white stripe laterally. Antenna yellowish brown, cilia in male as long as width of corresponding flagellomeres. Labial palpus brown with white scales at base. Maxillary palpus brown. Thorax. Saffron dorsally, pale yellow ventrally. Foreleg: femur brown; tibia brown and white alternately; tarsi white except distal three brown. Midleg: femur pale brown; tibia yellow dorsally, white ventrally, outer spur half as long as inner one; tarsi white ventrally, pale yellow dorsally. Hindleg: femur pale brown; tibia yellow, basal inner spur in male about three times as long as basal outer spur, apical inner spur about twice as long as apical outer spur; tarsi pale yellow. Wingspan 17.5–18.5 mm. Forewing yellow edged by reddish brown subterminal band, sprinkled with reddish brown scales from base to postmedial line, slightly darkened along costal margin, veins covered with reddish brown scales terminally, terminal band narrow, saffron; antemedial line reddish brown, curved outwards from basal fourth of costa to about basal third of dorsum; orbicular stigma faint, dark brown; reniform stigma straight, strip-like, dark brown; postmedial line reddish brown, weakly sinuate from 3/4 of costa to base of M2, bent inwards to base of CuA2, then curved outwards to about middle of dorsum; inner margin of subterminal band nearly parallel to postmedial line; underside with ground colour as on upperside but paler; fringe saffron mixed with pale yellow scales, mostly reddish brown at tornus. Hindwing with costal margin translucent white to 2/3 of costa, basal half medially pale reddish brown, followed by pale yellow band, outer margin sinuate, edged by reddish brown subterminal band, terminal band narrow, saffron, veins with reddish brown scales terminally; postmedial line indistinct; fringe as in forewing; underside paler than upperside especially in basal half. Abdomen. Brown dorsally, whitish ventrally, apical margins of segments tinged with white.

Male genitalia

(Fig. 17). Uncus bulging at base, gradually narrowed towards obtusely rounded apex, maximal width approximately 2× minimal width, bearing hair-like setae on distal half. Valva evenly wide medially, slightly tapering towards apex, with a small triangular sclerotized process beyond distal end of sacculus; transtilla triangular; costal sclerotized band wide, slightly expanded to 2/3 of dorsal margin; sacculus broad, distal third expanded and bearing a strongly sclerotized, hook-like process; dorsal sella quadrate; ventral sella hook-like, strongly sclerotized. Juxta U-shaped with two slender arms, thickened and fused in basal half. Phallus long and slender, slightly curved upward, approximately 1.25× length of valva, distal half with interlaced spicules on vesica, distal end with several pointed cornuti dorsally. Female genitalia (Fig. 21). Anterior apophysis slightly bulging near basal third. Antrum long, funnel-shaped, thickened and strongly sclerotized distolaterally, approximately 1.5× as long as anterior apophysis. Ductus bursae slender, as wide as anterior part of antrum, approximately 1.8× as long as diameter of corpus bursae; colliculum slightly narrowed posteriorly. Corpus bursae globular, spinulose; accessory bursa arising from middle side of corpus bursae; rhombic signum small, maximal length approximately 1/3 as long as diameter of corpus bursae, with two opposing angles bearing carinae disconnected medially, other two angles triangular, distally blunt.

Etymology

The specific name is derived from the Latin crassi- = thick and hamata = hook-like, referring to the thick, hook-like ventral sella.

Distribution

(Fig. 24). China (Hunan, Guangdong).

Emphylica cruoralis (Warren, 1895), comb. n.

Figs 4, 14, 18, 22, 24

Syllythria cruoralis Warren, 1895: 471.

Pyrausta cruoralis (Warren, 1895): Hampson 1896: 432.

Material examined

Type material. Lectotype (here designated) ♂: INDIA, Meghalaya: Khasis, Mar.1894, Nat. Coll., Pyralidae NHMUK Slide no. 10935 (NHMUK).

Other material examined

INDIA, Meghalaya: 7♂ (Fig. 14), Khasia Hills, Assam, Nissary (NHMUK); 8♂, Assam, Khasis, Nat. Coll. (NHMUK); 1♂, same data as type (NHMUK); 1♂, Khasis Hills, Assam (NHMUK); 1♂, Khasis Hills (NHMUK); CHINA, Tibet: 1♀, air-raid shelter, Beibeng Village, Medog County, 29.24N, 95.17E, alt. 750 m, 31.VII.2018, leg. Qi Mujie, genitalia slide no. ZDD12100 (molecular voucher no. SYSU-LEP0377) (NKU).

Diagnosis

Emphylica cruoralis resembles E. crassihamata in the reddish brown subterminal band and the saffron fringe. The differences between the two species are provided in the diagnosis of E. crassihamata. In appearance, E. cruoralis can be best recognized within the genus by the yellow postmedial band of the forewing, in male genitalia by the narrow trapezoid uncus with hair-like setae at distal third, the large, thumb-shaped, weakly sclerotized process of the ventral valva near the distal sacculus as well as the triangular ventral sella overlaid by a folded, distally blunt process. In female genitalia, it resembles E. crassihamata except for the less sinuate distolateral antrum and the relatively shorter and wider antrum anteriorly.

Redescription

(Figs 4, 14). Head. Frons and vertex yellowish brown. Antenna pale yellowish brown, cilia in male as long as width of corresponding flagellomeres. Labial palpus yellowish brown with white scales at base. Maxillary palpus yellowish brown. Thorax. Yellowish brown dorsally, whitish ventrally. Foreleg: femur brown; tibia brown and white alternately; tarsi white except for pale brown distal three. Midleg: femur pale brown; tibia yellow on dorsum, white ventrally, outer spur half as long as inner one; tarsi white ventrally, pale yellow dorsally. Hindleg: yellowish brown, basal inner spur in male about three times as long as basal outer spur, apical inner spur about twice as long as apical outer spur. Wingspan 16–19 mm. Forewing with reddish brown ground colour, except for saffron circle at base and sinuate, saffron postmedial band, narrowing towards costa and dorsum; costa straight, slightly arched to apex, brown at basal 2/3, yellowish brown at distal third; terminal margin with narrow, saffron intermittent band; fringe saffron, mixed with reddish brown near tornus. Hindwing with costal margin translucent white to 2/3 of costa, basal half medially reddish brown, followed by yellow postmedial band, narrowing towards tornus, outer margin sinuate, edged by reddish brown subterminal band, terminal band narrow, intermittent, saffron, posterior margin pale yellow; fringe as in forewing. Abdomen. Dorsally yellowish brown, apical margins of segments tinged with white. Male genitalia (Fig. 18). Uncus slightly bulging at base, gradually narrowed towards truncate apex, maximal width approximately 3× minimal width, distal third with hair-like setae. Valva evenly wide medially, slightly tapering towards rounded apex, ventral margin with weakly sclerotized, thumb-shaped process projecting basally near distal end of sacculus; costal sclerotized band moderately wide, slightly curved to beyond 2/3 of dorsal margin; sacculus broad, distal third expanded and bearing a strongly sclerotized, hook-like process; ventral sella triangular, weakly sclerotized, overlaid by strongly sclerotized, folded, distally blunt process. Juxta U-shaped with two narrow tapering arms, basally broadened. Phallus as in E. crassihamata (without interlaced spicules of vesica in Fig. 18). Female genitalia (Fig. 22). As in E. crassihamata except: distolateral antrum less sinuate, relatively shorter and wider anteriorly; ductus bursae narrower than width of anterior part of antrum.

Figures 18–19. 

Male genitalia of Emphylica spp. 18 E. cruoralis, Khasis (Pyralidae NHMUK Slide no. 10935) 19 E. xanthocrossa, Queensland (genitalia slide no. ANIC21185) A Whole genitalia B Base of valva dorsally C Distal part of phallus. Scale bar: 0.5 mm.

Distribution

(Fig. 24). India (Meghalaya), China (Tibet).

Remarks

This species was formerly placed in the genus Pyrausta. However, both the molecular phylogeny and the genital traits suggested that it should be placed in Emphylica. According to the male genitalia (Fig. 18) of the type specimen of Emphylica cruoralis (Warren, 1895), comb. n., this species agrees with diagnostic characters of Emphylica. It differs from Pyrausta by the conical frons, in male genitalia by the the presence of an editum made of modified, scale-like setae, the more anteriorly positioned and ventrally directed and sclerotized sella, and the more strongly developed sclerotized dorsal process of the sacculus, and in female genitalia (Fig. 22) by the strongly sclerotized antrum.

Emphylica xanthocrossa Turner, 1913

Figs 5, 15, 19, 23, 24

Emphylica xanthocrossa Turner, 1913: 159.

Material examined

Type material. Holotype, ♀: AUSTRALIA, Northern Territory: P[ort]. Darwin, Nov.[19]08, leg. F.P. Dodd, genitalia slide no. P232 (ANIC).

Other material examined

(ANIC). AUSTRALIA, Northern Territory: 1♂, 16.19S, 136.05E, 36 km SW of Borroloola, NT, 4.Nov.1975, leg. E.D. Edwards, K. Maes Gen. Prep. nr.: 20741; genitalia slide no. ANIC18161; 1♂, 16.10S, 136.15E, Goose Lagoon, 11 km SW by S Borroloola, NT, 31.Oct.1975, E.D. Edwards leg.; 1♂, Humpty Doo, N.T., Light Trap, 10.Nov.1959, E.B. Boerema leg.; 2♂, 16.40S, 135.51E, Bessie Spring, 8 km ESE of Cape Crawford, NT, 26.Otc.1975, E.D. Edwards leg., genitalia slide no. P707; 1♀, 16.41S, 135.44E, Cape Crawford road junction, NT, 29.Mar.1995, E.D. Edwards and M. Matthews leg.; Queensland: 1♂, 15.45S, 144.15E, 2 km NNW of Jowabinna, 17.I.1994, E.D. Edwards and P. Zborowski leg., genitalia slide no. ANIC21185; 1♀, 12.42S, 142.30E, Moonlight creek, QLD, 13.Nov.1993, at light, P. Zborowski and M. Horak leg., K. Maes Gen. Prep. nr.: 20742, genitalia slide no. ANIC18162; 1♂, 12.40S, 142.40E, Batavia Downs, QLD, 22-23.Nov.1992, at light, P. Zborowski and A. Calder leg.; 1♂, 12.40S, 142.41E, Batavia Downs, QLD, 11.Dec.1992, at light, P. Zborowski and W. Dressler leg.; Western Australia: 1♀, 15.77S, 128.75E, Hidden Valley, Kununurra, III.2016, P.M. Heath leg., genitalia slide no. ANIC21184, molecular voucher no. SYSU-LEP0307; 1♂, Kunnunurra, W.A., 9.Apr.1962, I.F.B. Common leg.; 1♂, Wyndham, W.A., ?.?.[19]30, T.G. Campbell leg.; 1♂, 16.10S, 128.23E, nr Dunham River crossing, WA, 6.Apr.1995, E.D. Edwards and M. Matthews leg.

Figures 20–23. 

Female genitalia of Emphylica spp., ventral views 20 E. diaphana, Chongqing (genitalia slide no. SYSU0969) 21 E. crassihamata, Hunan (genitalia slide no. SYSU0957) 22 E. cruoralis, Tibet (genitalia slide no. ZDD12100) 23 E. xanthocrossa, Queensland (genitalia slide no. ANIC18162). Scale bar: 1.0 mm.

Diagnosis

Emphylica xanthocrossa resembles E. crassihamata and E. cruoralis in the saffron fringe, the conical frons and the U-shaped juxta. It can be best distinguished from its congeners by the smaller wingspan (less than 15 mm), the triangular saffron spot on the forewing costa postmedially, the smoky brown subterminal margin of the hindwing, in male genitalia by the distally concave uncus, the spinulose ventral sella, the absence of a dorsal process on the sacculus, the larger juxta, the broad and slightly sinuate phallus and the ductus ejaculatorius originating from the middle of the phallus. In female genitalia, the antrum is moderately sclerotized, bottle-shaped, the two opposing angles of the signum without carinae are short, whereas in E. diaphana, E. crassihamata and E. cruoralis the antrum is strongly sclerotized and the two opposing angles of the signum without carinae are almost as long as the other two.

Redescription

(Figs 5, 15). Head. Frons and vertex pale yellowish brown, frons with cream white stripe laterally. Antenna brown, cilia in male less than half width of corresponding flagellomeres. Labial palpus brown and pale yellow alternately with white scales at base, pale yellow at tip. Maxillary palpus yellowish brown. Thorax. Pale yellow dorsally, whitish ventrally. Foreleg: yellow except distally white tibia and alternately yellow and white tarsi. Midleg: pale yellow, tibia and tarsi white ventrally; inner spur about twice as long as the outer one. Hindleg: yellowish white; basal outer spur reduced; apical inner spur about 3× as long as apical outer spur. Wingspan 13–14 mm. Forewing reddish brown, with a large triangular to sub-quadrate saffron spot on costa postmedially, a small saffron spot at base of dorsum and a semi-oval saffron patch at termen near tornus; antemedial and postmedial lines almost invisible except near dorsum; costal margin pale brown except at yellow spot; terminal margin mixed with saffron; fringe saffron; underside as upper side but paler, translucent at dorsum. Hindwing with costal margin translucent white to 2/3 of costa; termen arched to 1/2 then strongly oblique to tornus; distal third smoky brown except for saffron terminal area from apex to 1A; below posterior angle of cell covered with few brown scales, and a triangular patch of brown scales near tornus; remainder pale yellow; fringe as in forewing except brown near tornus; underside pale yellow. Abdomen. Dorsally covered with saffron scales, whitish ventrally, apical margin of segments tinged with yellowish white. Male genitalia (Fig. 19). Uncus with lateral margin slightly bulging at base, then gradually narrowed to concave apex, setose on distal third. Valva evenly wide in middle, tapering to rounded apex; transtilla triangular; costal sclerotized band wide, slightly curved to 2/3 of dorsal margin; sacculus broad, distal half moderately expanded; dorsal sella sub-rectangular; ventral sella triangular, slightly flexed and curved, spinulose, distally blunt. Juxta large U-shaped with two strongly sclerotized, curved, tapering distal arms, thickened basally and medially divided. Phallus tubular, slightly sinuate, approximately 1.1× length of valva, distal fourth spinulose, apically with dense, teeth-like spines ventrally; ductus ejaculatorius originating from middle of phallus; vesica with bundle of interlaced spicules. Female genitalia (Fig. 23). Posterior apophysis long and slender, approximately 4/5 as long as anterior apophysis. Anterior apophysis with triangular expansion near basal third. Antrum moderately sclerotized, bottle-shaped, slightly bulging medially. Ductus bursae slender, approximately 1.4× as long as diameter of corpus bursae; colliculum slightly narrowed medially. Corpus bursae globular; rhombic signum small, maximal length approximately 1/3 as long as diameter of corpus bursae, with two distally pointed opposing angles bearing carina disconnected medially, other two angles small, indistinct.

Distribution

(Fig. 24). Australia (Northern Territory, Queensland, Western Australia).

Figure 24. 

Distribution map of Emphylica spp.

Discussion

Based on the molecular phylogeny, the clade Achyra + (Loxostege + Sitochroa) is a sister group to Emphylica. All these four genera have a similar conical frons. Species of Achyra can be distinguished from Emphylica in male genitalia by the narrow triangular uncus laterally set with dense hair-like setae, the dense simple setae of the sella and in female genitalia by the presence of a second signum and the broad base of the ductus seminalis. Species of Loxostege differ from Emphylica in male genitalia by the cylindrical uncus set with scale-like setae, the few simple setae of the sella and in female genitalia by the long and coiled ductus bursae with a sclerotized base. Species of Sitochroa are best distinguished from Emphylica in male genitalia by the ventral sella with two hook-like, basally curved processes and the strongly sclerotized process extending from the phallus apically, and in female genitalia by the twisted sclerite near the posterior end of the ductus bursae. Hahncappsia, Neohelvibotys and Helvibotys, mainly distributed in the Nearctic and Neotropical regions, are not included in the current phylogenetic analysis. External characters of these three genera are similar to those of Achyra, Loxostege and Sitochroa (Munroe, 1976a). The morphological details were provided by Munroe (1976a, b). In male genitalia, Emphylica moths can be best distinguished from species of Hahncappsia, Neohelvibotys and Helvibotys by the usually trapezoid uncus, the thick, scale-like editum and the well-developed, distally rounded saccus. Some species of Hahncappsia have a row of scale-like setae on the sella and the sclerotized process of the sacculus is similar to those of Emphylica. The relationships between all these genera need to be further studied.

The monophyly of Emphylica is robustly supported by the results of the molecular analysis. Four species can be recognized as members of Emphylica based on the series of morphological characters provided above in the diagnosis of the genus. According to the tree topology (Fig. 1), E. crassihamata + E. cruoralis and E. xanthocrossa form a separate group, but with relatively low support in the ML analysis (BS = 40). Both BI and ML analyses show the same topologies, suggesting that E. crassihamata and E. cruoralis are more closely related to E. xanthocrossa than to E. diaphana which makes good sense with respect to the wing colouration. Within the genus, E. crassihamata is most closely related to E. cruoralis in the hindwing pattern (Figs 13, 14) and the genitalia (Figs 17, 18, Figs 21, 22).

Emphylica is recorded for the first time from outside Australia. The current study shows that Emphylica species occur in Southern China, the northwest of India and the north of Australia. There is as yet no record of Emphylica species in Indochina and the Malay Archipelago. Noteworthily, there are three Pyrausta spp., probably congeneric with Emphylica, recorded in Borneo (see http://www.pyralidsofborneo.org/index.php?cruoralis; http://www.pyralidsofborneo.org/index.php?sp4-17; http://www.pyralidsofborneo.org/index.php?sp5-10). The specimen identified as P. cruoralis is very similar to E. cruoralis in wing pattern, but with much narrower yellow bands on both wings. The wing pattern of another specimen identified as P. sp4 is almost the same as the former specimen, but the wingspan is similar to that of E. xanthocrossa. The last specimen identified as P. sp5 also has yellow bands of both wings similar to those of E. cruoralis. Unfortunately, the frons of these specimens cannot be observed, and no image of genitalia or genetic data can be accessed. Considering the similarity in the wing pattern, it would not be a surprise if these three taxa turn out to be congeneric with Emphylica species.

Acknowledgements

We would like to express our grateful thanks to Dr Andreas Zwick, Mr Youning Su (both CSIRO, NRCA, Australia) and Prof. Houhun Li (NKU, Tianjin) for the loan of specimens, to Dr David Lees and Dr Geoff Martin (both Natural History Museum, United Kingdom) for helping the first author to access specimens at NHMUK, to Mr Yulong Li (School of Life Sciences, Sun Yat-sen University, China) for assistance on the distribution map. We are also grateful to Dr Angus B. Robert (NHMUK) and Dr Mark Sterling (Allen & Overy LLP, England) for linguistic assistance on the manuscript, to Dr Bernard Landry (Muséum d’Histoire naturelle, Geneva, Switzerland), Dr Richard Mally (National Library of The Czech Republic) and Dr Weichun Li (Jiangxi Agricultural University, China) for their critical reviews. This project was supported by the International Program for Ph.D. Candidates, Sun Yat-Sen University, the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 31672330) and Program of the Ministry of Science and Technology of the People’s Republic of China (2015FY210300).

References

  • Caradja A, Meyrick E (1934) Materialien zu einer Microlepidopteren-Fauna Kwangtungs. Deutsche entomologische Zeitschrift Iris 47: 145–167.
  • Hampson GF (1896) Moths. The Fauna of British India, including Ceylon and Burma. London, 594 pp.
  • Hundsdöerfer AK, Rubinoff D, Attié M, Wink M, Kitching IJ (2009) A revised molecular phylogeny of the globally distributed hawkmoth genus Hyles (Lepidoptera: Sphingidae), based on mitochondrial and nuclear DNA sequences. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution 52: 852–865. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2009.05.023
  • Kristensen NP (2003) Skeleton and muscles: adults. In: Kristensen NP (Ed.) Lepidoptera, Moths and Butterflies – Volume 2: Evolution, Systematics, and Biogeography Handbook of Zoology IV (35). Walter de Gruyter, Berlin & New York, 39–131. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110893724.39
  • Lee S, Brown RL (2008) Phylogenetic relationships of Holarctic Teleiodini (Lepidoptera: Gelechiidae) based on analysis of morphological and molecular data. Systematic Entomology 33: 595–612. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-3113.2008.00430.x
  • Li HH, Zheng ZM (1996) Methods and techniques of specimens of Microlepidopera. Journal of Shaanxi Normal University (Natural Science Edition) 24: 63–70.
  • Maes KVN (1995) A comparative morphological study of the adult Crambidae (Lepidoptera, Pyraloidea). Bulletin et Annales de la Société Royale Belge d’Entomologie 131: 383–434.
  • Munroe EG (1976a) Pyraloidea Pyralidae comprising the subfamily Pyraustinae tribe Pyraustini (part). In: Dominick RB, Dominick T, Ferguson DC, Franclemont JG, Hodges RW, Munroe EG (Eds) The Moths of America North of Mexico. Classey EW Ltd and The Wedge Entomological Research Foundation, London, 1–78. [pls 1–4, A–H]
  • Munroe EG (1976b) Pyraloidea Pyralidae comprising the subfamily Pyraustinae tribe Pyraustini (conclusion). In: Dominick RB, Dominick T, Ferguson DC, Franclemont JG, Hodges RW, Munroe EG (Eds) The Moths of America North of Mexico. Classey EW Ltd and The Wedge Entomological Research Foundation, London, 79–150. [pls 5–9, J–U]
  • Robinson GS (1976) The preparation of slides of Lepidoptera genitalia with special reference to the Microlepidoptera. Entomologist’s Gazette 27: 127–132.
  • Ronquist F, Teslenko M, van der Mark P, Ayres DL, Darling A, Hohna S, Larget B, Liu L, Suchard MA, Huelsenbeck JP (2012) MrBayes 3.2: Efficient Bayesian Phylogenetic Inference and Model Choice Across a Large Model Space. Systematic biology 61: 539–542. https://doi.org/10.1093/sysbio/sys029
  • Simon C, Buckley TR, Frati F, Stewart JB, Beckenbach AT (2006) Incorporating molecular evolution into phylogenetic analysis, and a new compilation of conserved polymerase chain reaction primers for animal mitochondrial DNA. Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics 37: 545–579. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ympev.2009.05.023
  • Tamura K, Stecher G, Peterson D, Filipski A, Kumar S (2013) MEGA6: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis Version 6.0. Molecular Biology and Evolution 30: 2725–2729. https://doi.org/10.1093/molbev/mst197
  • Thompson JD, Higgins DG, Gibson TJ (1994) CLUSTAL W: improving the sensitivity of progressive multiple sequence alignment through sequence weighting, position-specific gap penalties and weight matrix choice. Nucleic Acids Research 22: 4673–4680. https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/22.22.4673
  • Turner AJ (1913) Studies in Australian Lepidoptera, Pyralidae. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Queensland, Brisbane 24: 111–163.
  • Wahlberg N, Wheat CW (2008) Genomic outposts serve the phylogenomic pioneers: Designing novel nuclear markers for genomic DNA extractions of lepidoptera. Systematic biology 57: 231–242. https://doi.org/10.1080/10635150802033006
  • Warren W (1895) New genera and species of Pyralidae, Thyrididae, and Epiplemidae. Annals and Magazine of Natural History, including Zoology, Botany and Geology (ser.6) 16: 460–477.
  • Zhang DD (2003) A taxonomic study on the tribe Pyraustini from the Mainland of China (Lepidoptera: Crambidae: Pyraustinae). PhD Thesis, Nankai University, Tianjin.