Eupyrgota brahma (Hendel), comb. n. (fig. 5)

Adapsilia brahma Hendel, 1914: 85 .

Adapsilia nocturna Bezzi, 1914: 159, syn. n.

M a t e r i a l. Type. Holotype Ơ Adapsilia brahma: India: “ Nilgiris / S. India / Sir J. T. Hampson / 88.112”, “Suljuis 3000 [ft] 26/4/[18]89” “ Eupyrgota / Brahma, H. /det. Hendel”, “Type Ơ [red bordered circle]”, “Holo / type [red bordered circle]”, “Holotype Adapsila brahma Bezzi verified J. E. Chainey 2002”, “BMNH # 252156 ”. Directly pinned (BMNH). Holotype Ơ Adapsilia nocturna: India: “ Near Bhowali, Kumaon, / 5,700 ft / A. D. Imms 1910 / 18 June at light ”, “34”, “ Adapsila / nocturna /n. sp. / Type Ơ” (pink paper label with Bezzi’s handwriting), “Type / 1914.331 [red bordered circle]”, “Holo / type [red bordered circle]”, “Holotype Adapsila nocturna Bezzi verified J. E. Chainey 2002”, “BMNH # 252157 ”. Directly pinned (BMNH).

D i a g n o s i s. This species can be recognized from the combination of face with facial carina; no ocellar setae; epistoma high, half as high as antennal groove; parafacial in profile 1.7 times as wide as flagellomere 1 (fig. 5, 6, 7), mesonotal scutum brownish yellow with extensive black lyrate pattern; anterior portions of anepisternum and anepimeron, as well as anteroventral part of katepisternum black (fig. 5, 5); scutellum with at least two pairs of long golden yellow setae (setae partly broken); wing 13 mm long, grey, except yellow anterobasal margin and cell br, and large brown anteroapical spot; fore coxa unmodified; fore and mid trochanters without spinulose setulae; fore femur without long setae, except 2 subbasal ventral setae; setae in ventro-apical rows brown, spurious and moderately long (one-quarter to one-third as long as femur width); all femora mostly brown; tibia reddish or brownish yellow (fig. 5, 5); abdominal tergites brownish yellow, tergites 1–3 partly black (fig. 5, 9); sternites sparsely yellow setose; surstyli (exposed only in the holotype of A. brahma) long triangular (as in E. luteola: see Kim, Han, 2000: fig. 2G); most setae and setulae brown to reddish yellow.

R e m a r k s. As the holotypes of both nominal species are males (some sexually dimorphic characters remain unknown), the reason to place it in the nominative subgenus Eupyrgota (s. str.) is their large size and, in addition, spotted, as in many other Asian species of the nominative subgenus, wing pattern (rather than widely brown one, as in E. (Asipyrgota) flaviseta Aldrich: see below). The specimens show no essential differences in size and body coloration; they share the dark pleural and wing patterns, brown coloration of the moderately thin femora, comparatively strong spurious setae of the apicoventral rows. I therefore consider both holotypes to be conspecific and synonymize two nominal species. No females are known.

The paper by Hendel appeared in the beginning of 1914 in the volume of “Archiv für Naturgeschichte” for the year 1913, and Bezzi in his paper (published not earlier than in the August, 1914), referred to the species described by Hendel as to already published, with numbers of the pages. This undoubtedly shows the priority of the Hendel’s name.