Evergestis elbursalis Amsel, 1961

Alipanah, Helen, Khodadad, Masoumeh, Rajaei, Hossein & Haseli, Mohammad, 2018, Taxonomic study of the genus Evergestis Hübner, 1825 (Lepidoptera: Crambidae: Glaphyriinae) in Iran with description of a new species, Zootaxa 4420 (1), pp. 1-33: 13-18

publication ID


publication LSID


persistent identifier


treatment provided by


scientific name

Evergestis elbursalis Amsel, 1961


Evergestis elbursalis Amsel, 1961 

Material examined. HMIMAbout HMIM: Iran, Chāhārmahāl va Bakhtiāri Prov. : 1 ♀, Kuhrang , Heyrān , N 32˚ 20΄31˝ E 50˚ 26΄ 56˝, 2305 m, 6.vi.2005, Ebrāhimi, Hājiesmailiān leg.  ; Esfahān Prov.: 1 ♀, Ardestān, Mahābād, 950 m, Ebrāhimi, Parchami-Arāghi leg.  , 1 ♀, Kāshān, Karkas Mt. , 2.vi.1970, Abāi leg.  , 1 ♀, Kāshān, Ghohrud, Jewinān, 2000 m, 12.–13.vi.1984, Pāzuki, Hāshemi leg., 1 ♂, Kāshān- Meymeh Rd., Ghohrud , N 33˚ 39΄ 04˝, E 051˚ 23΄ 53˝, 2450 m, 11.–13.v.2005, Trusch, Petschenka, Müller leg.  ; Fārs Prov.: 1 ♀, Kāzerun, Miān Kotal, 1900 m, 11.VI.1972, Ebert, Pāzuki leg.  , 2 ♀♀, 50 km NW. Sepidān, Tang-e Sorkh, 2250 m, 16.vi.1972, Ebert, Pāzuki leg., 1 ♂ 3 ♀♀, 10 km N. Sivand , 1150–1700 m, 15.V.1974, Abāi, Pāzuki leg. (GS: HA-2062)  , 1 ♀, Kāmfiruz, Tang-e Bostānak, 1750 m, 2.vi.1990, Ebrāhimi, Badii leg., 1 ♀, Firuzābād- Farāshband Rd., 40 km to Farāshband , 1800 m, 7.v.2004, Hājiesmailiān, Serri, Bolonia leg.  ; Ghom Prov.: 1 ♂, 3 km S. Fordu , 2150 m, 5.–6.vi.1984, Pāzuki, Hāshemi leg.  , 1 ♀, 8 km S. Fordu, Vesf , 2320 m, 7.–8.vi.1984, Pāzuki, Hāshemi leg.  ; Kohgiluyeh va Boyerahmad Prov. : 1 ♂ 1 ♀, Yāsuj, Sisakht, 2250 m, 13.vi.1972, Ebert, Pāzuki leg. (GS: HA-1729)  , 1 ♀ and one specimen without abdomen, 30 km S. Yāsuj, Kushk , 2200 m, 12.vi.1972, Ebert, Pāzuki leg.  , Yāsuj , 11.iii.1987, Anonymous leg.  ; Semnān Prov.: 1 ♂, Moallemān , 1070 m, 17.v.2005, Falsafi, Nematiān leg. (GS: HA-2070)  ; Tehrān Prov.: 1 ♀, Shemirānāt, Rudbār-e Ghasrān, Meygun , N 35˚ 57΄ E 51˚ 29΄, 2080 m, 9.vi.2005, Zahiri, Hājiesmailiān, Gelbercht, Drechsel leg.  ; SMNKAbout SMNK: Holotype, ♀, süd seite des Elburs, Iran, 28.v.1939, E. P  . Wiltshire, leg. H. Amsel (ex coll. H. G. Amsel); 2 ♂♂ 1 ♀, N-IRAN, Elburs-Mts., Prov  . Tehran (presently in Alborz Province), Arangeh, 25 km N. Karadj , 1550 m, 1.–6.vi.1972, Ebert & Falkner leg. (GS: HA-2036; 1897/2015, H. Rajaei). 

Remarks. Evergestis elbursalis  was described by Amsel (1961) based on two females collected in southern part of the Elburz Mt., and since then the male remained undescribed. In the present study, tracing specimens in both HMIMAbout HMIM and SMNKAbout SMNK revealed the availability of several males and females being collected in the same locality. Both sexes had the same wing pattern, and therefore, the male, which is below described, was considered to be conspesific with the female of E. elbursalis  .

Diagnosis. Evergestis elbursalis  is very close to E. frumentalis (Linnaeus, 1761)  . According to Amsel (1961), E. elbursalis  was smaller than E. frumentalis  , and the distance between ante-median and post-median lines in the forewing of E. elbursalis  was less than that of E. frumentalis  . Moreover, white markings at the inner side of postmedian line constituted a nearly continuous white band in E. elbursalis  comparing to ovoid white spots separated by darker veins in this area in E. frumentalis  ( Fig. 8E View Figure ). The latter character was also mentioned by Goater (2005).

Examination of the type specimen (♀) of E. elbursalis  ( Figs 8A, B View Figure ) and the material of both E. elbursalis  and E. frumentalis  preserved in the HMIMAbout HMIM, SMNKAbout SMNK and LUOMUS revealed that the size of specimens and width of the area between ante-median and post-median lines could not be considered as reliable diagnostic characters. For example, forewing length of the examined Iranian specimens of E. elbursalis  is x̅ = 13.14 mm ± 0.56 (n=22), while that of E. frumentalis  is x̅ = 12.77 mm ± 0.85 (n= 11). Moreover, distance between ante-median and post-median lines in the forewing of E. elbursalis  is imperceptibly less than that of E. frumentalis  and these two species can hardly be distinguished from each other using this character. As here also indicated, in the forewing of E. frumentalis  , the thin brown line at the outer part of post-median line is distinctly crenate ( Fig. 8E View Figure ). Meanwhile, in some specimens of E. frumentalis  , ovoid white spots at the inner side of post-median line are separated by darker veins, but in some others a white band with some transverse brown lines are visible in the inner side of crenate brown line, narrowing the identity of these specimens down to E. elbursalis  at the first glance. Based on the present study, the ante-median white line, which is slightly narrower and wavier in E. frumentalis  ( Fig. 8E View Figure ) seems to be a more reliable character.

Examination of the male genitalia of E. elbursalis  and E. frumentalis  revealed that main differences were the size and shape of clasper in valvae and the arrengment of teeth on ventral surface of gnathos. In E. frumentalis  clasper is as a relatively large sclerotized triangular to semi-spherical plate ( Fig. 9J View Figure ); while in E. elbursalis  it looks as a relatively small sclerotized flap ( Figs 9D, I View Figure ). Moreover, in E. elbursalis  the teeth on the ventral surface of gnathos are extended from the apex to slightly less than halfway along the shaft; while in E. fumentalis  they are extended to halfway along the shaft or slightly beyond it.

Examination of the female genitalia of E. elbursalis  and E. frumentalis  showed that the structure was very similar in these two species, in spite of showing some intraspecific variations. For example, in both species, there is a flap-like, and in some cases finger-shaped folding at the posterior end of ductus bursae just next to colliculum, near to the junction with ductus seminalis ( Figs 10A–F View Figure ). Also, some signs of sclerotization ( Fig. 10F View Figure ) or exceptionally a relatively large and distinctly sclerotized structure could sometimes be visible inside the folding. The latter character is observed in the female specimen of E. elbursalis  loaned from SMNKAbout SMNK, collected in Elburz Mt. (GS: HA-2036), ( Figs 10A, B View Figure ); however, in those examined specimens preserved in HMIMAbout HMIM, the folding has no distinct sclerotization inside ( Fig. 10C View Figure ). The same variation was observed in the female genitalia of E. frumentalis  . The female specimens loand from LUOMUS (GS: 2050/2016, 2051/2016, H. Rajaei) had no considerable sclerotization inside the folding ( Figs 10D, E View Figure ), and in several specimens preserved in HMIMAbout HMIM and the female specimen loand from SMNKAbout SMNK, some signs of sclerotization in that area was observed ( Fig. 10F View Figure ).

The male genitalia of E. elbursalis  is here described; however, due to the presence of much similarities both in males and females of E. elbursalis  and E. frumentalis  , these two species might be conspecific, and performing a molecular study is recommended.

Description of the male. Head ( Figs 9A–C View Figure ). Frons slightly slopped towards the palpi and pointed anteriomedially ( Fig. 9C View Figure ), covered with smooth, light brown to brown scales medially and white scales laterally just next to compound eyes; vertex covered with white scales; labial palpus porrect, 1.25–1.45 times the horizontal diameter of compound eye, the first segment covered with white scales externally, and the second and third segments covered with dirty-cream to light brown scales tinged with few white ones in the same view ( Figs 9B, C View Figure ); antennae roofed with dirty-cream scales dorsally and shortly ciliated ventrally; thorax covered with light brown to brown scales medially and white scales towards the lateral sides; tegula covered with light brown to brown scales except the posterior end which is white; dorsal abdominal scales brown and tinged with cream scales laterally.

Forewing ( Figs 8A–D View Figure ) almost triangular, with rounded apex and oblique termen; forewing length x̅ = 13.25 mm ±0.29 (n=4); ground color yellowish-brown to light brown ( Figs 8A, C View Figure ), with a relatively wide, and finely dentate white ante-median line positioned almost in the middle part of the wing, extended obliquely from below the costa towards the tornus with a distinct dent at its upper two-thirds, a relatively continuous narrower white post-median line edged distally by an irregulary sinuated brown line, a broken sub-terminal line, a clear brown discal spot at the upper two-thirds of the wing, and some white spots at the interior side of ante-median line; fringes chequered white and dark brown. Underside of the forewing brownish-fuscous with partly visible pattern ( Figs 8B, D View Figure ). Hindwing cream, light brown at distal corner and suffused darker along the veins, with a white post-median line edged proximally by a serrated brown line, and a white tornal streak; fringes same as the forewing but paler. Underside nearly same as the upperside, but brown line at the distal part of the post-median line more serrated comparing to the upperside ( Figs 8B, D View Figure ).

Male genitalia ( Figs 9D, E, G, H, I View Figure ) (n= 5). Uncus elongated, with a beak-shaped tip in lateral view; gnathos tapered and narrowed distally, with 8–14 teeth on its ventral surface extended from the apex to slightly less than halfway along the shaft ( Figs 9E, G View Figure ); valvae almost parallel sided, slightly oblique distally at lower half, costal margin thickened, especially at base, with prominent sacculus and relatively long hairs adjacent to it, a small flaplike and slightly sclerotized clasper, and a group of long, firm, bulbous based and backwardly directed hairs nearby ( Figs 9D, I View Figure ); juxta elongated; length of the proximal end of plallus slightly less than two times the distal end (= 1.55), containing ribbon bearing rows of short teeth and cornuti composed of two longitudinal slightly curved rows of dense and short spines positioned distally, distal end of phallus with paired brush-like pads ( Figs 9D, H View Figure ).

Distribution. Iran (S. Elburs) ( Amsel, 1961)


Jard� Bot�nic Marimurtra


Staatliches Museum fuer Naturkunde Karlsruhe (State Museum of Natural History)