Tenedia Grishin, Zhang & Shen & Cong & Grishin, 2019

Zhang, Jing, Shen, Jinhui, Cong, Qian & Grishin, Nick V., 2019, Genomic analysis of the tribe Emesidini (Lepidoptera: Riodinidae), Zootaxa 4668 (4), pp. 475-488 : 481

Tenedia Grishin , subgen. n.

http://zoobank.org/ 44F6F565-F53A-41E4-9296-BF804919F115

Type species: Emesis tenedia C. & R. Felder, 1861.

Diagnosis. A large subgenus without apparent synapomorphy. Characterized by generally broader wings than other Emesis ( Fig. 2h ). It is best diagnosed by the lack of characters for other subgenera. Differs from the nominotypical subgenus by the lack of metallic spots, from Aphacitis by the lack of apical white spots in females, from Poeasia ( Fig. 2c ) by the lack of broad gray semi-metallic areas on wings, from Mandania ( Fig. 2b ) by less bulky body, and from Brimia ( Fig. 2d ) by relatively larger hindwings. In DNA, a combination of the following base pairs is diagnostic: nuclear genome: cne11306.1.2:T60A, cne5833.2.1:A108G, cne12476.6.1:A395G, cne18163.3.1: A186G, cne 2337.5.1:A603T; COI barcode region: T281R, T484M, G506A or G38A & T283A, and A520T.

Derivation of the name. The name is a feminine noun in the nominative singular. It is formed from the type species name.

pecies included: Emesis lupina melancholica Stichel, 1916 (elevated to species level below), Polystichtis ocypore Geyer, 1837 , Emesis angularis Hewitson, 1870 , Emesis sinuata Hewitson, 1877 , Emesis heterochroa Hopffer, 1874 , Emesis tenedia C. & R. Felder, 1861, Emesis saturata Godman & Salvin , [1886], Emesis cypria C. & R. Felder, 1861, Emesis tegula Godman & Salvin , [1886], Emesis lupina Godman & Salvin , [1886], Emesis toltec Reakirt, 1866 , Apodemia phyciodoides Barnes & Benjamin, 1924 .

Parent taxon: Genus Emesis Fabricius, 1807 .

Next, our genomic analysis revealed that some species placed in Emesis do not belong in that genus. In agreement with morphological analysis of Hall & Harvey (2002), genomic phylogeny places Emesis xanthosa (Stichel, 1919) as a sister of Sertania guttata ( Stichel, 1910) , the type species of a genus described recently ( Kaminski et al. 2017). The difference between COI barcodes of E. xanthosa and Sertania guttata is about 9%, similar to the difference of 8% between two genera Lasaia H. Bates, 1868 and Calephelis Grote & Robinson, 1869 , but larger that the difference of 6.5% between two subgenera Neoapodemia Trujano, 2018 and Plesioarida Trujano & García, 2018 . Therefore, similarly to Kaminski et al. (2017), we do not place xanthosa in Sertania , but a new genus is erected for it here.

Figures

FIGURE 2. Sequenced specimens of new genera and subgenera proposed in this study. Dorsal and ventral sides are shown on the left and right, respectively, with the image letter in between. Gray letter F indicates that the mirror image (left-right invert- ed) is shown. DNA sample numbers are indicated for specimens, see Table S1 for other data. a. Curvie emesia, NVG-18045F09, on the right are male genitalia (with a 0.5 mm scale bar) of the specimen NVG-11913, data as for NVG-11914 (Table S1), but eclosed on 15-Feb-1974; b. Emesis (Mandania) mandana, NVG-18044D09; c. Emesis (Poeasia) poeas, NVG-18044G04; d. Emesis (Brimia) brimo, NVG-18045E01; e. Xanthosa xanthosa syntype, NVG-18054D08; f. Xanthosa xanthosa syntype, NVG- 18054D09; g. Xanthosa xanthosa syntype, NVG-18054D10; h. Emesis (Tenedia) tenedia, NVG-18086H06; i. Befrostia elegia syntype male, NVG-18052H02; j. Befrostia elegia syntype male, Brazil, coll. H. Stichel, #1089, NVG-18052H04; k. Befrostia elegia syntype female, no data, NVG-18052H03; l. Befrostia lalannei holotype, NVG-18086H06.All syntypes shown are from the ZMHB collection.