Acta Zoologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 41(4), pp , 1995

Transcription

1 Acta Zoologica Academiae Scientiarum Hungaricae 41(4), pp , 1995 SY ST E M A T IC POSITION A N D GENERIC ST A T U S OF L Y C A E N A COGIN A SC H A U S, 1902: AN EN D EM IC NEO TRO PICAL LY C A E N O PSIN A (LEPIDOPTERA, L Y C A ENID A E ) Zs. B á l i n t 1 and K. Jo h n s o n 2 1Department o f Zoology, Hungarian Natural History Museum H-1088 Budapest, Baross utca 13, Hungary 2 Department o f Entomology, American Museum of Natural History Central Park West at 79th Street, New York, NY , USA Elkalyce, gen. n., is proposed for the polyommatine lycaenid butterfly originally described as Lycaena cogina S c h v u s. This species, endemic to SE Brazil, has long been considered a member o f the genera Everes or Leptotes, from which, however, it is quite distinct. The new genus belongs to the Lycaenopsina infratribe o f the Lycaenopsis Section erected by E l i o t. The taxonomic history o f Lycaena cogina is discussed. Key words: Brazil, Celastrina, Lycaenposina, Neotropics, Polyommatini INTRODUCTION Our review o f higher taxonomic categories in the Neotropical Polyommatini has required study of the identity and status of several unusual South American species which show very restricted distributions (B Á LIN T and JOHNSON 1995). Previously, the senior author clarified the identity of L y c a e n a g r i q u a (SC H A U S, 1902: 407), replacing the unavailable homonym g r iq u a with p a r a n a B Á L IN T and placing this species in P s e u d o l u c i a N A B O K O V, 1945 (B Á L IN T 1993: 17). On the same page as the description of L. g r i q u a, SC H A U S also described L y c a e n a c o g i n a, both species reported only from Castro, Paraná, Brazil. L. c o g i n a was represented only by its holotype, a male numbered as Type #5920 in the National Museum of Natural History (USNM ), Washington D. C. (C O M STO C K and H U N T INGTON : 190; BRIDG ES 1994: VIII.113; G. L A M A S, pers. comm.). Hitherto the systematic position of L. c o g in a has not been clarified (see E B E R T 1969, B R O W N 1993 and Discussion) and, as a result, its unique systematic position in the L y c a e n o p s i s Section has gone unrecognized (E L IO T and K A W A - ZOÉ 1983). Although the significance of L. c o g in a in the South American fauna has been mentioned as recently as 1993, no one appears to have taken the fundamental step to study its morphology with regard to overall placement in the Polyommatini. A c ta zo o l. hung. 41, 1995 Hungarian N atural History M useum, Budapest

2 3 4 4 ZS. BÁLINT & К. JOHNSON Our study o f Lycaena cogina, from recently located additional material listed below, indicates it represents a unique Neotropical endemic infratribe in the Lycaenopsis Section (sensu ELIOT 1973, FIEDLER 1991, BÁLINT and JOHNSON herein) and, as such, is of obvious generic worth, both taxonomically and biogeographically. In the follow ing description we apply the format and terminology of ELIOT and KAWAZOÉ (1983). Elkalyce BÁLINT and JOHNSON, gen. n. (Figs 1-5) Type species: Lycaena cogina SCHAUS, 1902 Diagnosis. E yes large, glabrous. Antennae slightly shorter than the forewing cell; club with patch o f white scales. Second segment o f the palpi long and naked. Forewing cell extending approximately to m idwing; vein Sc ending before cell apex, veins R1 and Sc approximate but distinct. Male genitalia w ith sociuncus cupola-shaped in dorsal and lateral view, gnathos with articulating brachia, vinculum very broad with sclerotized edges, valva with large costal process and an additional mem branous apical process with long setae; juxta extream ily large and V-shaped connected strongly to the valva apical edge, phallus straight in dorsal view but curved in lateral view with biapical (but bulbous) caecum and long, deeply divided Chapman s process. M ale dorsal forewings with broad black borders and with veins and basal area are strongly suffused by dark scales extending along the costa to the wing base. Males without androconial marks. Hindwing similar to forewing but w ith marginal arrowhead-like markings and antemarginal spots in each cell. Pattern o f hindwing venter typical polyommatine (cf. E l i o t and K v w v z o é 1983, figs ). Female unknown. Material exam ined. 2 males, labelled as Brasilia, Sao Paulo, Campos de Jordao, 1600 m, , leg. H. Ebert; Staatssammlung, M ünchen ; gen. prep. B á l i n t, No Distribution and diversity. Confined to the Neotropical Realm (known only from Paraná, Brazil at present) and m onotypic at present. Etymology. An arbitrary combination o f syllables, gender fem inine, comprises three elements: El = E l i o t, K a = KAWAZOÉ and L yce = Lycaenopsis. 1 2 F igs 1-2. Elkalyce cogina (S c h a u s ), male, Brasilia, Sâo Paolo, Campos de Jordao, 1600 m, (ZSBS) 1 = dorsal, 2 = ventral view Acta zoo!. hung. 41, 1995

3 SYSTEMATIC POSITION AND GENERIC STATUS OF LYCAENA COG1NA 345 DISCUSSION Most significant to the morphology of L. c o g i n a is its membership in the L y c a e n o p s i s Section, and of taxa therein, its comprising a unique Neotropical member. L. c o g i n a shares the following characters with the L y c a e n o p s i s Section: (1) Hindwing tailess; male genitalia with uncus lobes produced; vinculum with a pronounced subtriangular extension directed cephalad; caecum more or less developed, suprazonal portion short. F ig s 3-5. M ale genital stru c tu re s o f E lk a ly c e c o g in a (S c h v u s ). 3 = u n c u s, g n a th o s, tegum en and v in cu lu m, 4 = valva and ju x ta, 5 = aed eag u s in lateral and ventral a sp e ct Ac ta zo o l, hung

4 3 4 6 ZS. BÁLINT & К. JOHNSON The morphology of E l k a l y c e possess some unique features amongst L y - c a e n o p s i s polyommatine lycaenids: (1) the juxta is remarkable well developed with large anal lobes, (2) the valva possess an anal membranous lobe and (3) the penis has a short but conspicuous, biapical suprazonal element (=Chapman s process). These characteristics suggest that the most probable sister group of E l k a l y c e is not C e la s tr in a, but O r e o l y c e (cf. ELIOT and KAWAZOÉ 1983, figs of O r e - o l y c e and C e la s tr in a ), a view which invites corroboration from the as-yet-unknown structures of the female. L. c o g i n a w a s n o t fig u r e d b y D R AUDT ( : ) and o n ly a cu rso ry rep e t itio n o f th e o rig in a l d e sc r ip tio n w a s g iv e n. T h e sp e c ie s w a s lis te d as L y c a e n a ( R u s t i c u s ) c o g in a - a stra n g e c o m b in a tio n (c f. ty p e s p e c ie s o f R u s t i c u s HÜBNER, 11806]: P a p ilio a r g u s LINNAEUS, 1758). C o m s t o c k and HUNTINGTON ( f 1959] : 190) simply repeated the binomen of the type description while HAYWARD (1973: 165), perhaps relying on his visits to BMNH, erroneously placed c o g in a in L e p t o t e s SCUDDER. H A Y W A R D (1973) also recorded specimens from Misiones Province, Argentina. These were not located by the junior author at Instituto Miguel Lillo, Tucumán, in 1991 but perhaps are worth looking for in uncurated HAYW ARD material still held at the BMNH. EBERT (1969), who studied the butterflies of eastern Brazil from an ecological aspect, recorded the taxon as a very rare species, flying in February, April and May. He did not repeat the original combination but indicated that the taxon was not convincingly classified ( [Gen. ign.] c o g i n a, EBERT 1969: 41). BROWN (1993: 52, table 2) published a cumulative list of Neotropical polyommatines. He cited EBERT but also called attention to the distinctness of c o g i n a, noting that it suggested separate generic status among the E v e r e s section (BROW N 1993, Table 2, note 3). However, he figured it as E v e r e s c o g in a (B R O W N 1993 op. cit., fig. 1/20). In 1993 the senior author located two male specimens of L y c a e n a c o g i n a in the butterfly collection of the Zoologische Staatssammlung des Bayerischen Staates, Munich, Germany (ZSBS). The specimens were curated by the late Dr. W A L T E R F o r s t e r, a well known lycaenidologist, as L y c a e n o p s i s c o g i n a, a placement uncannily close in light of its morphology. In 1994 the senior author corresponded with the late CHARLES A. BRIDGES who was preparing his recently revised catalogue (BRIDGES 1994). Among many questions regarding central Asian and high Andean polyommatines, Mr. BRID GES also asked the senior author about the placement of L y c a e n a c o g i n a. With dissected specimens of L. c o g in a in hand, the senior author was able to inform BRIDGES that c o g in a was a lycaenopsine and, pending publication concerning its unique generic worth, best placed tentatively either in L y c a e n o p s i s or the Neotropical lycaenopsine genus C e l a s t r in a. BRIDGES response (in litt, to BÁLINT, 23 November, 1994 and reflected subsequently in his publication 1994: VIII 113, A c ta z o o l. h u n g. 41, 199 5

5 SYSTEMATIC POSITION AND GENERIC STATUS OF LYCAENA COGINA IX. 63) was you say, that L y c a e n a c o g i n a SC H A U S, 1902 is a L y c a e n o p s i s. But that genus is Indoaustralian, while c o g i n a is Neotropical. How can that be?. With this apparently in mind, BR ID G ES followed H A Y W A R D, placing c o g i n a (again incorrectly) in L e p t o t e s. As with B r o w n s placement o f c o g i n a with E v e r e s, this reflects a problem first pointed out by JOHNSON and Q U IN T E R ( 1982[ 1983]) - many lepidopterists tend to look only to genera from their immediate biogeographic realm or hemisphere when trying to classify poorly known entities. REFERENCES BÁLINT, Zs. (1993) A Catalogue o f Polyommatine Lycaenidae (Lepidoptera) o f the Xeromontane Oreal Biom e in the Neotropics As Represented in European Collections. Rep. Mus. Nat. Hist. Univ. Wis. (Stevens Point) 29: B á l in t, Zs. and J o h n s o n, K. (1995) Neotropical Polyommatine diversity and affinities. I. R elationships o f the higher taxa (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae). Acta tool. hung. 41(3): BRIDGES, C. A. (1994) Catalogue of the Family-Group, Genus-Group and Species-Group Names of the Riodinidae & Lycaenidae (Lepidoptera) o f the World. Published by author, Urbana, Illinois, 1128 pp. B r o w n, K. S. (1993) Neotropical Lycaenidae: an overview, hi N e w, T. E. (ed.) Conservation Biology of Lycaenidae (Butterflies). Occasional Paper o f the 1UCN Species Survival C om mission 8: C o m s t o c k, W. P. and H u n t i n g t o n, E. I. ( ) An annotated list o f the Lycaenidae (L epidoptera) o f the Western Hemisphere. J. New York ent. Soc. 66: ; 67: , ; 70: , , ; 71: 45-57; 72: 62-64, , D r v u d t, M. (1921). 15. Gattung Itylos, 16. Gattung Scolitantides In S e i t z, A. (ed.): Macrolepidoptera o f the World, Vol 5. Stuttgart, Alfred Kernen Verlag, pp E b e r t, H. (1969) On the frequency o f butterflies in Eastern Brazil, with a list o f the butterfly fauna o f Pocos de Caldas, Minas G erais../. Lep. Soc. 23(Suppl. 3), 48 pp. E l io t, J. N. (1973) The higher classification o f the Lycaenidae (Lepidoptera): a tentative arrangement. Bull. Brit. Mus. Nat. Hist. (Ent.) 28: E l i o t, J. N. and K v w v z o É, A. (1983) The Blue Butterflies of the Lycaenopsis Group. London, BMNH, 309 pp. F i e d l e r, K. (1991) Systematic, evolutionary, and ecological implications o f myrmecophily within the Lycaenidae (Insecta: Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae). Bonner Zoologische Monographien 31, 210 pp. H v y w v r d, K. J. (1973) Catalogo de los Ropaloceros Argentinos. Opera Lillioana 23: J o h n s o n, K. and Q u i n t e r, E. ( 1982[ 1983]) Commentary on Miller and Brown vs. Ehrlich and Murphy et al.: Pluralism in systematics and the worldwide nature o f kinship groups. J. Res. Lep. 24: S c h v u s, W. (1902) Descriptions of new American butterflies. Proc. U. S. nain. Mus. 24: Received 19th May 1995, revised version accepted 15th August 1995 Acta zool. hung. 41, 1995