Apanthesis leuce

Jong, Rienk De, 2017, Fossil butterflies, calibration points and the molecular clock (Lepidoptera: Papilionoidea), Zootaxa 4270 (1), pp. 1-63 : 31

leuce . Apanthesis leuce Scudder, 1889

Incertae sedis.

USA, Colorado , Teller County, Florissant; late Priabonian, late Eocene.

Depository: MCZH (holotype, 16354).

Published figures: Emmel et al. (1992: Fig. 1 /10); Scudder (1889: Pl. LII Figs. 12, 13 ).

One forewing only, with venation and design well preserved. Radial formula 1, 2, 3+(4+5), udc absent, M1, R3+(4+5) and mdc almost originating from the same point; ldc weak. According to Scudder, the radial branching is typical for the “tribe Vanessidi” ( Nymphalidae ), but I do not know what is so typical about it, except for the weak ldc. Comstock (1961: 181) observed a closer similarity to Limenitis , with which also the markings correspond with a uniformously brown hue with a submarginal band parallel to termen and consisting of light-coloured, slightly kidney-shaped spots, and vague spots between the band and termen in intervenal areas). Because Limenitis and Anaea share characters in the male genitalia, Comstock (1961) considered the discovery of Apanthesis leuce an indication of a northern origin of Anaea . This is, however, an unwarranted speculation. The venational arrangement could as well be plesiomorphic and is, for instance, also similar to the arrangement in the pierid genus Eronia . Euronia was considered a primitive member of the pierid tribe Pierini by Klots (1931) based on morphological grounds. Braby et al. (2006) concluded from a molecular analysis of the Pieridae , that Euronia was grouped in the Colotis group of genera, the first offshoot of the Pierinae . The weakness of ldc may be an argument in favor of Nymphalidae , but it remains to be seen whether in a fossil of some 35 Ma of age the weak ldc in, e.g., Limenitis , can be distinguished from the rather weak ldc in Eronia . The only reason for considering the fossil a member of the Nymphalidae is, therefore, the similarity in wing markings to some recent species, a rather weak argument. Emmel et al. (1992) followed Scudder's decision; they did not mention Comstock’s remarks. I think it is wise to consider the fossil as without clear affinities, as long as elements of the wing design remain unstudied in a phylogenetic context.

Figures

FIGURE 1. Localities of fossil butterflies plotted ion a modern map. See Table 1 for further, complementary information.

FIGURES 11 – 13. Ƒanessa pluto Heer, 1849. Figures copied from (1875), Plate II, figures 1, 17 and 7, respectively. (A), copied by Scudder from original description by Heer; (B) and (C), figures sent to Scudder by Mr. Brunner de Wattenwyl, made after the same object. Note differences in wing shape and other details. Figs 14 – 16. Thaites ruminiana Scudder, 1875. Figures copied from Scudder (1875), Plate III, figures 9, 1 and 3, respectively. (A), underside of fossil; (B), reconstruction of venation; (C), reconstruction of markings. In (A) two separate subcostal veins have been drawn in the forewing, an impossible configuration in Lepidoptera, and apparently a mistake, corrected in (B) and (C). Fig. 17. Cyllo sepulta Boisduval, 1841, wing venation after Scudder (1875). Fig. 18. Butterfly fossil recorded by Wangrin (1939), but shown to be a fraud by Ansorge (2015). Photo kindly provided by J. Ansorge, Horst, Germany (see text for explanation).