Review Article |
Corresponding author: Oleg Pekarsky ( opbp@t-online.hu ) Academic editor: Alberto Zilli
© 2014 Oleg Pekarsky.
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Citation:
Pekarsky O (2014) Taxonomic studies of the Lygephila lubrica (Freyer, 1842) species complex with notes on other species in the genus (Lepidoptera, Erebidae, Toxocampinae). ZooKeys 452: 107-129. https://doi.org/10.3897/zookeys.452.8152
|
The taxa of the Lygephila lubrica (Freyer, 1846) species complex are revised. The genital features of all known taxa are described and illustrated, with special reference to the structure of the vesica. Genitalia of L. lubrica from different places in Russia, Central Asia and China are studied, illustrated and compared with different Mongolian populations. L. kazachkaratavika, described as a subspecies, is raised to a species level, stat. n. Neotypes of Lygephila lubrosa (Staudinger, 1901), L. lubrosa kazachkaratavika Stshetkin YuL & Stshetkin YuYu, 1994 [1997] and L. lubrosa orbonaria Stshetkin YuL & Stshetkin YuYu, 1994 [1997] are designated. The female genitalia of the type of L. lupina (Graeser, 1890) is described and illustrated for the first time, and L. mirabilis (Bryk, 1948) treated here as a junior subjective synonym, syn. n.
Lepidoptera , Erebidae , Toxocampinae , Lygephila lubrica species complex, L. mirabilis , L. lupina , vesica structure
This paper is dedicated to clarify the taxonomic status of the taxa in the L. lubrica species group, which is proved to contain more than a single species. Special attention was paid to revising the poorly-known taxa described from Central Asia and the identity of the historical names that have been used confusingly in the literature. The examined material is considered as representative for the entire area of the species complex, including all available types preserved in the collections of Püngeler, Staudinger, Bang-Haas, and Stshetkin. Neotypes are designated when required by the taxonomic results.
Male and female genitalia were dissected and mounted in Euparal on glass sides. Photos of genitalia were made by Svitlana Pekarska using a Nikon SMZ745T microscope and Moticam 2500 camera. Photos of imagines where taken by the author using a Nikon D3000/Sigma 105, f/2.8 camera.
Abbreviations: HNHM = Hungarian Natural History Museum Budapest (Hungary); IZIP = Institute of Zoology and Parasitology, Tajik Academy of Sciences Dushanbe (Tajikistan); MA = Matov Alexey, St. Petersburg (Russia); MNHU = Museum für Naturkunde der Humboldt-Universität zu Berlin (Germany); NHMW = Naturhistorisches Museum Wien (Vienna, Austria); ZISP = Zoological Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences St. Petersburg (Russia); ZFMK = Zoologisches Forschungsinstitut und Museum Alexander Koenig, Bonn; ZSM = Zoologische Staatssammlung München; AV = Anton Volynkin (Barnaul, Russia); GB = Gottfried Behounek (Grafing, Germany); JB = János Babics (Budapest, Hungary); OP = Oleg Pekarsky (Budapest, Hungary); LR = László Ronkay (Budapest, Hungary); WB = Wiltshire Berlin (slide made by Edward P. Wiltshire in the collection of MNHU).
Head and body brownish grey with frons and collar chocolate brown. Forewing broad, apex less pointed than in the L. lusoria group (
Ophiusa lubrica Freyer, 1846, Neuere Beiträge zur Schmetterlingskunde mit Abbildungen nach der Natur. 6: 7, Tab. 483, fig. 4. (TL: not given)
Synonymy:Lygephila lubrica sublubrica (Staudinger, 1896);
Toxocampa lubrica var. sublubrica Staudinger, 1896, Deutsche Entomologische Zeitschrift Iris 8: 271. (TL: [Mongolia, Uliastai], Uliassutai)
Lygephila lubrica sublubrica (Staudinger, 1896), Type ♂, [Mongolia, Uliastai], Uliassataj, slide No. WB12 (coll. MNHU).
2 ♂♂ & 1 ♀, Russia, C Tuva, W of Ujukskyi Mts, Kamennyi riv. valley, h=800–1000 m, 11–20.07.2003, leg. S. Vaschenko, slide Nos: OP1955m, OP2438m, OP1956f (coll. O. Pekarsky); 1 ♂, Russia, Altai Mts, 700 m, Kupchegen, 23–25.VII.2002, leg. Hácz & Juhász, slide No. OP1962m (coll. O. Pekarsky); 1 ♂, Russia, NW Altai Mts, Tigireksky ridge, slide No. AV0907 (coll. A. Volynkin); 1 ♂ Russia, Altai rep., Aktash, 1400 m, 12–14.VIII.2010, leg. R. Yakovlev, slide No. OP2439m (coll. O. Pekarsky); 1 ♀, Russia, SE Altai Mts, Aktash vill., slide No. AV0906 (coll. A. Volynkin); 1 ♂, Mongolia, Central aim., Nr. 1148, leg. Z. Kaszab, slide No. LR1401m (coll. HNHM); 1 ♂, Mongolia, Chövsgöl aimak, Nr. 1128, leg. Z. Kaszab, slide No. LR1402m (coll. HNHM); 1 ♀, Mongolia, Central aimak, 26 km O von Somon Lun, 1180 m, Nr. 260, 3.VIII.1964, leg. Z. Kaszab, slide No. OP2010f (coll. HNHM); 1 ♂ & 2 ♀♀, Mongolia, Selenga aimak, Orhon v., Sir Orhon, 715 m, N49°08'956", E105°15'099", 3–4.07.2004, leg. K. Gaskó, slide Nos: OP2296m, OP2295f, OP2297f (coll. P. Gyulai); 1 ♂, [Kazakhstan], Russia, Uralsk, 1937.VII., ex coll. Velez, slide No. LR1403m, (coll. HNHM); 1 ♂ & 1 ♀, [Kazakhstan], Uralsk, slide Nos: Hacker2536m/ZSM2510m, Hacker2334f/ZSM2508f (coll. ZSM); 1 ♂ & 1 ♀, Russia, S Ural, Orenburg reg., Donskoe vill., Verbljushka Mt., 25–29.6.2009, leg. L. Srnka, slide Nos: OP2124m, OP2125f (coll. O. Pekarsky); 4 ♂♂ & 1 ♀, Russia, Bashkortostan, Yantysh vill., 29–31.VII.2011 slide Nos: OP2005m, OP2007m, OP2440m, OP2441m, OP2006f (coll. O. Pekarsky); 1 ♂ & 1 ♀, Russia, Kabardino-Balkaria, C Caucasus Mts, Bydyk, 1250m, 18.7.2012, leg. L. Srnka, slide Nos: OP2151m, OP2152f (coll. O. Pekarsky); 1 ♀, Kasakhstan, 40 km W Ust Kamenogorsk, Kalbinski Altai, Monastyri, 600 m, 06.08.1994, leg. Lukhtanov, slide No. OP2013f (coll. P. Gyulai); 1 ♂, Kazakhstan, Boro-Khoro Mts, 30km N of Panfilov, (20 km from Chinese border), N44°29'765" E80°03'848", 1830 m, 30.06.2010, leg. S.K. Korb, slide No. OP2083m (coll. O. Pekarsky); 1 ♂, Kirgizstan, Inner Tjan-Shan, Min-Kush circ., 2300 m, 2.08.2000, leg. I. Pljushtch, slide No. OP2004m (coll. O. Pekarsky); 1 ♂ & 1 ♀, Kyrgyzstan, Naryn reg., Kekemeren river, n., Sarykamysh, 1400 m, 6–8.07.1996, leg. V.A. Lukhtanov, slide Nos: OP2015m, OP2016f (coll. P. Gyulai); 1 ♂, [Kyrhyzstan], Issykkul, Tianschan, 949, ex coll. Kotzsch, slide No. OP2426m (coll. ZFMK); 2 ♀♀, China, Xinyiang [Xinjiang] – Uygur, Boro Horo Shan, Balguntay city, 2000 m, 13.7.1996, leg. Nykl, slide Nos: OP2011f, OP2012f (coll. P. Gyulai); 1 ♂, China, Boro Boro shan, Balguntay city, 2000 m, 13.7.1996, slide No. OP2289m (coll. P. Gyulai); 1 ♀, Aksu Bakalik, Anf. VI.1912, ex coll. Rückbeil, slide No. OP2339f (coll. ZSM); 1 ♂, Aksu Bakalik, Anf. VI.1912, ex coll. Rückbeil, slide No. OP2338m (coll. ZSM); 1 ♂, [China], Aksu, [19]11, 225, ZFMK76/64 Boppard, slide No. OP2427m (coll. ZFMK); 1 ♂, Mongolia, Uliasutai, slide No. 0326Matov (coll. ZISP); 1 ♂, [Mongolia], Uliassatai, 946, ex coll. Kotzsch, 8/57, slide No. OP2428m (coll. ZFMK); 1 ♂ & 1 ♀, SW Mongolia, Hovd aimak, Bodonchijn-Gol basin, Hundij-Gol riv. valley, 1600 m, 46°06’N; 92°30’E, 3.vii.2010, leg. E. Guskova & R. Yakovlev, slide Nos: OP1957m, OP1958f (coll. O. Pekarsky); 2 ♂♂, W Mongolia, Hovd aimak, near Erdene-Buren somon, h=1 400 m, 04.07.2007, leg. Yakovlev R.V. & Guskova E.V., slide Nos: AV0283, AV0285 (coll. A. Volynkin); 1 ♂ & 1 ♀, Mongolia, Hovd Aimak, Altaj Mts, 10 km NE of Dott, 2000 m, 10.08.1996, leg. S. Farkas & I.Zs. Tóth, slide No. OP2290m, OP2291f (coll. P. Gyulai); 2 ♂♂ & 1 ♀, W Mongolia, Hovd aimak, near Erdene-Buren-Somon, 1400 m, 1.07.2010, 2500–2850 m, leg. R. Yakovlev, E. Guskova, slide Nos: OP2350m, OP2351m, OP2352f (coll. O. Pekarsky); 1 ♂, Mongolia, Bulgan aimak, 54 km W of Erdenecant, 1260 m, 104°05’E 47°05’N, 22.07.1987, leg. L. Peregovits, M. Hreblay & T. Stéger, slide No. OP2008m (coll. HNHM); 1 ♂, Mongolia, [Khentii] Chentaj aimak, Tsenkher-Mandal, Modoto, 1600–1800 m, 9–14.07.1984, leg. K. Cerny, slide No. GB2550m, (coll. G. Behounek); 1 ♂, [Russia], Yakovlevka Spas. u., Ussur. kr., 12.VIII.[1]926, [leg.] D’iakonv Filip’ev (in russian), slide No. 0330Matov, (coll. ZISP); 1 ♀, Russia, Primorsky ter., Lesozavodsk reg., Innokentievka, 26–30.VIII.[19]94, slide No. OP2298f (coll. P. Gyulai); 1 ♀, [China], Mien-shan (Prov. Shansi), Obere Höhe ca. 2000 m, 2.8.1937. [leg.] H. Höne, slide No. OP2423f, 2 ♂♂, 9.8.1937, slide Nos: OP2421m, OP2425m, 1 ♂, 13.8.1937, slide No. OP2422m (coll. ZFMK); 1 ♀, [China], Tapaishan im Tsinling, Sued-Shensi, Ca. 3000 m, 17.6.1936, [leg.] H. Höne, slide No. OP2424f (coll. ZFMK).
Lygephila lubrica was described in 1846 by Freyer in the genus Ophiusa. The exact type locality was not given in the original paper and also there was no information about the types. In 1896, Staudinger supposed during the description of Toxocampa lubrica var. sublubrica, that Ophiusa lubrica was described by Freyer from Altai: «Freyer sagt von seiner Lubrica nur, dass er sie von Kindermann erhielt; es muss sicher die von diesem Sammler im Altai gefundene Art sein, von der ich drei Stücke aus Lederer’s Sammlung besitze». Based on this assumption the type locality of L. lubrica is most probably “Russian Altai” near Ust-Bukhtarminsk settlement (not existing now), which was located near the junction of the Bukhtarma and Irtysh rivers in the modern territory of Kazakhstan. Staudinger & Wocke (1871) placed this species in the genus Toxocampa, and later
The main external distinctive feature of the species is the brownish-grey ground colour of forewings and hindwings. Lygephila lubrica differs from the externally somewhat similar L. lubrosa by its characteristic brownish-grey ground color of the forewings; from L. kazachkaratavika by more unicolorous forewings with a less-developed pattern; and from both related species by its brownish hindwings, which are generally ochreous in the two latter species. The differences in the genitalia structures among the three similar species are easily recognisable in both sexes. In males, the uncus dilation in L. lubrica is wider than in L. lubrosa, but narrower than in L. kazachkaratavika, and the ampulla is more proximal, closer to the middle of the valve, than in the two other species; in the females, the cleft on the posterior margin of the antrum is U-shaped or V-shaped in L. lubrica, whereas in L. lubrosa it is evenly concave; in L. kazachkaratavika the ostium cleft is deep, narrow, slit-like.
Wingspan 37–50 mm, on average 42–48 mm. Head and body brownish grey; collar dark chocolate brown. Forewing brownish grey, sometimes dark brown; subbasal line indistinct; antemedial line arched, consisting of two elongated patches; medial fascia diffuse, wide and waved, with two costal patches; reniform stigma approximately triangular, dark brown, sometimes with sharp extension at inner corner and with satellite streak-like spots on outer margin; orbicular stigma as small white dot; postmedial line distinct; subterminal line with light fascia; terminal line a black sinuous stripe. Hindwing varies from brown to greyish brown; transverse line distinct; narrow discal spot present on underside; outer dark third with defuse inner margin; fringes as ground color.
Male genitalia (Figs
Female genitalia (Figs
Adults. Lygephila lubrica 1 ♂, Russia, Orenburg 2 ♀, Russia, Orenburg 3 ♂, Kazakhstan, Boro-Khoro Mts 4 ♀, Kabardino-Balkaria, Bydyk 5 ♀, Kyrgyzstan, Naryn reg. 6 ♀, China, Xinyiang – Uygur 7 ♂, Russia, Altai, Kupchegen 8 ♀, Russia, Tuva 9 ♂, SW Mongolia, Hovd aimak 10 ♀, SW Mongolia, Hovd aimak.
Siberian. Distributed from Zaporozhie region of Ukraine to Rostov, Samara, Povolzhie regions to Ural of Russia through Kazakhstan, Russian Altai and northern Mongolia.
Toxocampa lubrica var. lubrosa Staudinger, 1901, Catalog der Lepidopteren des Palaearctischen Faunengebietes. I: 252. (TL: [Kazakhstan], Ili, [Kyrgyzstan, Issyk Kul], “Iss. K.”)
Neotype (here designated) male, Kazakhstan, Ili river valley near bridge 23,4 km asimut 222 from Koktal, 600 m, N43°58'004", E79°35'905", 04.07.2010, leg. S.K. Korb, slide No. OP2082m (coll. O. Pekarsky, deposited in HNHM Budapest).
1 ♂, with same data as neotype; 1 ♂ & 1 ♀, Kazakhstan, Ili river valley near Koktal, 506 m, N43°57'57.50", E79°36'1.06", 03.07.2010, leg. S.K. Korb, slide No. OP2489f (coll. O. Pekarsky); 1 ♀, [Kazakhstan], Syr-Daria, Baigacum, Koshantschikoff, 23.6.1913, 4/7, ex. coll. Püngeler, slide No. OP1979f (coll. MNHU); 1 ♂, [Kazakhstan], Aj-Darle, Syr-Darja, 25.V.1909, leg. Koshantshikoff, slide No. 0325Matov (coll. ZISP).
Described by Staudinger in 1901 as a variation of L. lubrica; with the type locality mentioned as [Kazakhstan], Ili [river] and [Kyrgyzstan], Issyk Kul [lake]. The original description stated that the forewings are pale grey (“cinereo-griseis”) without dark outer part, and that the hindwings are ochreous with broad marginal fascia. This description corresponds exactly with the external appearance of the moths from Ili river in Kazakhstan, therefore the neotype is designated from this area. Moths from Issyk Kul show, however, marked differences in habitus, especially the brown coloration of most parts of the forewings. These two taxa are different in genital structures of both sexes, which are discussed in detail under L. kazachkaratavika. Starting from the 1980’s, Stshetkin YuL treated L. lubrosa in his publications as a distinct species (
The main fault of the Stshetkins’ work is the lack of definition of L. lubrosa Staudinger, 1901. In their article they provided the following description of the genitalia of L. lubrosa: “Гениталии самца симметричные. Ункус слабо изогнутый, расширенный в средней части, заостренный. Вальвы удлинённые с немного выпуклыми дорзальными и вентральными краями. Вершинный отросток класпера пальцеобразный, длиннее, чем у L. lubrica; его конец находится близ дорзального края вальвы (у L. lubrica он далеко не достигает края). Конец вальвы от основания этого отростка до его заднего конца заметно короче, чем у L. lubrica. В оральной трети длины вальвы продольная хитинизированная складка класпера, направляясь орально, плавно прогибается несколько к вентральному краю вальвы и при этом не образует резкого угла с бугорком-гарпой, имеющегося у L. lubrica Frr. Нижняя фультура под эдеагусом без особого изгиба прямо идет в сторону саккуса, как у L. lusoria L.” The translation of this text is as follows: “The male genitalia are symmetrical. Uncus slightly curved, dilated in the middle part, pointed. Valva elongated with slightly convex dorsal and ventral edges. Apex of clasper digitiform, longer than that of L. lubrica; its end close to the dorsal margin of the valva (as for L. lubrica, the latter is far from reaching the margin). The end of the valva from the base of the clasper till its back end is noticeably longer than that of L. lubrica. In the oral [basal] third of the valva, the longitudinal chitinized fold of the clasper is directed orally [basally] and is slightly curved towards the ventral margin of the valva without forming an abrupt angle with the hump-harpe, which is typical for L. lubrica Frr. Lower fultura [juxta] under aedeagus almost straight and directed towards the saccus as L. lusoria L.” This description is contradictory as it includes characteristics of both yellow hindwinged species occurring in Central Asia. To be precise, “Uncus dilated in the middle part” is only typical for the moth (L. kazachkaratavika) from Kyrgyzstan (lake Issyk Kul) and Kazakhstan (city of Kizilorda and station Baigacum on the river Syr Darja) (Figs
In the same work the authors described two subspecies of L. lubrosa on the basis of external characteristics, admitting that the two subspecies do not differ in genitalia structure from the nominotypical subspecies. However, the moths from the Kazakh Karatau, station Balamurum collected by V. Kozhantshikov in 1909 (L. kazachkaratavika) differ significantly in their genitalia structure from the moths from the valleys of the river Ili (L. lubrosa lubrosa) and the river Pianj (L. lubrosa orbonaria). All above-mentioned data prove that the authors did not consider the subject of their research, which caused unsatisfactory results and added further difficulties for the clarification of this species-complex. A further difficulty is that the authors did not define holotypes or paratypes (or simply type series) for the newly described taxa. According to the information from the museum curators of ZISP and IZIP, they do not possess the aforesaid type specimens with the corresponding type labels.
In order to correctly identify the taxa of this species complex, in view of complexity of the current taxonomic situation, and to give an accurate definition of L. lubrosa, it is necessary to designate a neotype of this taxon.
Easily distinguishable from all other members of the species group by its unicolorous grey forewings. Comparing the genital structures of the taxa of the group, it differs from all related species by the narrow uncus without a real dilatation (only some slight thickening is present), the wide valva, and the subapically located, strong clasper with its tip reaching the valval edge (males); and by the funnel-shaped antrum bent dorsally at 45 degrees, being a unique female character for the whole genus (Fig.
Wingspan 42–46 mm. Head and body grey with some brownish scales; collar chocolate brown. Forewing almost unicolorous, wing pattern poorly developed; subbasal line hardly traceable, represented by groups of dark scales on veins; antemedial line semicircular; medial shade not expressed; reniform stigma small, indistinct, with one or two black dots basad; orbicular stigma small dot-like; postmedial and subterminal lines distinct; terminal line a row of black dots on veins. Hindwing pale ochreous; transverse line not discernible; outer dark third with sharply defined inner margin; fringes ochreous.
Male genitalia (Figs
Female genitalia (Figs
Adults. 11–16 Lygephila kazachkaratavika 11 neotype, ♂, Balamurum 12 ♀, Kazakhstan, Baigacum 13 ♂, Kazakhstan, Taldy-Kurgan reg. 14 ♀, Kazakstan, Baigacum 15 ♂, Kyrgyzstan, Issyk Kul 16 ♀, Kyrgyzstan, Issyk Kul 17, 18 L. lubrosa lubrosa 17 neotype, ♂, Kazakhstan, Ili river 18 ♀, Kazakhstan, Baigacum 19, 20 L. lubrosa orbonaria 19 neotype, ♂, Tajikistan, Pianj river 20 ♂, Tajikistan, Pianj river.
Kazakhstan, valley of the river Ili.
Neotype (here designated) male, Tajikistan, down stream of Planj river, “Tigrovaya Balka” reserve, 1–5.08.2006, leg. V. Gurko, slide No. JB1218m (coll. P. Gyulai, will be deposited in HNHM Budapest).
1 ♂, S. Tajikistan, down stream of Pianj riv., “Tigrovaya Balka” reserve, 1–5.08.2006, V. Gurko lgt., slide No. OP2268m (coll. M. Dvořák).
Described as a subspecies of L. lubrosa. The original description does not contain any information about the genitalia structures. However, the male genitalia show some recognisable differences compared with those of the nominate subspecies.
There is no trustworthy information about the holotype and paratypes of this taxon. According to the information from the Lepidoptera collection of IZIP, Stshetkins’s collection was totally destroyed sometime after the end of the 1990‘s. Also, there are no corresponding type labels in institute’s collection. To ensure the stability and identification of the taxon it is necessary to designate a neotype of Lygephila lubrosa orbonaria.
Differs from L. lubrosa lubrosa by its smaller size and better marked reniform stigma. In the male genitalia, ssp. orbonaria differs from ssp. lubrosa by its narrower uncus without a medial thickening, and the narrower upper part of valva with more expressed asymmetry.
Wingspan 34–43 mm. The external features, with the exception of the smaller size and somewhat roundish forewing, match those of the nominate subspecies.
Male genitalia (Figs
Female genitalia. Unknown.
SW Tajikistan, Pianj river valley.
Lygephila lubrosa kazachkaratavika Stshetkin YuL & Stshetkin YuYu, 1994 [1997]
Neotype (here designated) male (Fig.
1 ♀, label1: [Kyrgyzstan], Asia Centr., (Issykul), 1896, revers label1: Toxocampa, von R. Tancré, 5.98, ex. coll. Püngeler, slide No. OP1981f (coll. MNHU); 1 ♂, [Kyrgyzstan], Issi-Kul, slide No. OP2067m (coll. NHMW); 1 ♀, label1: [Kazakhstan], Syr-Daria, Baigacum, Koshantschikoff, revers label1: 20.6.13, label2: 21/6, 1913, 3/7; 1 ♀, label1: [Kazakhstan], Syr-Daria, Baigacum, Koshantschikoff, revers label1: 21.6.13, label2: 21/6, 1913, 4/7; 1 ♀, label1: [Kazakhstan], Syr-Daria, Baigacum, Koshantschikoff, revers label1: 22.6.13, label2: 22/6, 1913, 5/7, ex. coll. Püngeler, slide No. OP1932f (coll. MNHU); 1 ♀, label1: [Kazakhstan], Syr-Daria, Baigacum, Koshantschikoff, revers label1: 23.VI.13, label2: 23/6, 1913, 6/7, ex. coll. Püngeler, slide No. OP1980f (coll. MNHU); 1 ♂, Kazakhstan, Taldy-Kurgan reg., Ili riv., Boroghudsir, 450m, 7–19.06.1996, slide No. OP2017m (coll. P. Gyulai).
Described as subspecies of L. lubrosa. It is known that the author did not visit the museum collection of ZIN (ZISP) before writing his article on Lygephila and did not designate a holotype (personal comment of A. Matov). Also, potential type material of Lygephila lubrosa kazachkaratavika has not been found in any of the private collections where Stchetkin YuL’s material was purchased. So, the holotype most likely was never designated. To ensure stability of nomenclature and identification of the taxon it is necessary to designate neotype. A specimen from Kozhantshikov’s material preserved in the HNHM Budapest with the same label data as published in original description is hereby designated as neotype.
Easily separable from L. lubrica and L. lubrosa by the very contrasting, well-developed pattern on the forewings. In the male genitalia, it differs from all close relatives by its wider dilatation of the uncus, and the more acute apex of the valva (males); the longer antrum with a deep slit-like cleft on the posterior margin is diagnostic for females.
Wingspan 41–44 mm. Head and body brownish grey; collar dark chocolate brown. Forewing contrastingly marked, variable in coloration from mottled light greyish brown to uniform dark brown; noctuid pattern well developed; subbasal line traceable; antemedial line arched, consisting of three elongated patches edged by light fascia basally; medial shade waved, bifurcated from below cell to anal margin, with two costal patches; reniform stigma somewhat triangular, black, sometimes with satellite streak-like spots on outer margin; orbicular stigma absent; postmedial line distinct; subterminal line with light fascia; terminal line a row of black dots. Hindwing ochreous; transverse line distinct; small discal spot present on underside; border between pale proximal part and dark outer third diffuse; fringes ochreous.
Male genitalia (Figs
Female genitalia (Figs
Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan.
Toxocampa lupina Graeser, 1890, Berliner Entomologische Zeitschrift, 35: 71–84. (TL: [Russia, Judish Autonomy, Radde] Raddefka)
Synonymy:Lygephila mirabilis (Bryk, 1948), syn. n.
Eccrita mirabilis Bryk, 1948 (TL: N Korea, Shuotsu)
♀ Type, Amur Centr. (Radde), [18]87, ex. coll. Püngeler, slide No. OP1931f (coll. MNHU).
1 ♀, [RFE], Ussuriysk dist., Kajmanovka, 20.VII.[19]82, leg. Ivanov, slide No. 0321Matov (coll. ZISP). 1 ♀, [China], Tapaishan im Tsinling, Sued-Shensi, Ca. 1700 m, 14.7.1936, H. Höne, slide No. OP2402f, 1 ♀, [China], Tapaishan im Tsinling, Sued-Shensi, Ca. 1700 m, 10.8.1936, H. Höne, slide No. OP2403f (coll. ZFMK).
There is a lot of confusion between L. mirabilis and L. vulcanea (Butler, 1881) in the literature with regard to illustrations of the adults and genitalia. The taxonomic clarification of this problem will be given in a separate publication.
The identity of L. lupina was unclear for a long time. Lygephila lupina was described, according to the original description, from Radde, central Amur [Khabarovsk region] (Graeser 1890) on the basis of a single male from the collection of Taylor Tancré, in comparison with Lygephila maxima (Bremer, 1861). The Püngeler collection, now in MNHU, contains a female specimen with a type label (Fig.
64–66 Adults. 64, 65 Lygephila lupina (=mirabilis) 64 ♀, Type, Russia, Raddefka 65 Russia, Kajmanovka 66 L. vulcanea ♀, Japan 67–69 Female genitalia 67, 68 Lygephila lupina (=mirabilis) 67 Russia, Raddefka, slide No. OP1931f 68 Russia, Kajmanovka, slide No. 0321Matov 69 L. vulcanea, Japan, slide No. OP2442f.
The distinctive features of L. lupina and L. vulcanea (Fig.
Wingspan 44–49 mm. Head and body brownish grey; collar dark chocolate brown. Forewing brownish grey with sparse dark brown irroration; subbasal line indistinct; antemedial line arched with costal patch; reniform stigma large, dark brown, consists of 5 or 6 streak-like spots; orbicular stigma absent; postmedial and subterminal lines distinct; terminal line a row of black dots. Hindwing brownish; small discal spot present on underside; outer third dark brown; fringes as ground color.
Female genitalia (Figs
Russian Far East, China, Korea.
I would like to express my profound gratitude to László Ronkay, Donald Lafontaine and Alberto Zilli for reading the manuscript and for their critical comments, to Gábor Ronkay (Budapest, Hungary), Péter Gyulai (Miskolc, Hungary) and Gottfried Behounek (Grafing bei München, Germany) for access to their extensive private collections. I’m grateful to Johann Stumpf (Lauda-Koenigshofen, Germany), Armin Becher (Freudenberg, Germany), Marek Dvořák (Smrčná, Czech Republic), Luboš Srnka (Lehota pod Vtáčnikom, Slovakia), Matjaž Černila (Kamnik, Slovenia), Aidas Saldaitis (Vilnius, Lithuania) and particularly Stanislav Korb (Nizhniy Novgorod, Russia) for providing material from their collections for the examination; to Keitaro Eda (Shizuoka, Japan) for granted Lygephila material from Japan; to Vlad Proklov (London, UK) for faunistics information of L. lubrica; to Vadim Zolotukhin (Uljanovsk, Russia) for his kind help in finding the material for study; to Evgenij Rutjan (Kiev, Ukraine) and Damir Sharafutdinov (Dushanbe, Tajikistan) for help in finding literature; to Anton Volynkin (Barnaul, Russia) for genitalia photos of L. lubrica from Altai; to Alexey Matov (ZISP, St. Petersburg, Russia) for adult and genitalia photos of L. lubrica, L. lubrosa and L. mirabilis and the great help in finding literature; to Martin Lödl and Sabine Gaal-Haszler (NHM, Vienna), Wolfram Mey (MNHU, Berlin), Axel Hausmann (ZSM, München) and especially to Dieter Stüning (ZFMK, Bonn) for access to the museum collections and for their help in finding literature.