Zischkaia abanico Nakahara & Petit

Nakahara, Shinichi, Zacca, Thamara, Dias, Fernando M. S., Dolibaina, Diego R., Xiao, Lei, Espeland, Marianne, Casagrande, Mirna M., Mielke, Olaf H. H., Lamas, Gerardo, Huertas, Blanca, Kleckner, Kaylin & Willmott, Keith R., 2019, Revision of the poorly known Neotropical butterfly genus Zischkaia Forster, 1964 (Lepidoptera, Nymphalidae, Satyrinae), with descriptions of nine new species, European Journal of Taxonomy 551, pp. 1-67: 44-46

publication ID

https://doi.org/10.5852/ejt.2019.551

publication LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:pub:C3C851C3-0F12-412C-A15B-56F0F263CD00

DOI

http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.3477372

persistent identifier

http://treatment.plazi.org/id/ECB82262-F5E0-4C0A-9FDB-468065263D73

taxon LSID

lsid:zoobank.org:act:ECB82262-F5E0-4C0A-9FDB-468065263D73

treatment provided by

Plazi

scientific name

Zischkaia abanico Nakahara & Petit
status

sp. nov.

Zischkaia abanico Nakahara & Petit   , sp. nov.

urn:lsid:zoobank.org:act:

Figs 1 View Fig , 2 View Fig W–X, 4 View Fig H, 14 View Fig , 15 View Fig C

Diagnosis

Zischkaia abanico   sp. nov. is readily distinguishable from other species in the “ pacarus   clade” by the shape of the apical portion of the valva, which is somewhat rectangular with a convex (i.e., projecting) distal margin in lateral view, whereas the apical process of the valva is more triangular in other species of Zischkaia   , except for Z. pacarus   . Zischkaia abanico   sp. nov. and Z. pacarus   are in fact similar in terms of the shape of the valva, as well as other external characters, including wing pattern, and these two taxa cannot be distinguished externally, although our DNA ‘barcodes’ data clearly suggest they are not conspecific (see Fig. 1 View Fig ). In fact, these two taxa can be distinguished by their range, with Z. abanico   sp. nov. known from the slopes of the Andes from Colombia to Ecuador and Z. pacarus   known from southern and southeastern Brazil to northeastern Argentina. We do not know of any putative female specimen for this species.

Etymology

The specific epithet is based on the name of the river, Río Abanico, which flows below the ridge where the holotype was captured; the site is thus referred to as as the ‘Abanico ridge’ among lepidopterists. This specific epithet is considered as a latinized masculine noun in apposition.

Type material examined

Holotype

ECUADOR • ♂; “//11926 Euptychia   sp. 2002, 1213 Ecuador 9 de Octubre, M-Sgo [Morona-Santiago], 1600m JCP// DNA voucher LEP-37388// prep. genit. 575 19.07.2017 / J.Lorenc Zischkaia   sp Nueve do Octubre Ecuador //”; JEPE, to be deposited in MZUJ.  

Other material examined (2 ♂♂)

COLOMBIA – Cauca • 2 ♂♂; Popayán; [2°27′ N, 76°36′ W]; Lehmann leg.; BMNH(E)-10430710 to BMNH(E)-10430711; NHMUK GoogleMaps   .

Description

Male

FOREWING LENGTH. 23 mm (n = 1).

HEAD. Eyes naked, with grayish scales at base. Frons brownish. Post-genal area with lightly colored long hair-like scales and grayish scales. Labial palpi with first segment mostly with brownish long hairlike scales; second segment length almost twice as great as eye depth and adorned with brown scales laterally, dorsally mostly with light brownish long hair-like scales, ventrally adorned with brownish and white hair-like scales, about 3-4 times as long as segment width; third segment about two-fifth of second segment in length and covered with brownish scales, ventrally with brownish hair-like scales, with slight patch of creamy-white scales laterally. Antennae approximately two-fifth of forewing length, with ca 39 segments (n = 1), distal 13–15 segments composing club, club not prominent.

THORAX. Dorsally, laterally and ventrally scattered with grayish scales with long multi-colored hair-like scales.

LEGS. Foreleg brownish, foretarsus slightly shorter than tibia, femur similar to tarsus in length; midleg and hindleg with femur creamy white ventrally, tibia and tarsus grayish dorsally, whitish ventrally, tarsus and tibia spined ventrally, and a pair of tibial spurs present at distal end of tibia.

ABDOMEN. Eighth tergite as stripe at base of eighth abdominal segment, in addition to presence of distal broader patch.

WING VENATION. Most of forewing Subcostal swollen; base of Cubitus swollen; forewing recurrent vein absent; origin of M 2 towards M 1 than M 3. Hindwing Humeral developed.

WING SHAPE. Forewing subtriangular, apex rounded, costal margin convex, outer margin slightly convex (almost straight, but see also below), inner margin straight, but rounded towards thorax near base; hindwing slightly elongate, rounded, costal margin almost straight, angled towards thorax near base, outer margin slightly undulating, inner margin slightly concave near tornus, anal lobe convex, slightly round.

DORSAL FOREWING. Ground color light brownish, distally slightly paler; black androconial scales, not prominent, present in middle of DFW, from base to submedian area; trace of submarginal and marginal band almost invisible.

DORSAL HINDWING. Ground color similar to forewing, black androconial scales present in discal cell and adjacent area, not as prominent as DFW; trace of submarginal band almost invisible (clearly absent in one specimen).

VENTRAL FOREWING. Ground color light chestnut brown; submedian line invisible; dark brown narrow median line extends from near costa to Cu 2 -2A, in slightly outward diagonal direction, concolorous slightly sinuate submarginal line extending from apex towards tornus, but terminates around 2A; concolorous marginal line, narrower than submarginal line, extending from apex towards tornus, but terminates around 2A; fringe dark brownish.

VENTRAL HINDWING. Ground color similar to forewing; regular dark-brown submedian line almost straight, extending from costal to inner margin, passing origin of M 1; median line almost parallel to submedian line, concolorous, similar in width, passing origin of M 3, and posterior end bent inwards in 2A-3A; submarginal line extending from apex towards tornus, undulating, posterior end slightly broadening and apparently fused to submedian line in 2A-3A; marginal line, concolorous, slightly undulating along outer margin, thinner than submarginal line; submarginal ocelli from Rs to 2A (ocellus in Rs-M 1 absent in one specimen), rounded, pupil appear as scattered silverish scales placed rather distally, black central spot ringed with orangish ring then with thin dark brownish indistinct ring, ocellus in Rs-M 1 smallest, if present; bright silvery purple ground color visible between submedian line and submarginal line when seen under light; fringe dark brownish.

GENITALIA ( Fig. 4H View Fig ). Tegumen rounded in lateral view, elongated posterior projection of tegumen developed, apparently slightly shorter than uncus, tapering posteriorly and hooked at terminal point; combination of ventral arms of tegumen and dorsal arms of saccus sinuous, broadens towards saccus; appendices angulares present, but somewhat reduced; saccus anterior half slightly curved upwards, similar to uncus in length; uncus long and narrow, sparsely with hair-like setae, curved ventrally, rounded at terminal point, posterior end of ventral margin appearing as small projection; either side of base of uncus with hair-like setae; brachia similar to uncus in length, slightly narrower, curved in lateral view, tapering posteriorly and crossing over each other near terminal point; fultura inferior present; valva subtriangular in lateral view, apical process subtriangular, somewhat pointy distal end, scarcely covered by hairy-like setae; costa developed and triangular, dorsal margin slightly sinuous; phallobase slightly shorter than phallus in length, curved; ductus ejaculatorius not examined; aedeagus straight with manica not examined, winglet present, distal opening located ventrally where vesica is visible.

Female

Unknown or unrecognized.

Variation

The FW outer margin is more curved in the holotype, whereas it is straighter in the two examined specimens from Colombia; the VHW median line is wavy below the origin of M 3 in the holotype, whereas it is rather straight in the two Colombian specimens.

Distribution ( Fig. 14 View Fig )

This species is known from two localities only, the eastern Andes of Ecuador (Morona-Santiago) ( Fig. 15C View Fig ) and the Cauca valley in Colombia (Cauca). However, there is some doubt about the reliability of the latter locality, as discussed further below.

Remarks

We excluded from the type series the two male specimens from Popayán, Colombia, listed above, despite the male genitalia of the dissected specimen (BMNH(E)-10430711) being identical to that of the holotype male, in particular in the apical portion of the valva being somewhat rectangular with a convex (i.e., projecting) distal margin in lateral view. However, given the absence of other specimens of this evidently rare species from Colombia or other localities in northern Ecuador, and the otherwise low overlap in the butterfly fauna between Morona-Santiago and the Cauca valley, we considered it reasonably likely that the Colombian specimens might have been mislabeled. In particular, there are several mislabeled specimens of Ithomiini   ( Nymphalidae   ) in the NHMUK also labeled as having been collected by Lehmann in Popayán, Colombia, including Dircenna loreta loreta Haensch, 1903   (a lowland west Amazonian taxon, 1 ♂), Melinaea marsaeus mothone (Hewitson, 1860)   (an east Andean foothill taxon, 1 ♂) and Hypothyris ninonia daeta (Boisduval, 1836)   (Southeastern Brazil, 2 ♂♂). Notably, the last mentioned taxon occurs within the range of Z. pacarus   , so it is possible that the two Colombian specimens are actually mislabeled Z. pacarus   . Thus, although Popayán is a somewhat plausible locality for this species, and certainly this taxon should be searched for in Colombia, we decided to treat the presence of this species in Colombia as requiring confirmation.

NHMUK

Natural History Museum, London