Nemophora amatella ( Staudinger, 1892 )

Kozlov, Mikhail V., 2023, The identities of Nemophora augites (Meyrick, 1938) and Nemophora amatella (Staudinger, 1892): correction of misidentifications and description of a new species (Lepidoptera: Adelidae) from China, Zootaxa 5301 (1), pp. 94-104 : 98-102

Nemophora amatella ( Staudinger, 1892)

( Figs. 3‒6 , 9‒12 , 15 )

Adela amatella Staudinger 1892: 392 .

Lectotype ♁ (here designated): Mongolia, Hentiy province (originally spelled as Kentei) (approx. 48 o N, 111 o E); labelled: 6 × 10 mm, green paper, black ink ‘Kentei | [18]89. Dörr[ies].’; 8 × 25 mm, red paper, black ink ‘ Lectotype ♁ | Adela amatella | Staudinger 1892 | design. M. V. Kozlov 1994’ (ZMHB) [examined]. Paralectotypes: 1 ♁, labelled: 6 × 14 mm, blue pen ‘Kentei’ [recent labelling]. 1 ♁ (left wings missing), labelled: 9 × 13 mm, print + black ink ‘Ural | Zlatoust. | 16 Junii 1876’; 7 × 15 mm, black ink ‘Amatella | Alph.’; 3 × 26 mm, print ‘Amatella’; 5 × 19 mm, print + black ink ‘Gen. slide 1882 ♁ | E. Schmidt Nielsen’. 1 ♁, labelled: 3 × 17 mm, violet ink ‘[Georgia] Nakus 26 7 [18]80’; 4 × 10 mm, green paper, black ink ‘Caucas. | m. occ. Chr[istoph].’; 9 × 19 mm, yellowish paper, print + black ink ‘ Nemophora ♁ | degeerella L. | M. Kozlov det. 1999’. 1 ♀, labelled: 3 × 17 mm, violet ink ‘[Georgia] Nak[us] 26 7 [18]80’; 6 × 14 mm, blue pen, ‘Caucas.’; 9 × 19 mm, yellowish paper, print + black ink ‘ Nemophora ♀ | degeerella L. | M. Kozlov det. 1999’. All paralectotypes bear the label: 8 × 25 mm, red paper, black ink ‘ Paralectotype ♁ (or ♀) | Adela amatella | Staudinger 1892 | design. M. V. Kozlov 1994’ (ZMHB) [examined].

Adela degeerella L. var. amurensis Hoffmann 1893: 136 . Syntypes (unknown numbers of ♁ and ♀): Finland, surroundings of Kuusamo (approx. 66 o N, 29 o E); whereabouts unknown (see comments) .

Adela coreana Matsumura 1931: 1109 , fig. 2322.

Lectotype ♀: [South] Korea, labelled: 4 × 10 mm, print ‘ Corea | Okamoto’; 5 × 7 mm [Koriku | 22.V | Inoue]’ (in Japanese) (cited as ‘ Corea, Gwangrung, 5.V., Inoue’ by Park 1986: 108); 7 × 16 mm, red paper, print ‘Type | Matsumura’; 10 × 20 mm, red paper, black ink ‘Lecto-type | Nemotois | coreana | MATSUMURA’ (SEHU, designated by Razowski & Kumata 1985: 7–8) [examined]. Paralectotype ♁: labelled: 5 × 7 mm ‘[Koriku | 8.10 | Inoue]’ (in Japanese); 8 × 22 mm, black ink ‘ Adela coreana | Mats.’ (SEHU) [examined].

Nemotois degeerella f. ogasawarai Matsumura 1932: 123 , Pl. 4, fig. 9. Holotype ♁: Japan, Honshu, Iwate prefecture (approx. 39 o 30′ N, 141 o 30′ E); labelled: 4 × 12 mm, print ‘ Iwate | ogasawara’, reverse side, black ink ‘34[1901].VI.3’; 4 × 17 mm, red paper, print ‘Type | Matsumura’, reverse side, black ink ‘A. | ogasawarai’; 8 × 20 mm, black ink ‘ Adela | degeerella’ (SEHU) [examined].

Other material. I refrain from listing here the 300+ investigated specimens of N. amatella from the entire distribution range, because an extensive within-species variation (see below) may indicate that N. amatella , in parallel to N. degeerella ( Linnaeus, 1758) ( Kozlov et al. 2017) , consists of a complex of cryptic species. For the same reason I do not provide a full bibliography for this species.

Diagnosis. Differs from all externally similar species by the combination of large moth size, relatively wide wings, prominent yellow longitudinal stripes outside the forewing fascia (this character may not be valid for some females) and presence of two finger-like processes at the apex of phallus. From N. yunnanica ( Fig. 2 ) it also differs by the glossy bronze frons.

Description. Male ( Figs. 3‒5 ). FWL 8.7‒11.2 mm, WLR 0.32‒0.34. Head colour variable: vertex of specimens from Fennoscandia is yellow or ochreous, with admixture of brownish piliform scales; specimens from Altai (Siberia) and Kamchatka have brown vertex and sparse light yellow piliform scales between antennal sockets; specimens from Primorye, Japan and Korea have black vertex and yellowish-brown piliform scales between antennal sockets. Frons bronze. PLB 1.25‒1.65 × vertical eye diameter, light yellow, with raised brown scales. Proboscis yellow. Eyes not enlarged; interocular index 0.5‒0.6. Antenna 3.1‒3.4 × FWL; pegs present. Scape and basal part (about 0.25) of flagellum dark coppery brown; apical part of flagellum light yellowish-brown. Tegulae bronze, marginally purplish; thorax golden. Forewing ( Figs. 9, 10, 12 ) from ochreous yellow basally to dark brown, sometimes with purplish tint, apically; inner margin of fascia at 0.50‒0.55 × FWL. Fascia variable in width, with straight to wave-shaped medial yellow band, which is about the same width at costa and dorsum but narrower in the medial part, slightly oblique in some specimens; yellow band on both sides is bordered by narrow dark bands, which are brown marginally and grey to metallic-blue medially. Longitudinal stripes in basal part of forewing variable, from thin brown lines to wide bronze stripes bordered by dark brown scales. Pattern of the apical part usually with 9‒10 yellow stripes reaching 0.4‒0.9 of the distance between external margin of fascia and wing apex; the extent of these stripes is variable, from very wide (dark lines separating yellow rays do not reach fascia) to very narrow, sometimes reduced to narrow yellow band adjacent to fascia. Fringe brown to coppery brown. Hindwing brown; costal area yellowish-grey; fringe brown to grey. Legs light yellow; tibiae and tarsal segments apically brown. Epiphysis at 0.5, not reaching apex of tibia. Abdomen dark brown.

Female ( Figs. 6 , 11 ). FWL 8.2‒8.9 mm, WLR 0.30‒0.35. Antenna 1.1‒1.2 × FWL; basal half thickened by dark brown semi-erect scales. Forewing pattern more variable than in males; some specimens do not have longitudinal stripes at all ( Fig. 11 ). Otherwise similar to male.

Male genitalia ( Fig. 15 ). Tegumen dome-shaped, in some specimens with distinct medial ridge. Socii oval, 1.5 × diameter of phallus. Vinculum 1.9‒2.7 × length of valva, with straight to slightly concave lateral margins and nearly straight distal margin. Tip of tegumen extends beyond tips of valvae. Valvae variable in shape: specimens from Fennoscandia and Altai exhibit almost straight ventral margin and clearly pointed tip, whereas specimens from Primorye, Kamchatka and Japan usually have deep incess on ventral margin and broadly rounded tip of valva. Valvae fused basally up to 0.25‒0.35 × total length; internal margins usually invisible. In lateral view valvar base is wave-shaped; dorsal margin slightly emarginate. Anellus 0.4 × length of valva. Transtilla with long medial process. Juxta 0.5‒0.6 × length of phallus; arrow head narrow (WLR 0.38‒0.45), with pointed tip and short pointed lateral arms. Phallus 1.1‒1.3 × length of vinculum, almost straight; tip funnel-shaped, with two finger-like processes at the base of the apical funnel; base of phallus from very narrow (of the same width as a medial part of phallus) to widely funnel-shaped.

Biology. An early summer ( May to July ) swarming species. In Southern Primorye ( Russia) it is common in broadleaved forests. The swarm may contain up to 50 males; swarming sessions continue for 3‒4 min with 1‒2 min intervals. Swarming sites are constant over the years; migration of individuals between swarms has not been recorded. When a female enters a swarm, males approach it and attempt to copulate. After copulation, which occurs during a flight, the pair lands ( Kozlov 1986) .

Distribution. Sweden, Norway, Finland, Russia (from the Kola Peninsula to Primorye and Kamchatka; for the complete list of 21 Russian regions, see Kozlov 2019), Mongolia, Japan (Hokkaido, Honshu), Northern Korea, Southern Korea. The occurrence in Northern China requires confirmation (see below).

Comments. The name ‘ Adela amatella ’ was published by Staudinger (1892), even though he attributed this name to Alphéraky who never published the description. The syntypes of N. amatella (deposited in ZMHB) include three specimens of N. amatella and two specimens of N. deceptoriella Kozlov, Mutanen, Lee & Huemer, 2017 , which in 1999 were misidentified by me as N. degeerella ( Linnaeus, 1758) . The latter two specimens were collected in surroundings of either Borzhomi or Bakuriani, which are located in Georgia some 16 km apart. Although Christoph (1881a) did not provide exact dates for this period of his collecting trip in this region, the collection date of two syntypes (26 July 1880) lies between 6 July, when he captured a specimen of Lithosia quadra ( Linnaeus, 1758) in Borzhomi, and 8 August, when he captured another specimen of L. quadra in Bakuriani ( Dubatolov et al. 2016). The lectotype of N. amatella is designated in accordance with the current use of this name ( Kyrki 1981, Kozlov 1997b, 2004). The composite nature of the type series, along with pronounced variation in both external and genital characters, explains the difficult taxonomic history of N. amatella . Interestingly, the syntypes of N. coreana also belong to different species: the lectotype is a female of N. amatella ( Kozlov 1997b) , but the paralectotype is a male of N. staudingerella ( Christoph, 1881b) ( Park 1986) .

The name ‘ Adela degeerella var. amurensis ’ was for a long time attributed to Alphéraky (1897), who used this name for a male collected from Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskij, Russia (deposited in ZIN). However, I currently found that this name was first published by Hoffmann (1893) based on specimens collected in northern Finland. Most likely, both Hoffmann and Alphéraky based their identifications on specimens from Amur, which were received by Staudinger already in 1880, but have not been distinguished from N. degeerella at that time ( Wocke 1880).

One specimen of N. amatella collected by Hoffmann in Kuusamo is kept in MZH (L. Kaila, pers. comm.). However, there exists no proof that this specimen is a syntype.Anyhow, the taxonomic identity of N. amurensis does not cause any doubts at this time. In particular, DNA barcoding revealed practically no differences between N. amatella specimens collected in Finland and in Eastern Russia (Buryatia and Chita) (M. Mutanen, pers. comm.). Therefore, I do not see any need in designation of either a lectotype or a neotype of Adela degeerella var. amurensis .

Despite the priority of N. amatella over N. amurensis , N. amatella was considered as a junior synonym of N. amurensis by Rebel (1901; as Adela degeerella v.? amatella ), Meyrick (1912a, b; as Nemotois amurensis ), Matsumura (1932; as Nemotois amurensis ) and Inoue (1954; as Nemophora amurensis ). In Northern Europe N. amatella has been collected for a long time, but was routinely misidentified as N. degeerella . In particular, at least one of a few specimens from Swedish Lapland (deposited in MZLU: https://www.flickr.com/photos/127240649@N08/29627570464/ in/album-72157673736485661/ and https://www.flickr.com/photos/127240649@N08/30640874524/in/album-72157676959634786/), referred to as ‘ Adela degeerella ’ by Zetterstedt (1840), belongs to N. amatella ; and the remaining specimens likely belong to N. degeerella and Adela croesella ( Scopoli, 1763) . After Hoffmann (1893), only Petersen (1924) referred to ‘ Adela degeerella var. amurensis Staudinger’ from Europe until the differences between N. degeerella , N. amatella (cited as N. amurensis ) and N. bellela ( Walker, 1863) (cited as N. esmarkella ( Wocke, 1864)) were explicitly stated by Kyrki (1981). Nemophora amurensis was synonymized with N. amatella by Varis et al. (1995). Nemophora ogasawarai was erroneously synonymized with N. staudingeriella by Moriuti (1982), but then synonymized with N. amatella by Kozlov (1997b).

A wide distribution range of N. amatella (see above) and its previous report from northeastern China ( Liu 1983) hints that N. amatella may also have been misidentified and reported as another species by Sun et al. (2022). In particular, N. purpuratifera Sun, Wang & Li, 2022 , could appear a junior synonym of N. amatella , but the details provided in the original description ( Sun et al. 2022) are insufficient to either accept or reject this assumption with sufficient level of confidence. Importantly, N. purpuratifera and/or some other species described by Sun et al. (2022) may appear junior synonyms of N. kukunorensis ( Sauber, 1899) and/or N. badioumbratella ( Sauber, 1899) . Both these species, which were described from the surroundings of Koko nor (originally spelled as Kuku-nor) lake in Northern China (approx. 37 o N, 100 o E), were synonymized with N. amatella by Küppers (1980) and Caradja (1920), respectively. However, identities of both species described by Sauber (1899) remain uncertain and require further examination.

Figures

FIGURES 1–6. Adults of Nemophora spp. 1, N. augites (Meyrick, 1938), male, lectotype, from Lijiang, Yunnan, China; 2, N. yunnanica Kozlov, sp. nov., male, holotype, from Lijiang, Yunnan, China; 3, N. amatella (Staudinger, 1892), male, from Gornotaiezhnoe, Primorskij krai, Russia; 4, ditto, male, from Vinogradovka, Primorskij krai, Russia; 5, ditto, male, from Vladivostok, Primorskij krai, Russia; 6, ditto, female, from Gornotaiezhnoe, Primorskij krai, Russia. Scale: 2 mm.

FIGURES 7–12. Forewing pattern of Nemophora spp. 7, N. augites (Meyrick, 1938), male, lectotype, from Lijiang, Yunnan, China; 8, N. yunnanica Kozlov, sp. nov., male, holotype, from Lijiang, Yunnan, China; 9, N. amatella (Staudinger, 1892), male, lectotype, from Hentiy province, Mongolia; 10, ditto, male, from Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskij, Kamchatskij krai, Russia; 11, ditto, female, lectotype of Adela coreana Matsumura, 1931, from South Korea; 12, ditto, male, holotype of Nemotois degeerella f. ogasawarai Matsumura, 1932, from Iwate prefecture, Honshu, Japan. Scale: 2 mm.

FIGURES 13–15. Male genitalia of Nemophora spp. 13, N. augites (Meyrick, 1938), lectotype, gen. prep. 27828 (NHM); 14, N. yunnanica Kozlov, sp. nov., holotype (MINGA); 15, N. amatella (Staudinger, 1892), lectotype (ZMHB); a: genital complex, ventral view (right valva not shown); b: genital complex, lateral view; c: juxta; d: phallus, ventral view; e: phallus, lateral view. Scale: 0.5 mm.