Volume 63 Number 4 December 14, 2009 ISSN 0024-0966 Journal of the Lepidopterists' Society Published quarterly by The Lepidopterists' Society THE LEPIDOPTERISTS’ SOCIETY Executive Council John Shuey, President Soren Nylin, Vice President John PL Acorn, Immediate Past President Michael E. Toliver, Secretary Joaquin Baixeras, Vice President Kelly M. Richers, Treasurer M arcelo Duarte, Vice President Members at large: Stephanie Shank Richard Brown Charles Harp Charles V. Covell, Jr. Todd Stout Dan Rubinoff Editorial Board John W. Brown (Chair) Michael E. Toliver ( Member , at large) Brian Scholtens (Journal) Law rence F. Gall (Memoirs) Dale Clark (News) John A. Snyder ( Website ) Honorary Life Members of the Society Lincoln P. Brower (1990), Frederick H. Rindge (1997), Ronald W. Hodges (2004) Charles V. Covell, Jr. (2009), Don R. Davis (2009) The object of The Lepidopterists’ Society, which was formed in May 1947 and formally constituted in December 1950, is “to pro¬ mote the science of lepidopterology in all its branches, ... to issue a periodical and other publications on Lepidoptera, to facilitate the exchange of specimens and ideas by both the professional worker and the amateur in the field; to secure cooperation in all mea¬ sures” directed towards these aims. Membership in the Society is open to all persons interested in the study of Lepidoptera. All members receive the Journal and the News of The Lepidopterists’ Society. Prospective members should send to the Assistant Treasurer full dues for the current year, to¬ gether with their full name, address, and special lepidopterological interests. In alternate years a list of members of the Society is is¬ sued, with addresses and special interests. Active members — annual dues $45.00 within the U.S., $50.00 outside the U.S. Affiliated members — annual dues $10.00 within the U.S., $15.00 outside the U.S. Student members — annual dues $20.00 within the U.S., $25.00 outside the U.S. Sustaining members — annual dues $60.00 within the U.S., $65.00 outside the U.S. Life members — single sum $1,800.00 Institutional subscriptions — annual $60.00, $65.00 outside the U.S. Airmail postage for the News $15.00. $30.00 outside North America (U.S., Canada, Mexico) Send remittances, payable to The Lepidopterists’ Society, to: Kelly M. Richers, Treasurer, 9417 Carvalho Court, Bakersfield, CA 93311; and address changes to; Julian P Donahue, Natural History Museum, 900 Exposition Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90007-4057. For information about the Society, contact: Ernest II. Williams, Department of Biology, Hamilton College, Clinton, NY7 13323. To order back issues of the Memoirs, write for availability and prices to Kenneth B. Bliss, 28 DuPont Avenue, Piscataway, NJ 08854. Kim Garwood Kenn Kaufman Harry Zirlin The additional cost for members outside the U.S. is to cover mailing costs. Journal of The Lepidopterists’ Society (ISSN 0024-0966) is published quarterly by The Lepidopterists’ Society, c/o Los Angeles County Museum of Natural History, 900 Exposition Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90007-4057. Periodicals postage paid at Los Angeles, CA and at additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Lepidopterists" Society, % Natural History Museum, 900 Exposition Blvd., Los Angeles, CA 90007-4057. Cover Illustration; Above: dorsal habitus of holotype of Suinoorda maccabei n. sp. Below: head of paratype of the same, collected 15 April 1986 by T.L. McCabe, in the CUIC, showing the greatly expanded frontoclypeus. Images by James Hayden. See journal article on page 185. Volume 63, Number 4 185 Journal of the Lepiclopterists’ Society 63(4), 2009,185-208 ^JWTHSO FEB 22 2017 ■Libraries, A NEW GENUS OF CARIBBEAN ODONTIINAE WITH PALAEOTROPICAL AFFINITIES (LEPIDOPTERA: CRAMBIDAE) James E. Hayden 2144 Comstock Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca, NY 14853 USA, email: jeh63@cornell.edu ABSTRACT. Suinoorda maccabei gen. et sp. nov. is described from the Bahama Islands and Cuba. Cladistic analysis of the Eurrhypini (39 terminals, 48 characters) tests the phylogenetic relationships of the species and confirms that it is the earliest-diverging member of an otherwise Palaeotropical elade characterized by a modified plectrum of the eurrhvpine genitalic stridulatory apparatus. The new species is not closely re¬ lated to other Neotropical Eurrhypini with similar but plesiomorphic or convergent maculation. The nomenclatural status of other Eurrhypini is revised. Clupeosoma orientalale (Viette) comb. nov. and Clupeosoma vohilavale (Marion & Viette) comb. nov. are transferred from Au¬ tocharts Swinhoe, Noordocles magnijicalis (Rothschild), comb. nov. is transferred from Noorda Walker, and Hyalinarcha hijalinalis (Hampson), comb. nov. is transferred from Boeotarcha Meyrick. Metrea Grote is synonymized with Cliniodes Guenee, syn. nov., and the synonymy of Ba- songa Moschler with Cliniodes is reinstated. Missing data for female genitalia and larval feeding habit are predicted with a simple method. Additional key words: Stridulation, seed feeding, frontal structure, diagnosis, missing data INTRODUCTION The purpose of this paper is to describe and diagnose a new, phylogenetically unique species of snout moth from the West Indies. In the course of my studies on the Neotropical Eurrhypini Leraut & Luquet (Crambidae: Odontiinae), T.L. McCabe brought to my attention a series of specimens that he collected in 1986 on Great Exuma, Bahama Islands. I subsequently found in the Museum fur Tierkunde (Dresden) one specimen collected in 2000 by }.-P. Rudloff in eastern Cuba. The male specimens significantly resemble other tropical Eurrhypini in having almost entirely white forewings with the antemedial line nearly absent, a black discocellar spot, and a simple, narrow, reddish terminal band (Fig. 1). This pattern occurs in Neotropical eurrhypines such as Argyrarcha Munroe, Sobanga Munroe, and Cliniodes paradisalis (Moschler) (Fig. 4), as well as in Palaeotropical genera such as Autocharts Swinhoe and Pseudonoorda Munroe (Fig. 3). Dissection of males confirmed its placement in the Eurrhypini and more precisely with a group of genera that share an unusual, hitherto unrecognized modification of the genitalic structures that characterize the tribe (Figs. 8, 9) (Leraut & Luquet 1983). Its closest relatives are restricted to the Palaeotropics, ranging from Africa to New Guinea; some of these genera share the wing pattern (e.g. Pseudonoorda), and others do not ( Clupeosoma Snellen). However, the new species also shares symplesiomoqdhes with members outside the group. Most strikingly, the frontoclypeal suture, just above the base of the haustellum, is exaggerated in a porcine snout of nearly circular shape (Fig. 5). This appears to be homologous to the distinctly upturned frontoclypeus of Autocharts and Dicepolia Snellen (Fig. 6). The new species also has plesiomorphic forewing venation and genitalic androconia. A new genus seemed necessary, but hesitating to add another name to an already nomenclaturally atomized subfamily, I tested its relationships by cladistic analysis. The genitalic structures relate to the diagnosis of the Eurrhypini. The tribe includes nearly two hundred species in about four dozen genera, with greatest diversity in Palaeotropical forests. The tribe has been characterized by three apomorphies of the male genitalia: (1) a pair of “lamelliform structures” on the 8th abdominal sternite (Leraut & Luquet 1983), (2) a pair of large, square to oblong “squamiform structures” attached to the vinculum (Minet 1980; Figs. 8, 9: Sq), and (3) a plume of long scales in medial position on the vinculum (Nuss & Kallies 2001). The second and third structures have been confused in previous studies (see Discussion), but in this paper, I identify the squamiform structures with the two square membranes. The lamelliform structures are bundles of a few robust chaetiform setae cemented together and directed posteriad. The ehaetae apparently rub against the numerous transverse ridges of the squamiform structures. The structures been observed to have a stridulatory function for male courtship in one species, Syntonarcha iriastis Meyrick of Australia and Wallacea (Gwynne & Edwards 1986), but none of the many other species with the apparatus have yet been studied. The squamiform and lamelliform structures in S. iriastis are strongly modified, so the species was omitted from this analysis. In the new species and its Palaeotropical relatives, the lamelliform structures are absent from the eighth 186 Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society sternite (S8) and appear to be functionally replaced by a pair of lozenge- or ribbon-like fields on the intersegmental membrane between S8 and the vinculum, just anterior of the squamiform structures (Fig. 8: Sep). These sclerotized fields bear transverse ridges so that the outline and texture are reminiscent of cuttlebones. Reflecting the terminology of Minet (1980) and Leraut & Luquet (1983), I refer to these as striicturae sepiformes (Gk. sepion, euttlebone). The Odontiinae has not been subject to previous phylogenetic analysis, except as a terminal taxon (Solis & Maes 2002). The results demonstrate that the new species is not closely related to several other Neotropical odontiines, despite shared wing patterns and head structures. In addition, explicit predictions are derived from the phylogeny about unobserved characters, including unknown feeding habits. Generic transfers are made where evidence is sufficient, but broad nomenclatural changes are not made pending a larger sample of species and characters (Hayden in prep.). MATERIALS AND METHODS Taxa. The thirty-nine species selected for phylogenetic analysis include Eurrhypini that share similar wing pattern and/or sepiform structures. All known Neotropical Eurrhypini that resemble the new species in maculation are included. The type species of genera were included wherever possible. Two Odontiini serve as outgroups: Cijnaeda dentalis (Denis & Schiffermiiller, 1775), the type species and genus of the Odontiini, and Tegostoma comparale (Hiibner, 1796). The ingroup taxa are listed in Table 1 with information about slide preparations. For the external characters of many species, additional specimens were examined from the same collections. Species used in this analysis were identified by comparison with original descriptions, digital photographs of type material, and revisions and faunal treatments. The Neotropical eurrhypine genera were transferred in Munroe (1995). Leraut & Luquet (1983: 528) indicated that Hijalinarcha Munroe, Metreci Grote, Figs. 1-6. Dorsal habitus of wings and frontoclypeus. 1, Suinoorda maccabei holotype 6, right half. 2, S. maccabei paratype 9, left half (reflected) (McCabe Coll.). 3, Pseudonoorda distigmalis 9 (Congo, Likouala Region: CMNH). 4, Cliniodes paradisalis (Ja¬ maica, Moneague: AMNH). 5, S. maccabei 6, frontal aspect of head. 6, Dicepolia rufitinctalis, frontal aspect of head (USNM). Fc, frontoclypeus; CH, prothoracic coxal hairs. Volume 63, Number 4 187 Pseudonoorda, and Viettessa Mine! belong in the Eurrhypini based on possession of the apomorphic structures. The following Old-World genera used in this study are hereby placed in the Eurrhypini because their type species possess the structures: Aeglotis Amsel, Autocharts, Clupeosoma, Deanolis Snellen, Ephelis Lederer, Hemiscopis Warren, Heortia Lederer, Hijdrorybina Hampson, Noordodes Hampson, and Pitama Moore. The following misplaced species are transferred to the Eurrhypini for the same reason: Epipagis ocellata (Hampson 1916) and Mecuna catalalis Viette 1953. The terminal “Pseudonoorda brunneiflava” is a composite of two species: the female is identified as Pseudonoorda brunneiflava Munroe, and the male is a closely related undescribed species. The new species has the forewing postmedial line closer to the distal wing edge and the terminal area yellow like the median area, rather than violet. Consequently, the wing pattern (char. 4) is coded as both states because P. brunneiflava and P. metalloma have a violet terminal area. The following sources provided specimens used in this analysis: American Museum of Natural Histoiy, New York (AMNH); Academy of Natural Sciences, Philadelphia (ANSP); Carnegie Museum of Natural Histoiy, Pittsburgh (CMNH); Canadian National Collection of Insects, Arachnids and Nematodes, Ottawa (CNC); Cornell University Insect Collection, Ithaca (CUIC); Instituto Nacional de Biodiversidad, Costa Rica (INBio); Museum d'Histoire Naturelle, Geneve (MIING); Museo del Instituto de Zoologia Agricola, Maracay (MIZA); Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle, Paris (MNHN); The Natural Histoiy Museum, London (NIIM); New York State Museum, Albany (NYSM); Musee Royal de l'Afrique Centrale, Tervuren (RMCA); Naturalis, Leiden (RMNH); Senckenberg Naturhistorisehe Sammlungen Dresden (Museum fur Tierkunde: MTD); United States National Museum, Washington, D.C. (USNM); Museum fur Naturkunde, Humboldt Universitat, Berlin (ZMHB); Staatliche Naturwissenschaftliche Sammlung Bayerns, Miinehen (ZSM). Preparation. Specimens were examined under tungsten-filament light with a Wild Heerbrugg stereomicroscope. Measurements were taken with an ocular micrometer at 1000X, and coloration was inspected under incandescent light and compared with the Methuen Handbook of Colour, 2nd ed. (Kornerup ' & Wanseher 1967). Photomicrographs were taken with a digital Nikon DXI camera and Microptics photomicrographer. Specimens were dissected according to Robinson (1976). Abdomens were macerated for 20 mins, in 10% aqueous KOH solution in a simmering water bath and dissected in water. After inspection of deciduous hairs and scales, genitalia were cleaned with size 3/0 sable hair brushes and a snipe pinfeather, stained with Chlorazol black E, dehydrated 24hr in 95% ethanol, and mounted in Euparal. Some dissections were stored in glycerin for several months during the process of character coding to observe 3-dimensional structures. Wings were prepared by wetting in 95% ethanol, immersion in acetone for 30s., and denudation of scales in water. Wings were soaked in weak bleach solution (20%) for 60s., brushed again, stained in Eosin-Y ( lg / 70% ethanol) for ca. 1 hour, and dehydrated and mounted as for the genitalia above. Additional slides by E.G. Munroe and preparators in the CNC were examined (Table 1). These were often less informative, as the androconia, scales, and even the squamiform structures were often removed. Characters. Forty-eight characters were coded in the context of a larger sui'vey of Odontiinae (Appendix A). Characters for phylogenetic analysis were drawn from the external morphology of the head (4), wings (11), tympanal organs (1), male genitalia (22), female genitalia (9), and larval feeding habit (1). Terminology follows Klots (1956), Kristensen (2004), and the LepGlossary (Leptree Team 2008), and terms for tympanic organs follow Maes (1995). Sources of hostplant information are listed in Table 2. The states were delimited with consideration of plausible physiological and behavioral constraints while maximizing grouping information for the taxon sample. Characters are numbered from 0; see Appendix B for descriptions of character states. In the Results and Discussion, parenthesized numbers refer to “(character:state).” Some characters were coded as inapplicable if they depend on the presence or absence of another character. Unobserved characters include antennal ciliation for Dicepolia munroealis (Viette) (char. 0), the vineular androconia for Autocharts barbieri (Legrand), D. munroealis and Sobanga rutilalis (Walker) (char. 30), female genitalia for Aeglotis argentalis (Christoph) and Clupeosoma atristriatum Hampson (chars. 37-45), and feeding habit for most terminals (char. 46). Characters were coded for more than one state where a structure either did not clearly belong to one state or where the terminal was polymorphic (exhibiting more than one discrete state among specimens). Phylogenetic analysis. The data matrix was entered with WinClada v. 1.00.08 (Nixon 2002) (Appendix B). Electronic files are available from the author. The matrix was analyzed with parsimony with TNT v. 1.1 for Windows (Goloboff et al. 2003, 2008) on 188 Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society Table 1. Species and specimen preparations included in the analysis. Slide numbers refer to preparations by the author ( JE 1 1 ) unless indicated by preparator’s initials. Taxon Sex Locality Slide no. Collection Aeglotis argentalis (Christoph 1887) lm Pakistan: Kohistan 270 MTD Argyrarcha margarita (Warren 1892) 2m, If Brasil: Rio Gr. do Sul 126, 127, 427 CUIC If Br: Sta. Catharina 2760 M. d’A. CNC Autocharts albiplaga (Hampson 1913) lm. If South Africa: Cape Prov. 93, 119 USNM Autocharts harbieri (Legrand 1965) lm. If Seychelle Is. 94, 120 USNM Autocharts fessalis (Swinhoe 1887) lm. If India: Orissa 49, 50 USNM Autocharts mimetica (Lower 1903) lm. If Australia: NT 189, 190 NYSM Cliniodes costimacula (Hampson 1913) lm Venezuela: Aragua: Rancho Grande 48 USNM if Costa Rica: Prov. Limon 210 INBio Cliniodes opalalis Guenee 1854 lm Peru: Pasco Dept. 59 CUIC lm Peru: Huanuco 61 AMNH lm Venezuela: Tachira 64 MIZA lm Peru: Divisoria 66 USNM lm Bolivia: Cochabamba 162 CNC lm Costa Rica: Puntarenas: Monte Verde 195 AMNH if Costa Rica: Puntarenas: Monte Verde 172 CUIC if Jamaica 1107 M. d’A. CNC Cliniodes ostreonalis (Grote 1882) lm. If Canada: Que.: Noway Bay 137, 138 CNC lm Canada: Ont.: Merivale 1319 EGM CNC if Canada: Ont.: Merivale 2911 M. d’A. CNC Cliniodes paradisalis (Moschler 1886) lm Jamaica: Port Antonio 17 AMNH lm Jamaica: St. Andrew Parish 269 ANSP lm Jamaica 2553 EGM CNC if Jamaica: Trelawny 154 CNC Clupeosoma atristriatum Hampson 1917 2m PNG: New Britain: near Keravat 121, 122 CNC Clupeosoma sericiale (Hampson 1896) lm. If Philippine Is: Luzon 53, 54 USNM Clupeosoma orientalaJe (Viette 1954 [1953]) lm Madagascar Est 258 MNHN if Madagascar Est 259 RMCA Clupeosoma vohilavale (Marion & Viette 1956) lm. If M adagascar: M aroantsetra 256, 257 MNHN Cynaeda dentalis (Denis & Schiffer- lm, If Germany: Rheingau: Loreley 38, 39 USNM Deanolis sublimbalis Snellen 1899 lm Malaysia: Sabah: Kinabalu NP 130 USNM if Philippine Is: Samar 254 ZMHB Dicepolia munroealis (Viette 1960) lm Madagascar: Lakato route Holotype, prep. unkn. MNHN if Madagascar: Anosibe 288 MHNG Dicepolia roseobnmnea (Warren 1889) lm Rio I^a 175 CUIC lm Fr. Guiana: St. Jean de Maroni BM 22137 NHM lm Brasil: Upper Amazon, Codajas BM 22138 NHM lm Brasil: Estado Parafba 111,915 Heinrich USNM if Brasil: Estado Parafba 224 USNM Dicepolia niftinctalis (Hampson 1899) lm Guyana 79 CUIC lm Venezuela: Amazonas 81 MIZA if Bolivia: Cochabamba 167 CNC lm. If Mexico: Ver.: Jalapa 232, 233 USNM lm. If Peru: Avispas 234, 235 CNC lm. If Panama: Canal Zone 236, 237 USNM lm Bolivia: Cochabamba 238 USNM if Brasil: Distr. Fed. 239 USNM lm Brasil: Rondonia 246 LACM Ephelis cruentalis (Geyer 1832) lm Ilamfelt Coll. 44 USNM Volume 63, Number 4 189 Table 1. (continued) Taxon Sex Locality Slide no. Collection Ephelis cruentalis (Geyer 1832) lm Hamfelt Coll. 44 USNM lm [unknown] 330 CMNII if Italy: Basilicata: Monticchio 45 USNM if Turkey: Dorah Roher 271 RMNH Epipagis ocellata (Hampson 1916) lm Congo: I, ulna 307 RMCA If Congo: Bokuma 308 RMCA Eurrhypis pollinalis (Denis & Schiffermiiller 1775) lm. If [illeg.] Hamfelt Coll. 132, 133 USNM Hemiscopis suffusalis (Walker 1866 [1865]) lm. If Philippines: Los Banos 196, 320 USNM lm Philipplines: Mindanao 417 CNC lm Sri Lanka: Kandy 1652 EGM CNC if China: Hainan Is. 78 CUIC if Sri Lanka: Colombo 1653 EGM CNC Heortia dominalis (Lederer 1863) lm. If Philipplines: Mindanao 324, 325 RMNII Heortia vitessoides (Moore 1885) lm Cambodia 75 CUIC lm Sri Lanka: Galle Distr. 326 USNM If Sri Lanka: E. Distr. 152 USNM lm Indonesia: Borneo 2555 EGM CNC Hyalinarcha hyalinalis (Hampson 1896) lm PNG: Dagua Rd„ Wewak 115 CNC If PNG: Morobe 116 CNC lm PNG: Wewak 3028 DK CNC 2 m India: Assam: Margherita 3024 DK, 3032 DK CNC Hydrorybina polusalis (Walker 1859) lm Laos 74 CUIC If Sri Lanka: Kandy 4819 DK CNC If Philippines: Luzon 321 ZMHB Mecyna catalalis Viette 1953 lm M adagascar: Analamazaotra 279 MNIIN If Madagascar: Anosibe route 280 MNIIN Mecynarclia apicalis (Hampson 1898) lm. If Guyana: Rupununi 51, 52 USNM If ? Ellsworth Collection 155 CUIC lm Brasil: Amazonas 161 CMNH Mimoschinia rufofascialis (Stephens 1834) lm, If USA: Virgin Is.: Kingshill 57, 58 CUIC lm USA: AZ: Pima Co. 87 CUIC if USA: TX: Uvalde 88 CUIC if Mexico: B.C. Sur 272 CMNH Noordodes magnifi calls (Rothschild 1916) lm. If New Guinea: Irian Barat 249, 250 ZSM Pitama hermesalis (Walker 1859) lm, If Malaysia: Sabah 197, 204 USNM Pseudonoorda brunneiflava Munroe 1974 If Indonesia: N. Sulawesi 261 RMNH Pseudonoorda sp. near brunneiflava Munroe 1974 lm Philippine Is: Luzon 260 MTD Pseudonoorda distigmalis (Hampson 1913) lm Cameroon: Efulen 20 CMNH lm. If Cameroon: Efulen 117, 118 CNC Pseudoschinia elautalis (Grote 1881) lm. If USA: Arizona 139, 140 CUIC Sobanga rutilalis (Walker 1862) lm Venezuela: Amazonas 141 CUIC lm. If Brasil: Amazonas 142, 143 CUIC lm Brasil: Teffe 1117 M. d’A. CNC Suinoorda maccabei sp. nov. 3m, If Bahamas: Great Exuma 186, 187, 188, 274 CUIC lm Cuba: Holguin 273 MTD Tegostoma comparale (Hiibner) lm. If S. Russia 27, 28 USNM Viettessa bethalis (Viette 1958) lm Cameroon: Bonenza 264 RMCA if Congo: Paulis [Isiro] 319 RMCA 190 Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society a Dell Latitude D610 PC. The commands were “rseed 1; hold 1000; collapse auto; mult= hold 10 replic 20;” The same commands can be implemented by selecting Settings / Memory / Max. trees = 1000, then entering search parameters under Analyze / Traditional Search. “Collapse auto” ensures that branches with no apomorphies are collapsed. During preliminary character analysis, additivity was explored for some characters, and results that implied homoplasy in complex characters were reanalyzed. In final analysis, characters were treated as non-additive and equally weighted, and polarity was determined from the results of unconstrained analysis with C. dentalis as the primary outgroup (Nixon & Carpenter 1993). Inapplicable data are represented by and missing data by “?,” but both are analyzed allowing all possible states to be considered. The matrix was analyzed as-is, but to assess tree length correctly, a second matrix was analyzed where the polymorphic terminals were divided into multiple terminals (Nixon & Davis 1991). The apomorphies of terminals and clades are interpreted to be their diagnoses (Farris 1979). Character evolution was traced with the Character Diagnoser function of Winclada and TNT. Fast and slow optimization herein respectively refer to accelerated and delayed transformation (Swofford & Maddison 1987) and were implemented with WinClada. Bremer support values for clades were calculated by expanding memory for trees, generating many suboptimal trees up to N extra steps, and searching among those for the shortest tree that lacks a given node (“hold 80000; subopt N; bbreak=fillonly; bsupport”). The values of missing data were predicted to be those that best agree with the optimality criterion in simultaneous analysis. For parsimony, this is all possible permutations for unscored cells that add no extra steps. See Wilkinson (1995: Table 1) for an antecedent. Possible states were restricted to those actually observed in scored taxa. Predictions were made by inspecting mapped characters with WinClada, then running a simple procedure file in TNT to check the ambiguous cases. The file, available from the author, uses the “xread =” command to replace “?s” with alternative states. RESULTS Phylogenetic analysis. Searches found 1 tree of 187 steps (consistency index = 0.35, retention index = 0.67) (Fig. 7). Most of the cells coded for more than one state represent uncertainty of state assignment. There are four real polymorphisms: the wing pattern (char. 4) of the new species and the composite Pseudonoorda brunneiflava, and the feeding habit (char. 47) of two other species (Table 2, footnotes). Splitting these four into eight terminals, each pair differing only in the state of the polymorphism, resulted in the same topology with length 191. Branches without support are collapsed as polvotomies. Character state changes are reported in Appendix C. Table 2. Sources of hostplant data. Species References Autocharts barbieri Gerlach and Matyot 2006 Autocharts fessalis Beeson 1961, Browne 1968 Cliniocles opalalis |anzen & Hallwachs 2005 Cliniodes ostreonalis ° McDunnough 1931, Munroe 1961. Hayden 2008 Ctjnaeda dentalis Slamka 2006, Huertas Dionisio 2007 Dea nolis sublimbalis Waterhouse 1998 Dicepolia roseobrunnea de Oliveira 1942 [1941] Eurrh ypis pollinal is Slamka 2006. Huertas Dionisio 2007 (for E. guttulalis (Herrich-Schaffer)) Hemiscopis suffusalis ° ° Beeson 1961, Tominaga 1999, Turner 1908 Heortia vitessoides Munroe 1977, Singh et al. 2000 Hijdrorybina polusalis Meyriek, E. 1938 MS, in Robinson et al. 2001 Mimoscliinia rufofascialis Heinrich 1921, Leech 1949 Pseudosch inia elautalis Mann 1969 Tegostoma comparalc Huertas Dionisio 2007 ° Folivore on Thymelaeaceae and Rhamnaceae. Coded as polymorphic. “H. suffusalis on Dipteroearpaceae and Phyllanthaeeae, but H. purpureum (Inoue) and H. violacea (Lucas) on Thymelaeaceae. Phyllanthaeeae produce alkaloids like those in Thymelaeaceae. Coded as polymorphic. Volume 63, Number 4 191 Cynaeda dentalis Tegostoma comparale — Eurrhypis pollinalis - — Ephelis cruentalis Pseudoschinia elautalis Mimoschinia rufofascialis Hyalinarcha hyalinalis 45 1 PA NA | PT NT PT Dicepolia rufitinctalis 6 6 | . Dicepolia roseobrunnea 1 L" - : Dicepolia munroealis — Autocharis barbieri 49 |— Autocharis fessalis 1 48 Autocharis mimetica 1 — ■ Autocharis albiplaga Suinoorda maccabei - NT Noordodes magnificalis Pseudonoorda brunneiflava 65 r - Pseudonoorda distigmalis Deanolis sublimbalis Clupeosoma vohilavale Clupeosoma orientalale Clupeosoma sericiale Clupeosoma atristriatum Mecyna catalalis Hydrorybina polusalis Hemiscopis suffusalis Aeglotis argentalis Argyrarcha margarita* Sobanga rutilalis Mecynarcha apicalis Viettessa bethalis Pitama hermesalis Epipagis ocellata 70 r- Heortia vitessoides 2 L - Heortia dominalis Cliniodes costimacula - Cliniodes ostreonalis** 57 r - Cliniodes paradisalis 3 L=_ Cliniodes opalalis PT NT PT NT Fig. 7. Cladogram (187 steps. Cl = 0.35, RI = 0.67). Numbers above branches refer to nodes (Appendix C), and numbers below are Bremer support values (suboptimality of trees lacking the node). NA, Nearetic; NT, Neotropical; PA, Palaearctic; PT. Palaeotropieal; E, Eurrhypini; L, leaf-feeding clade; S, sepiform clade. °A. margarita is also known from Madagascar (Munroe 1974). °°C. ostreonalis is Eastern Nearetic. The sepiform clade (node 64, S) is strongly supported as monophyletic, with Bremer support of 5 ( i.e . the next shortest trees from which the clade is absent are 5 steps longer) (Bremer 1988). The clade has five unambiguous apomorphies: lamelliform structures absent (21:0), sepiform stmetres present (22:1, uniquely derived), distal edge of squamiform structures rounded (26:1, uniquely derived, reversed to squarish in the Pseudonoorda brunneiflava- group), squamiform structures with central enations (27:1), cervix bursae large and sclerotized (40:2). The new species is the first-diverging terminal in the sepiform clade. The Palaeotropieal species that constitute the remainder of the clade (node 63) share three unambiguous synapomorphies: Its t stalked with Rs,+3 (11:1), loss of S8 piluli (23:0), and elongate ovipositor (38:1). The results indicate that Pseudonoorda is paraphyletic. The sister group of the sepiform clade (node 42, L) includes medium- to large-bodied species of global 192 Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society distribution. The clade’s two apomorphies are an extension of the forewing costal streak through the discal spot that approximates or reaches the postmedial line (6:1) and the shallow depth of the sacci tympanorum extending underneath S2 (15:1). The group includes several members that feed on Thymelaeaceae, a plant family that produces unusual toxic tei'penoid compounds (Evans 1986). Deactivation of char. 47 (feeding habit) results in almost no change. Three trees of 183 steps are recovered that differ in minor aspects that do not affect the sepifonn clade, thymelaeacean elade, or any nomenelatural conclusions drawn here. Combining states 2 and 3 into one state (general folivory) returned the same topology with one fewer step. Systematic section. Clupeosoma orientalale (Viette) comb. nov. and Clupeosoma vohilavale (Marion & Viette) comb. nov. are transferred from Autocharts, as they share synapomorphies with Clupeosoma sensu Munroe (1974b) (see Discussion). Hyalinarcha hyalinalis (Hampson) comb. nov. is transferred from Boeotarcha Meyrick, as it is closely related to the type species H. hyalina (Hampson), females of which were not available for study. Noordodes magnificalis (Rothschild) comb. nov. is transferred from Noorda Walker. The synonymy of Basonga Moschler, 1886 (type species B. paradisalis Moschler) with Cliniodes Guenee, 1854, last recognized in Klima (1939), is revived, as is the combination Cliniodes paradisalis (Moschler). Metrea Grote, 1882 is synonymized with Cliniodes, syn. nov., resulting in the combination Cliniodes ostreonalis comb. nov. Suinoorda Hayden gen. nov. Diagnosis. Unambiguous autapomoiphies: female with entire forewing solid orange, concolorous with terminal area (4:1, 2; Fig. 2); lateral arms of gnathos approximated to lower corners of uncus (36:1). Symplesiomorphies not shared with rest of sepiform clade: forewing RSj not stalked with Rs.,+3 (char. 11:0; Fig. 10); piluli present on S8 (char. 23:1; Fig. 12: Pi); androconium of long, straight setae present near base of valval costa, dorsal side (28:1; Fig. 18: RA); ovipositor short (38:0; Fig. 16). Otherwise sharing the apomorphies of the sepiform clade of Eurrhypini (see above). Two other diagnostic characters have ambiguous optimization: forewing antemedial line absent (8:0, autapomorphic with slow optimization or synapomorphic with fast optimization); basicostal androconium present as field of deciduous hairs from base of costa (28:1, Fig. 18: BA; autapomorphic with slow optimization or symplesiomorphic with fast optimization). Etymology: Latin sus, swine, referring to the shape of the frontoclypeus, and also the reflexive pronoun, referring to taxonomic rank; plus Noorda Walker. Gender, feminine. Type species: S. maccabei Hayden sp. nov. S. maccabei Hayden sp. nov. Description. Male habitus (figs 1, 5, 13, 14, 15): Head. Frons flat and oblique. Frontoclypeus expanded in a low cylindrical protuberance, lateral edges of ridge curling down and inward almost to secondaiy contact above pilifers; lower edges of frontoclypeus crenulate (fig. 5: Fc). Frons with smooth, yellow-beige scales, dark brown laterally on protuberance. Vertex rough, yellow-beige. Scales between antennae and eyes white. Ocelli present. Chaetosemata absent. Antennae round and smooth, about 3/5 length of forewings, cilia dense and longer than in female. Labial palpi dark brown above, white below; not greatly exceeding length of head, length 0.90±0.03 mm from base under head to apex; porrect or slightly drooping with third meron downtumed -30° from porrect axis. Maxillary palpi short (0.36±0.03 mm), brown, terminal scales not strongly dilated. Pilifers small and separate from lower comers of frontoclypeus. Haustellum well-developed, basal vestiture white. Thorax. Collar, distal tegulae and dorsal thorax yellow-beige. Tegulae proximally brownish red. Ventral thorax and coxae wiiite. Forelegs: coxa white mixed with light gray, with patch of long, yellow- gray, backward-sweeping hairs extending the length of anterior margin of coxa (fig. 5: CH); femur and tibia gray, the latter with epiphysis hidden in long scales, without androconium; tarsomeres white, all but the basal one with small dorsal gray patch. Midlegs: femur and inner surface of tibia white; outer tibial surface orange fading to yellow before white, with gray patch at joint with femur; tibia bearing androconium of straight, white hairs as long as tibia (fig. 14: An); inner tibial spur 3 times length of outer; tarsi as for foreleg. Hindlegs: uniformly white, no androconia; spurs as fore midleg; tarsi as for foreleg. Abdomen. Praecinctorium white-scaled, monolobate, as broad as deep. Abdomen dorsum yellow (hindmost scale row' white), venter white. Male abdomen 4.8±0.1 mm in length excluding genitalia. Genitalic androconia pale yellow. Eighth stemite without scales (fig. 15: S8). Forewing. Length, 7.2 - 7.7 ±0.1mm, width, 3.6 - 4.0 ±0.1mm (n = 6). Upper side pale yellow with scales tipped in yellow, salmon or fuscous, giving irrorate appearance in fresher specimens. Costa thickly scaled and colored, with longer, setiform scales on edge; proximally gray along leading edge; distally and inner proximally dark salmon-orange. Antemedial line represented by minuscule browm spot behind costa at 1/5 length and faint spot or line along dorsal edge at 3/8 length. Discal spot large, oval, dark brown, beyond 1/2 length of wing, 0.42 ±0.06mm wide by 0.66 ±0.06mm long. Postmedial line narrow, dark brown, smoothly curving convexly from costa (at Rs4) to CuAj and concavely from CuA,, to tornus. Postmedial area 1.0±0.1 mm wide, orange or dark salmon. Terminal fringe dark gray or fuscous. Dorsal edge of forewing without scale tufts. Fovea absent. Forewing underside pale yellow, with costa and terminal area orange. Male-type retinacular hook and female-type retinaculum both present. Hindwing. Length, 6.2 ±0.1mm by 3.6±0.1 mm; lustrous white, with long, sparse hairs on anal area. Anal edge smoothly curved. Terminal area pale orange with some scales browm-tipped in darker specimens. Postmedial line faint, brown, from M., to anal fold, where it meets the terminal edge; white behind anal fold (a few brown scales extend proximally along anal fold in fresher specimens). Terminal fringe yellowish brown. Hindwing underneath translucent white, with yellow costa and terminal fringe. Male frenulum a single bristle. Volume 63, Number 4 193 Figs. 8-12. Genitalia and wings. 8, Suinoorda maccabei d genitalia, stridulatory apparatus (JEH 187). 9, Cliniodes ostreonalis d genitalia, stridulatory apparatus, squamiform structures slightly displaced (JEH 137. CNC). 10, S. maccabei d wing venation (JEII 274). 11, S. maccabei d genitalia, entire (JEH 187). 12, same, eighth abdominal segment. En, enation of squamiform structure; F, field of scales in fringe on tergum 8 posterior edge; Fr, frenulum: Lm, lamelliform structure; Lo, lobe of S8; Pi, location of piluli; Sep, sepiform structures; Sq, squamiform structures; S8, eighth sternite; T8, eighth tergite. 194 Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society Figs. 13-19. Habitus and genitalia. 13, Sainoorda maccabei underside of 6 wings. 14, S. maccabei 6 mesothoracic tibia, lateral aspect. 15, S. maccabei 6 abdomen, lateral aspect. 16, S’, maccabei 9 genitalia (JEI4 188). 17, same, tympanal organs. 18, S. mac¬ cabei 6 genitalia, dorsal aspect (JEH 187). 19, Autocharis barbieri 6 genitalia, ventral aspect (JEH 94, USNM). An, androconium of long hairs; BA, basicostal androconium; C, colliculum; CvB, cervix bursae; DS, ductus seminalis; F, tergum 8 posterior fringe; P, patch of scales on hindwing subcostal area; ScS, scoop-shaped scales along costa; ST, saccus tympani; S8, sternite 8 (naturally de¬ nuded); VA, vincular androconium (pleural A8-9 intersegmental). Dense patch of small, erect scales between costa and Sc+R, from base of wing to the divergence of Sc+R! and Rs; patch extended discretely but more sparsely onto anterior half of discal cell (fig. 13: P). Female habitus (fig. 2): Structure and coloration as in male, except dorsum of head, thorax and forewings almost uniformly salmon-orange. Tegulae and lateral collar dark brown; midleg tibia upper surface more strongly orange, without androconia. Antennal cilia shorter than in male, but antenna itself of same thickness. Forewing medial and terminal areas concolorous, with the latter slightly more densely scaled. Forewing antemedial line absent; discal spot and postmedial line indistinctly indicated by light-brown scales. Retinaculum a patch of scales as in male. Two frenular bristles. Hindwing underside without subcostal patch of scales. Hindwing terminal area darker yellow than rest of hindwing, but lines absent. Abdomen 4.4±0.2 mm in length excluding ovipositor; exceeding hindwings by about one third length. Venation (fig. 10): Forewin g: Sc meeting margin 2/3 from wing apex. R, basally straight and moderately broadened. RSj basally straight, not stalked with Rs,+ ,. Rs2t3 with stalk cuived to approximate Rs closely. Sc and radial veins except Rs4 distally curved toward anterior margin, the first three veins suddenly and sharply so. Rs4 unstalked, basally curved toward Rs„+3, distally meeting margin below wing apex. Cell complete, 7/12 length of wing. Nty nearly straight, from upper corner of discal cell. M, and Y1 , straight, from lower corner of cell. CuAj and straight, arising from cell basad from tip. 1A straight, complete; 2A looped and joining 1A at half its length. Hindwing-. Sc+R, stalked to about 1/3 length from point of departure from cell, partly joined to Rs to just beyond discal cell. Base of Sc+Rj + Rs strongly broadened. Discal cell short: anterior portion 1/3 length of wing, distally demarcated by short, straight spur of M, parallel to body axis; posterior portion demarcated by straight vein running diagonally to nearly 1/2 length of wing. M ( straight. M„ and M„ basally approximate, not stalked, from lower comer of cell. 01^ from comer of cell; CuA., from cell at just more than 2/3. CuP and 1A+2A straight; 3A basally straight and broad, distally slightly bowed anteriad before meeting margin. Tympanal organs (fig. 17): Bullae tympani oval, length Brice width. Edges of fornix tympani straight and meeting in blunt, elbow¬ like right angle. Sacci tympani round, not hypertrophied (fig. 17: ST); rami tympani (transverse edge) on same level as elbow of fornix tympani. Processus tympani a broad, nearly circular lobe. Puteoli tympani shallow. Venulae not evident. S2 a rounded rhombus, wider than long, bluntly protruding over S3; median third of S2 also emergent and slightly more sclerotized than lateral areas. Male genitalia (figs 8, 1 1, 12, 18): Eighth segment. T8 membranous, longer than wide; lateral sclerotized edges of T8 with anterior ends ending in shallow, posteriad-facing invaginations, posterior ends fading before fringe; transverse bar absent. Transverse fringe of long, broad, keeled scales present along posterior edge of T8 (figs 12, 15: F). Lateral ends of fringe separate as distinct lobes in pleuron 8, slanted dorso-anterior to ventro-posterior and closely adjacent to posterior corners of S8. S8 roughly rectangular, parallel- Volume 63, Number 4 195 sided; anterior quarter underneath S7 and bilobate, with broadly triangular emargmation and medially sclerotized to halfway point. Edges sclerotized, most strongly along anterior third. Posterior edge with squared corners and central third broadly, roundly emarginate, without projections. Central area of S8 trapezoidal, slightly raised, with corners at sternal margin at anterior third to posterior emargination. Posterolateral corners of S8 with area of fine nondeciduous setae (piluli, char. 22; fig. 12: Pi). Lamelliform structures absent. Androconia of pleuron 8 on large, lance-ovate patches: dorso-anterior end rounded and adjacent to anterior comers of T8, ventro-posterior end tapered and connected directly to the sides of S8 at the point where S8 emerges from underneath S7. Genitalia. Uncus an isosceles triangle about twice as high as width at base, with expanded, flat-topped, bilobate apex bearing conspicuous tufts of nondeciduous setae at tip of each lobe; rows of fainter hairs on lateral edges of uncus, but elsewhere bare. Arms of gnathos transversely straight, with broad bases fused to tegumen and medial area narrow; bases of gnathos arms close to base of uncus. Gnathos central element parallel-sided, produced 210±15pm, with minute granules at bluntly acute tip; ventrally deeply indented beyond (posterior of) the level of the arms. Tegumen almost as long as vinculum (680±15pm), without ornamentation; with long, straight¬ sided lateral arms descending to valvae. Membrane between arms with diffuse deciduous hairs, not grouped into discrete patches. Juxta smooth, occupying most of the area inside vinculum and sides parallelling edges of vinculum; base nearly circular, as high as squamiform structures, with concave emargination where base of vinculum bows upward; apex of juxta abruptly cuspidate and acute, unornamented and not projecting. Valvae lvriform, l,770±15pm along costa. Costa sinuate, proximally convex and distally concave, edge basad of apex membranous and bearing short, smooth, unkeeled scales that curve over edge of costa (fig. 18: ScS). Costa sclerotized to apex, with small tuft of short setiform hairs on a slightly out-turned apex. Distal edge of valva straight. Saccular edge of valva roughly mirroring costa: subapically concave, medially convex, and basally indented to accommodate squamiform structures. Convex area of sacculus with dense, broad scales. Medial area of valva basally sclerotized and distally membranous with striae and sparse, fine setae. Area below costa longitudinally depressed as narrow, shallow' pocket. Reverse side of valva with androconium 380± 15pm from base of valva, in submarginal position (behind shallow pocket); base of field a transverse row, 150±15pm long (fig. 18: BA). Vinculum l,050±20pm high, roughly square. Transtilla absent. Saccus not developed, medially concave. Androconia present lateral of vinculum, of straight hairs as long as valvae (fig. 18: VA). Basal area of androconia extended to 500±15pm in length, running up behind (dorsal of) vinculum toward tegumen. Phallus l,680±15pm long, 170±15pm at narrowest point, gently curved. Vesica with numerous small comuti along most of length. Squamiform and associated structures. Posteroventral vinculum (facing juxta) with medial, sclerotized, bicapitate boss. S8-9 intersegmental membrane extended over vinculum, bearing squamiform structures lateral of boss. Medial pluma of unkeeled scales not obvious. Membrane laterally extended as semi-sclerotized arms bearing short tufts of scales parallel to lateral edges of squamiform structures. Membrane anteriad of vinculum with thickened pair of longitudinal, parallel fields bearing transverse ridges at intervals of about 15pm (fig. 8: Sep). Ridged fields narrow, each 45±15pm wide and 450±15pm long, with further sclerotization extending 250±15pm anteriad. Squamiform structures round, 675±15pm long by 400±15pm wide, symmetrical; stiff membranes attached on lower edge to vinculum (fig. 8: Sq). Medial edge of squamiform structures strongly sclerotized and smoothlv arcuate in hemiellipse extending over distal end of squamiform structures. Lateral edges clavate and longitudinally striate, with narrow base and broad termination before membranous laterodistal area that does not not meet the arc of the medial edge. Central area of squamiform structures finely striate. Basicentral area of each squamiform structure with digitate process or enation directed medially, adjacent to boss of accessory sclerite (fig. 8: En). Enations curving around ridged areas w'hen the latter are folded against them. Female genitalia (fig. 16): Ovipositor short, 750±15pm long by 450±15pm deep, with A9 not longer than deep. Ovipositor lobes soft and truncate. Anterior apophyses extending to collicuhun; posterior apophyses not extending beyond anterior edge of A9. Collicuhun short, about twice as long as wide (fig. 16: C). Ductus bursae between colliculum and corpus bursae proper expanded in an irregularly chamber (cervix bursae: CvB), demarcated from coipus bursae by slight constriction and end of sclerotization. Cervix bursae irregularly but mostly sclerotized. A few granular booklets irregularly distributed on the signum. Ductus seminalis narrow and arising from unsclerotized area of anterior ductus bursae (DS). Corpus bursae proper (anterior of sclerotized cervix) 1900±30pm long, longitudinally pleated and bearing two convex, granular signa on opposite sides of the bursa, the larger and posterior of the two being transversely ovate, and the anterior one nearly circular. Type material. Holotvpe. d: BAHAMAS — Great Exuma — Simons Ft. 23.31.50—75.47.30, 12 April 1986, Tim L. McCabe / [red label] HOLOTYPE Suinoorda maccabei Hayden. T.L. McCabe Collection. Paratvpes. BAHAMAS: Id, same data as holotvpe except: 10 April 1986 / J.E. Hayden Slide No. 187 6 (JEH Coll.), 'id, same data as holotvpe except: 14 April 1986 / }.E. Hayden Slide Nos. 186 d, 274 wings (CUIC). 2 dd, same data as holotvpe except: 15 April 1986 (CUIC and T.L. McCabe Collection). 19, same data as holotvpe except: 15 April 1986 / J.E. Hayden Slide No. 188 9 (CUIC). CUBA: Id: [green label] Cuba, Holguin, Rafael Freyre, Piedra Picar. dry- forest. 9.vi.2000, leg. J.-P. Rudloff / J.E. Hayden Slide No. 273 d (MTD). CUIC type no. 7356. Diagnosis: As for genus. Biology: Unknown. See Missing Data. Distribution: Commonwealth of the Bahamas: Great Exuma Island; Republic of Cuba: Holguin Province (fig. 20). Etymology: I take pleasure in naming this species after Dr. Tim McCabe, Curator of Entomology at the New York State Museum, who collected and finely set the Bahamian series. Variation: The Cuban specimen differs from the Bahamian ones in having a slightly narrower frontoelypeal arch and the lateral arms of the gnathos at a slightly more obtuse angle to the median element. These features are not of specific distinction. Similar species: Suinoorda differs from similar species in the possession of a highly, almost circularly arched frontoelypeal margin. Autocharts and Dicepolia have an obtusely to acutely angulate frontoclypeus, and Noordodes and P. bnumeiflava have a low, rounded arch. S. maccabei also differs in the sexually dimorphic forewing coloration, and the sharp apical curvature of the forewing radial veins is unique. Similar species outside the sepiform clade lack the sepiform structures. Among similar Neotropical Eurrhypini, Dicepolia species have long labial palpi, are uniformly colored brownish orange or rosy brown, and have a dark, narrow postmedial line farther from the terminal margin. Female S. maccabei differ in having no trace of ante- and postmedial lines. Cliniocles paradisalis (fig. 4) has short, upturned labial palpi typical of Cliniodes. Both have a smooth postmedial line, but it extends much farther basad along the posterior wing margin in C. 196 Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society Fig. 20. Known distribution of S. maccabei. Starred loeaiities: Simons Point, near Georgetown, Great Exuma Island, Bahama Is., and near Rafael Freyre, Holguin Province, Cuba. Volume 63, Number 4 197 paradisalis, approximating the obvious antemedial line. The forewing has a discal spot continuous with the costal streak, and the hindwing is suffused more strongly. Argyrarcha and Sobanga differ strongly from S. maccabei in maculation, including a well-developed antemedial line and the costal streak extending through the discal spot toward the postmedial line. These also have an expanded T8 posterior fringe, which in Argyrarcha and Mecynarcha Munroe is cape-like and larger than any single tergite. Among Palaeotropieal genera, the red-and-white Autocharts species have long labial palpi, some (A. fessalis Swinhoe) have hindwing M.,+3 stalked, and some have a more strongly developed spot of color on the hindwing anal vein. In Autocharts species, the shape of the forewing postmedial line tends to be more angulate on the veins. Pitama hermesalis and Viettessa have a straight frontoclypeus, a much broader postmedial band, and most species are much larger in size. Like some of the Neotropical taxa, Viettessa species have a costal streak extending through the discal spot toward the postmedial line. Pseudonoorda brunneiflava and Noordodes have Rs. stalked with Rs, ,. Noordodes has a postmedial line that steps sharply basad along the cubital veins. The ground color is yellow and the markings, dark violet. Character evolution. The four unambiguous symplesiomorphies of Suinoorda argue for its early divergence. The frontoclypeal arch (char. 3:2, figs 5, 6) evolved once or twice from a transversely straight margin (3:0), depending on fast or slow optimization: in the last common ancestor of Hyalinarcha and Suinoorda (fig. 7: node 44) or independently in nodes 52 and 64. The length of antennal sensilla (char. 0) is informative: except for four autapomorphic reversals, it characterizes nodes 43 and 56, and has ci = 0.42, ri = 0.78. Forewing maculation with a white or light-colored median and distinctly darker terminal area (4:1) evolved one to three times from states 0 or 2 and was lost several times. It appeared above T. comparale (node 46) and was retained as the fundamentally plesiomorphic condition along most of the phylogeny. Under slow optimization, it evolved once at node 46, but under fast optimization, it evolves independently in C. paradisalis and Autocharts (node 50). The eoncolorous maculation in both female S. maccabei and Pseudonoorda sp. near brunneijlava, regarded as split terminals, is recovered as independent reversals from the white/red condition. The stalking of Rs, with Rs., +3 (char. 8:1) is mainly a feature of the sepiform clade above Suinoorda (node 63), but it evolved independently in Hydrorybina. Some species lack the stridnlatory apparatus. Lamelliform structures (21:1; fig. 9: Lm) were gained with the Eurrhypini (node 46) and lost in S. rutilalis and the sepiform clade. Likewise, the squamiform structures (square membranes: char. 24; figs 8, 9: Sq) were gained at node 46 and lost in S. rutilalis , rendering characters 25, 26, and 27 inapplicable. The outgroup Cynaeda dentalis is classified in Odontiini, which is defined by the absence of the lamelliform and squamiform structures (Leraut & Luquet 1983). The S8 piluli (char. 23) were gained at node 46 (Eurrhypini) and lost at nodes 41 (the Aeglotis- Argyrarcha clade), 63 (the sepiform clade above Suinoorda), and in H. hyalinalis. Some but not all of these clades have the stridnlatory apparatus absent or modified (e.g. asymmetrical squamiform structures at node 47, evolved from symmetrical structures). The basicostal androconium on the dorsal side of the costa of the male valve (28:1; figs 18, 19: BA) evolved from the absent condition (28:0) at node 44, the last common ancestor of Hyalinarcha, Suinoorda, and Aeglotis. It was secondarily lost at nodes 41, 63, 53 ( Cliniodes spp.), and in Al. catalalis. An androconium situated halfway along the costa, at the end of a sclerotized extension (28:2), is a synapomorphy of derived Cliniodes species (node 57), and it evolved from the absent condition. A gnathos with arms basally approximate to the lower uncus (36:1) evolved three times from the not- approximated condition (36:0) at nodes 47, 53, and in Suinoorda. The ovipositor length (char. 38) is homoplastic (ci = 0.12), but it contains some grouping information (ri = 0.46). It is long in the Palaeotropieal sepiform species, but its short length in Suinoorda contributes to grouping that clade with the large-bodied species of node 42. Stem boring and leaf mining (47:0) is the primitive eurrhypine feeding habit, and it is restricted to the outgroups (Odontiini) and Eurrhypis Hiibner and is predicted for Ephelis. Seed- or fruit-feeding (47:1) evolved from it and is the most general larval feeding habit. It is known for the three distantly related groups Mimoschinia Munroe + Pseudoschinia Munroe, Dicepolia roseobrunnea (Warren), and Deanolis, and predicted for the intervening taxa. External folivory on Thymelaeaceae (47:2) is restricted to the clade of node 42 and evolved once or twice from seed-feeding, in Hemiscopis and in node 54, or earlier depending on optimization. Folivory on other plant families (47:3) evolved independently from seed-feeding in Autocharts and from either seed- or Thymelaeaeeae-feeding in Hemiscopis + Hydrorybina. Predictions for unscored data are reported in Table 3. 198 Journal, of the Lepidopterists’ Society Table 3. Predicted missing data. The following states add no extra steps to the cladograms when analyzed together. Species Character Predicted states A. argentalis 38. Ovipositor length short 39. Colliculum short 40. Duct. burs, sclerotization absent 41. Appendix of duct. burs. absent 42. Corp. burs, signum present (one or two) 43. Corp. burs, signum, shape round 44. Ductus seminalis origin from ductus bursae 45. Ductus seminalis width narrow 46. Pleats on cervix bursae absent, or present 47. Feeding habit seeds/fruits, or folivore on Thyme!., or folivore on other family A. margarita 47. Feeding habit seeds/fruits, or folivore on Thymel., or folivore on other family A. albiplnga 47. Feeding habit folivore on other family A. barbieri 31. Vincular androconia present A. mimetica 47. Feeding habit seeds/fruits C. costimacula 47. Feeding habit folivore on Thymel. C. paradisalis 47. Feeding habit folivore on Thymel. C. atristriatum 38. Ovipositor length long 39. Colliculum short 40. Duct. burs, sclerotization absent 41. Appendix of ductus bursae absent 42. Corpus bursae signum present (one or two) 43. Corp. burs, signum, shape round 44. Ductus seminalis origin from ductus bursae 45. Ductus seminalis width enlarged 46. Pleats on cervix bursae present 47. Feeding habit seeds/fruits C. orientalale 47. Feeding habit seeds/fruits C. sericiale 47. Feeding habit seeds/fruits C. vohilavale 47. Feeding habit seeds/fruits D. munroealis 0. Antennal sensilla longer in male 31. Vincular androconia absent 47. Feeding habit seeds/fruits D. nifitinctalis 47. Feeding habit seeds/fruits E. cruentalis 47. Feeding habit stem borer or leaf miner E. ocellata 47. Feeding habit seeds/fruits, or folivore on Thymel., or folivore on other family H. dominalis 47. Feeding habit folivore on Thymel. H. hyalinalis 47. Feeding habit seeds/fruits M. catalalis 47. Feeding habit seeds/fruits, or folivore on Thymel., or folivore on other family M. apicalis 47. Feeding habit seeds/fruits, or folivore on Thymel., or folivore on other family N. magnificalis 47. Feeding habit seeds/fruits P. hermesalis 47. Feeding habit seeds/fruits, or folivore on Thymel., or folivore on other family P. brunneiflava 47. Feeding habit seeds/fruits P. distigmalis 47. Feeding habit seeds/fruits S. rutilalis 31 . Vincular androconia present 47. Feeding habit seeds/fruits, or folivore on Thymel., or folivore on other family S. maccabei 47. Feeding habit seeds/fruits V. betlmlis 47. Feeding habit seeds/fruits, or folivore on Thymel., or folivore on other family Volume 63, Number 4 199 Discussion The recent collection of this new species recalls Hampson’s comment on the Bahamian moth fauna: “[...] I should expect a thorough exploration of the other islands [than Nassau and Andros] to add considerably to the list of species” (1901). Hampson studied only specimens from those islands and Abaco (1901, 1904); had he seen it, he probably would have assigned it to Noctuelia Guenee or Noorda Walker following his classification of Pyraustinae (Hampson 1899a). I find no reference to a species fitting this description in other studies of Bahamian and Cuban Lepidoptera (Smith el al. 1994 and citations therein). The distribution of this species in the Bahamas and Cuba (Fig. 20) can be explained by the subaerial exposure of the Bahama Platform during the last glacial maximum, when the islands were separated by only the narrow Old Bahamas Passage (Miller & Miller 2001). The Cuban locality is about 270km due south of the type locality, but this distribution is congruent with that of other Lepidoptera (Miller & Simon 1998). The species may be expected to be distributed more widely in eastern Cuba and the islands that are part of the Great Bahama Bank. Another species, Cautethia exuma McCabe (Sphingidae), was described from the same locality and is apparently endemic to Great Exuma (McCabe 1984). The flora of the type locality is a mix of native and naturalized species (T. McCabe pers. comm. 2007): Caesalpinia L., Casuarina L., coconut, Coccoloba L., Erithalis G. Forst., Ficus L., frangipani ( Plumeria mbra L.), Key Lime, Malpighia L., Mimosa L., orange, and “old woman's tongue,” a legume. The Cuban locality is mixed forest: mostly secondary growth with native dry- forest undergrowth and relictual vegetation in the vicinity characteristic of mogotes; dominant trees include Acacia Mill., Caesalpina, Coccoloba , coconut. Ficus, Gymnanthes lucida Sw., Hibiscus elatus Sw., Mimosa, Plumeria L., and Trichilia L. (J.-P. Rudloff pers. comm. 2008). If the larva is frugivorous on a host common to these areas, Coccoloba, Ficus, or the legumes are candidates. The vicariant biogeographic relationship between Suinoorda and the rest of the sepiform clade, which is distributed from tropical West Africa to Fiji, parallels other relationships in the cladogram (Fig. 7). Cliniodes (node 53) is derived with respect to Asian and African genera. Dicepolia (node 67), with both Neotropical and Malagasy species, is related to genera and species distributed around the Indian Ocean. The placement of Malagasy D. munroealis is a sampling artifact; additional evidence (Hayden 2009) indicates that the Malagasy and Neotropical members constitute two monophyletic clades. Argyrarcha marganta, related to the strictly Neotropical Mecynarcha and Sobanga, is recorded from Brazil and Madagascar (Munroe 1974a), and Aeglotis is Central Asian. Vicariant relationships between Neotropical and Palaeotropical taxa occur in many Lepidoptera (Holloway & Nielsen 1999), although such relationships involving Antillean endemics are better known for other insect orders (Liebherr 1988). The discoveiy of congeneric species in the Greater Antilles is probable. Evidence from paleogeography and lepidopteran biogeography suggests that Hispaniola and Puerto Rico are most closely related to the eastern Cuban landmass (Iturralde-Vinent & MaePhee 1999; Liebherr 1988; Fontenla 2003), and the continued discovery of even conspicuous moth taxa in Hispaniola indicates that the fauna remains poorly known (Rawlins & Miller 2008). The phylogeny includes about half of the genera in the Eurrhypini (Nuss et al. 2008), and it will be tested by an analysis with more taxa and characters (Hayden in prep.). It would be premature to confer a formal name and rank on the sepiform clade, as such an act would relegate the rest of the Eurrhypini to a paraphyletic nominotypical taxon. There is terminological uncertainty about the squamiform structures. Nuss & Kallies (2001) distinguished two different structures: a plume of long scales in medial position on the vinculum (not shown here) and a pair of “riffled membranes” lateral of the plume. They inteipreted the scale plume to be the “structures squamiformes” (Minet 1980; Leraut & Luquet 1983), and they considered the membranes to be a third eurrhypine synapomorphy. The “squamiform structures” of Minet (1980: Figs. 5, 9) probably instead refer to the membranes (M. Nuss pers. comm. 2009). The illustrations of Leraut & Luquet could refer to either structure (1983: Figs. 13, 19), and Munroe neither illustrated nor elaborated on his reference to “specialized scalelike sclerotizations associated with the juxta and vinculum midventrally” (1972: 137). Regardless of terminology, the long plume and the large membranes frequently occur together, although the plume was not observed in dissections of Suinoorda. The plume is deciduous, whereas the membranes are less easily removed. One hypothesis is that the membranes and plume are developmental homologs: the vinculum fundamentally bears scales in a transverse row, of which two scales are hypertrophic. The riffles or striations are the longitudinal ridges, which bend laterally so that the lamelliform structures rub across the ridges. Autocharis was reinstated by Amsel (1970) and 200 Journal of tiif Lepidopterists’ Society received numerous species removed from Noorda Walker (Viette 1990; Shaffer & Munroe 2007). The results indicate that the small, white-and-violet species and the gray species form one monophyletic group. In addition to the genitalia and apomorphies of node 50, Autocharts species can be distinguished from Pseudonoorda by having long male antennal sensilla and plesiomorphic forewing venation. D. munroealis and related species will have been transferred in another publication (Hayden 2009). Suinoorda maccabei requires a new genus because it cannot be accommodated by any available genus without substantial recircumscription. The next best alternative would be to transfer the whole sepiform clade to the oldest available name, Clupeosoma Snellen, 1880. Such an act would stabilize nomenclature by mitigating the proliferation of genera with one or few species, which is a problem in the Odontiinae (Nuss et al. 2008). However, synonymy would disrupt several established combinations, including the pest species in Deanolis Snellen (Waterhouse 1998). An important consideration for generic circumscription is the generic diagnosis or definition, which affects the management of specimens identified only to that rank. Historically, most of the genera included in this study were created to accommodate species that did not fit any pre-existing generic diagnosis. The problem lies not with the general practice of fitting species into generic definitions but rather with two specific issues. First, most of the definitions predate Munroes circumscription of the Odontiinae (1961), so genera were differentiated from distantly related taxa by means of inappropriate characters. Second, the diagnoses are typological, therefore untestable and arbitrarily exact — that is, new monotypic genera were defined with any number of specious characters (e.g. Munroe 1974a). Cladistie parsimony equates diagnoses with synapomorphies, making diagnoses both testable and efficient (Farris 1979). Past nomenclatnral debates (e.g. Ehrlich & Murphy 1982 et seqq.) could have benefited from consideration of diagnoses. In the case of Clupeosoma, none of the synapomorphies of node 64 are found in previous definitions (Snellen 1880; Hampson 1897). The characters that figure in Snellen s original diagnosis, revived by Munroe (1974b), are either invariant in the Eurrhypini or dispersed across the cladogram (chars. 2, 7, 10, 11, 12). Of these, the pearly, metallic scales on the body and wings (7:2) are shared among the Malagasy and New Guinean species. With the transfer of the Malagasy species, Clupeosoma is delimited at node 60 with the following diagnosis: the forewing medial area is concolorous with postmedial/terminal area (4:2, except C. orientalale, which has an irregularly darker medial area), the underside of the body and the wings have pearly, metallic scales (7:2), and the costa of the genitalic valva is apically produced in a straight point (32:1). One might criticize the proposal of a genus for a single species. As suggested above, congeners probably exist in related areas of endemism. More saliently, Suinoorda is the first odontiine genus proposed on explicit phylogenetic grounds, and other monotypic genera (Bason go, Metrea) are synonymized on the same grounds. Suinoorda should accommodate any species that share its derived characters: the sexually dimorphic wing pattern (4:1,2), the absence of the forewing antemedial line (8:0), and the gnathos arms near the base of the uncus (36:1). Pseudonoorda is recovered as paraphyletic, but nomenclatnral changes would require study of more species, including the type species P. minor Munroe. Munroe (1974b) recognized these two groups of Pseudonoorda: one centering on P. distigmalis (Hampson) and P. nigropunctalis (Hampson), and another on P. brunneiflava. The latter group includes at least P. brunneiflava, P. metalloma (Lower), P. photina (Tams) and an undescribed species mentioned by Munroe (1974b). The male of the coded terminal may be Munroe s undescribed species. Deanolis sublimbalis Snellen, the red-banded mango borer of Southeast Asia and New Guinea (confused in Munroe 1974b with the spilomeline Decelia terrosalis Snellen), is closely related to Pseudonoorda species of the first group. Cliniodes is restricted to South America and the West Indies, except the eastern Nearctic C. ostreonalis (see Hayden 2008). Cliniodes is diagnosed here by three apomorphies: loss of the androconium from the base of the valval costa (28:0), proximity of the gnathos arms to the uncus (36:1), and a cervix bursae with pleated sclerotization (46:1). Furthermore, C. ostreonalis ( = Metrea ) and C. paradisalis (= Basonga) share with derived Cliniodes species the loss of yellow forewing scales and a juxta with a recurved, apical hook. Male genitalia (not figured) indicate that C. ostreonalis is closely related to the Andean C. g laucescens (Hampson) and two other species, whereas C. paradisalis is related to C. opalalis Guenee and C. euphrosinalis Mosehler. Epipagis ocellata and Mecijna catalalis are misplaced in their respective genera, which both belong in the Spilomelinae. Described in Sameodes Snellen, E. ocellata is related to the other African species Epipagis flavispila (Hampson), Hapalia iospora (Meyriek), both of which are here transferred to Eurrhypini, and possibly some of the species placed in Epascestria by Maes (2002). Viette (1990: 90) published the Volume 63, Number 4 201 combination “ A[utocharis ] catalalis (Viette), 1953,” but it is not explicit whether the transfer was for Mecyna catalalis Viette, 1953a: 136 or for Dichocrocis catalalis Viette, 1953b: 208. Regardless, the species would be misplaced in Autocharis, so it will be transferred in a future work. The specific epithets combined with Tegostoma and Clupeosoma terminate with -ale (ICZN 1999: Artt. 31.2, 34.2) because these generic epithets are unambiguously neuter. The original spellings are with - alis , as was Zeller’s combination T. comparalis (1847: 581). The Greek neuter ending -ma, -mat- is a common suffix, as in somatic, stomatic. Indeed, the meanings of “ Tegostoma ” and “ Clupeosoma ” evidently refer to character states 3:1 and 7:2, although that fact does not rationalize the present choice of diagnosis. The problems associated with gender agreement (Sommerer 2002) are acknowledged but beyond the scope of this paper. Predicting missing data is a strong empirical rationale for phylogenetic classification. Given some characters, one can infer the states of other characters to an arbitrary degree of precision. Subsequent observations confirm predictions, thereby expediting field- and labwork. For u unscored cells in characters with n states, there are n" possible permutations, requiring zero to many extra steps. These predictions follow explicit Riles (Fitch 1971) and are replicable. The results indicate that Suinoorda larvae feed on seeds or fruits. One extra step is required if the larvae feed on something else, but without more information about ecology and biology, there is no indication what else that would be. It is possible that the feeding habit is a fifth unobserved state, such as specialization on another tissue or family, though allowing for an unknown state requires process assumptions about character evolution or evolutionary rates. Most of the predictions herein are precise (Table 3). The least certain area involves the eight species, unscored for feeding habit, above node 42 and below node 54. Those above node 54 are all known or predicted to be external folivores on Thymelaeaceae, which their large body size and aposematism corroborate. Taken individually, the other eight species could assume any of the three habits other than stem¬ boring/leaf-mining. However, only 17 of the 3s possible permutations add no extra steps. For example, Mecyna catalalis would feed on Thymelaeaceae only if (1) all the others do the same or if (2) P. hennesalis , V. bethalis (Viette), and E. ocellata do the same and all the others are seed/fruit feeders. The same situation obtains for E. ocellata with regard to generalist fol ivory (state 3). Although there is one tree with substantial support. ambiguous character mapping clearly complicates phylogenetic predictivity. Fieldwork will be necessary to observe the feeding habits of Suinoorda and any broader distribution or undiscovered congeners; the conclusions above are intended to facilitate that research. The phylogenetic results and generic diagnoses will likewise require testing with more evidence. This analysis demonstrates that the new species is more closely related to Palaeotropical genera than to the known Neotropical ones. The Eurrhypini includes many other genera, and the present sample focuses on the sepiform clade and the superficially similar Neotropical species. Elucidating the relationships of the other major groups will depend on description of novel characters and reexamination of traditional ones. Acknowledgements I thank James K. Liebherr for his support, discussions about methodology and West Indian biogeography, and critical com¬ ments. I give thanks to Bernard Landry, Patrice Leraut, |oel Minet, Michael Shaffer, and especially Alma Solis for advice about pyraloid systematics and Odontiinae in particular. Dis¬ cussions with M. Nuss about odontiine systematics, methodol¬ ogy, the exigencies of cataloging, and the proliferation of generic names in the subfamily led me to pursue the full cladistic analy¬ sis; his comments on an earlier draft greatly improved this paper. I kindly thank Tim McCabe and Jan-Peter Rudloff collecting and lending the specimens and for accounts of the habitats. I am also grateful to many people for making additional material available: J. Barbut, U. Buehsbaum, P. Clavijo, A. Herrera, D. Lafontaine, W. Mey, James Miller, E. van Nieukerken, J. and W. de Prins. J. Rawlins, K. Tuck, and J. Weintraub. I thank K. Nixon, M. Luckow, and the Bailey Hortorium systematics group for comments on the drafts and stimulating discussions. The Willi Hennig Society generously distributed the software gratis. This work was supported in part by NSF Doctoral Dissertation Improvement Grant DEB-0808415 to J. Liebherr and by the Arthur Rawlins Endowment. Literature Cited Amsel, H.G. 1949. Die Microlepidopteren der Brandt'schen Iran-Ausbeute. 1. Teil. Bull. Soc. Fouad Ier d'Entom. (Cairo) 33: 227-269. - . 1970. Afghanische Pyraustinae. Beitr. naturk. Forsch. SudwDtl. 29(1): 25-66. Beeson, C.F.C. 1961. The Ecology and Control of the Forest Insects of India and the Neighboring Countries, 2nd ed. Dehra Dun. Bremer, K. 1988. The limits of amino acid sequence data in Angiosperm phylogenetic reconstruction. Evolution 42(4): 795-803. Browne, F.G. 1968. Pests and Diseases of Forest Plantation Trees: an annotated list of the principal species occurring in the British Commonwealth. Oxford: Clarendon, p. 475. Christoph, ITT. 1887. Lepidoptera aus dem Achal-Tekke-Ge- biete. Dritter Theil. Pp. 50—125. In Romanoff, N. M. (ed.). Memoires sur les Lepidopteres 3. St. Petersburg. de Oliveira, M.A. 1942 [1941], Contribugao ao estudo das pragas e molestias da Oiticica. Bol. Inspect. Fed. de Obras contra as Secas. 16(1) (Jnl-Setem.): 19—17. Denis, J.N.C.M. & I. Schiffermuller. 1775. Ankiindung eines systematischen Werkes von den Schmetterlingen der Wienergegend herausgegeben von einigen Lehrern am k.k. 202 Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society Theresianum. Augustin Bemardi, Wien. 1-323. Ehrlich, P.R. & D.D. Murphy. 1982 [1981]. ButteiHy nomen¬ clature: a critique, j. Res. Lepid. 20(1): 1—11. Evans, F.J. (ed.) 1986. Naturally Occurring Phorbol Esters. Boca Raton: CRC Press. Farris, J.S. 1979. The Information Content of the Phyloge¬ netic System. Syst. Zool. 28(4): 483-519. Fitch, W.M. 1971. Toward defining the course of evolution: minimum change for a specific tree topology. Syst. Zool. 20(4): 406—416. Fontenla, J.L. 2003. Biogeography of Antillean butterflies (Lepidoptera: Rhopalocera): patterns of association among areas of endemism. Trans. Amer. Entom. Soc. 129(3+4): 399-410. Gerlach, J. and P. Matyot. 2006. Lepidoptera of the Sey¬ chelles Islands. Leiden: Backhuys. Geyer, C. In Hiibner, J. 1826-1832 [1832], Zutrage zur Sammlung exotischer Schmettlinge, bestehend in Bekundi- gung einzelner Fliegmuster neuer oder rarer nichteuropais- cher Gattungen. Augsburg. [1]— [3]— 4— 6— [7]— 8— 48, pi. [104]— [137]. 1 Goloboff, R, J. Farris, & K. Nixon. 2003. T.N.T.: Tree Analy¬ sis Using New Technology, v. 1.1 for Windows. Program and documentation available from the authors and at www.zmuc.dk/public/phylogeny/TNT/. Accessed 14 June 2009. - , - , AND - . 2008. TNT, a free program for phyloge¬ netic analysis. Cladistics 24(5): 774-786. Grote, A.R. 1881. New moths from Arizona, with remarks on Catocala and Heliothis. Papilio 1: 153—168. - . 1882. On Certain Pyralidae. Papilio 2: 72-74. Guenee, M.A. 1854. Deltoides et Pyralites. Pp. 1-448. In Bois- duval, J. & M.A. Guenee (eds.) Histoire Naturelle des In- sectes. Species General des Lepidopteres 8. Paris: Roret. Gwynne, D.L. & Edwards, E.D. 1986. Ultrasound production by genital stridulation in Syntonarcha iriastis (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae): long-distance signalling by male moths? Zool. J. Linn. Soc. 88: 363—376. Hampson, G.F. 1896. The Fauna of British India, including Ceylon and Burma, London 4 (Moths), pp. i-xxviii, 1-594. - . 1897. On the classification of two subfamilies of moths of the family Pyralidae: The Hydrocampinae and Seopariinae. Trans. Entom. Soc. London: 127—240. - . 1899a. A revision of the moths of the subfamily Pyrausti- nae and family Pyralidae. Part I. Proc. Zool. Soc. London (1898) (4): 590-761. - . 1899b. A revision of the moths of the subfamily Pyrausti- nae and family Pyralidae. Part II. Proc. Zool. Soc. London 1899 (1): 172-291. - . 1901. The Lepidoptera-Phalaenae of the Bahamas. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (ser. 7) 7(39): 246-261. - . 1904. The Lepidoptera-Phalaenae of the Bahamas [con¬ tinued]. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (ser. 7) 14(81): 165—188. - . 1913a. Descriptions of new species of Pyralidae of the subfamily Pyraustinae. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (ser. 8) 11: 322-342, 509-530. - . 1913b. Descriptions of new species of Pyralidae of the subfamily Pyraustinae. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (ser. 8) 12: 1-38, 299-319. - . 1916. Descriptions of new Pyralidae of the subfamilies Epipaschiinae, Chrysauginae, Endotriehinae, and Pyralinae. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (ser. 8) 18: 126-160, 349-373^ - . In Poulton, E.B. 1916. On a collection of moths made in Somaliland by Mr. W. Feather. Proc. Zool. Soc. London: 91-182. - . 1917. Descriptions of new Pyralidae of the subfamilies Hydrocampinae, Scoparianae, &c. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist, (ser. 8) 20: 201-216, 265-282. Hayden, J.E. 2008. Notes on Metrea ostreonalis Grote. News Lepid. Soc. 50(1): 20-21, 25. - . 2009. Taxonomic revision of Neotropical Dicepolia Snellen (Lepidoptera: Crambidae). Zootaxa 2237:1—33, pi. 1-6. Heinrich, C. 1921. Some Lepidoptera likely to be confused with the pink bollworm. J. Agric. Research 20: 807-836. Holloway, J.D. & E.S. Nielsen. 1999. Biogeography of the Lepidoptera. Ch. 21 in Handbook of Zoology, Vol. IV Arthropoda: Insecta. Part 36 (Lepidoptera, Moths and But¬ terflies), Vol. 1 (Evolution, Systematics, and Biogeography). N.P Kristensen, ed. New York: Walter de Gruyter. Hubner, ]. 1796-1833 [1796]. Sammlung europaischer Schmetterlinge. 6. Horde. Die Ziinsler; nach der Natur geordnet, beschrieben und vorgestellt. Augsburg: by the author, [ij— [iv], [i — ii], [i— ii], 1-30, [i — ii], [i— ii], pis. 1-32. - . 1825 [1816]. VerzeichniB bekannter Schmettlinge. Augs¬ burg: by the author. [ 1]— [3] — 4 — 6— [7] — 8 — 431. Huertas Dionisio, M. 2007. Estados inmaturos de Lepi¬ doptera (XXVIII). Cuatro especies de la subfamilia Odonti- inae Guenee, 1854 en Huelva, Espana (Lepidoptera: Cram¬ bidae). SHILAP Revta. Lepid. 35 (137): 49-65. International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature. 1999. International Code of Zoological Nomenclature, fourth ed. London: The International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature. Iturralde-Vinent, M.A. & R.D.E. MacPhee. 1999. Paleo- geography of the Caribbean Region: implications for Ceno- zoic biogeography. Bull. Amer. Mus. Nat. Hist. 238: 1-95. Janzen, DTI. & Hallwachs, W. 2005. Dynamic database for an inventory of the macrocaterpillar fauna, and its food plants and parasitoids, of Area de Conservacion Gua- nacaste (ACG), northwestern Costa Rica. http://janzen.sas.upenn.edu, accessed 1 Nov. 2006. Klima, A. 1939. Pyralididae: Subfam.: Pyraustinae II. Pp. 225-383 in: Bryk, F., Lepidopterorum Catalogus 94. 's Gravenhage: W. Junk. Klots, A.B. 1956. Lepidoptera. Ch. 20 in Taxonomist's glos¬ sary of genitalia in insects. S. L. Tuxen, ed. Copenhagen: Ejnar Munksgaard. pp. 97-111. Kornerup, A. and Wanscher, J.H. Methuen. Handbook of Colour. 2nd ed. London: Methuen & Co. Ltd., 1967. Kristensen, N.P. 2004. Skeleton and muscles: adults. Ch. 4 in Handbook of Zoology, Vol. IV Arthropoda: Insecta. Part 36 (Lepidoptera, Moths and Butterflies), Vol. 2 (Moiphology, Physiology, and Development). N.P. Kristensen, ed. New York: Walter de Gruyter. Landry, B. 1995. A phylogenetic analysis of the major lineages of the Crambinae and of the genera of Crambini of North America (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). Memoirs on Entom. In- ternat.: 1. Lederer, J. 1863. Beitrag zur Kenntniss der Pyralidinen. Wiener Entom. Monatschrift 7 (8, 10—12): 243—280, 331-504. Leech, II. B. 1949. The occurrence of a hollyhock-seed eater, Noctuelia rufofascialis, at Vernon, British Columbia (Lepi¬ doptera: Pyralidae). Entom. Soc. Brit. Columbia Proc. 45 (1948): 25. Legrand, H. 1966. Lejoidopteres des lies Seychelles et d'Aldabra. — Mem. Mus. Hist, naturelle (ser. A Zool.) 37: 1-210. LepTree Team. 2008. LepGlossary: Leptree.net. Accessed Oct 03, 2008 at http://www.leptree.net/g2. Leraut, P. J. A. & Luquet, G.C. 1983. Statut de quelques gen¬ res et especes d'Odontiinae palearetiques et description de quatre nouveaux taxa (Le. Crambidae). Linneana Belgica 8 (1982) (12): 527-555. Liebherr, J.K. 1988. General patterns in West Indian insects, and graphical biogeographic analysis of some eireum- Caribbean Platijnus beetles (Carabidae). Syst. Zool. 37(4): 385-409. Lower, O.B. 1903. Descriptions of new Australian Noctuina, Volume 63, Number 4 203 &c. Trans. R. Soc. S. Austr. 27: 27-74. Maes, K.V.N. 1995. A comparative morphological study of the adult Crambidae (Lepidoptera: Pyraloidea). Bull. Ann. Soc. R. Beige Ent. 131:383-434. - . 2002. Crambidae. Pp. 96-105. In Vari, L., D.M. Kroon & M. Kruger. Classification and Checklist of the species of Lepidoptera recorded from Southern Africa. Chatswood, Australia: Simple Solutions. Maistrello, L., M.A. Lopez, F.J. Soria and R. Ocete. 2005. Growth inhibitory activity of Daphne gnidium L. (Thymelaeaceae) extracts on the elm leaf beetle (Col., Chrysomelidae). ). Appl. Entorn. 129(8):418— 424. Mann, J. 1969. Cactus-feeding insects and mites. Bull. U.S.N.M. 256. Marion, H. & P. Viette. 1956. Pyrales de Madagascar nou- velles ou peu connues (Lepidoptera). Mem. Inst. Sci. Madagascar, Ser. Entom. (E) 7: 77-115, pi. 1. McCabe, T.L. 1984. A new Cautethia from the Bahamas (Lep¬ idoptera: Sphingidae). Proc. Entom. Soc. Washington 86(3): 614-618. McDuSnough, J. 1931. Note on the larvae of Metrea ostreon- alis (Pyraustinae, Lepid.) Canad. Entom. 63: 50. Miller, J.Y. and L.D. Miller. 2001. The biogeography of the West Indian butterflies (Lepidoptera): an application of a vicariance/dispersalist model, pp. 127—155 in Biogeography of the West Indies: Patterns and Perspectives. 2nd ed. C.A. Woods and F.E. Sergile, eds. CRC Press. Miller, L.D. and M.J. Simon. 1998. Rediscovery of the rare, “endemic” Cuban butterfly, Achtjlodes munroei Bell, with notes on its behavior and possible origin. Caribbean J. Sci. 34: 327-329. Minet, J. 1980. Creation d’une sous-famille particuliere pour Noorda Walker, 1859, et definition d un nouveau genre parmi les Odontiinae. Bull. Soc. ent. France 85: 79-87. Moore, F. 1884-1887 [1885]. The Lepidoptera of Ceylon. London: L. Reeve, i-xvi, 1-578. Moore, F. 1888. Heterocera (continued) (Pyralidae, Cram¬ bidae, etc.). Pp. 199-299. In Hewitson, W.C. & Moore, F. Descriptions of new Indian lepidopterous Insects from the collection of the late Mr. W.S. Atkinson 3. London: Taylor & Francis. Moschler, H.B. 1886. Beitrage zur Schmetterlings-Fauna von Jamaica. Abhandl. Senck. Naturforsch. Ges. (Frankfurt a. M.) 14: 25-84. Munroe, E.G. 1961. Synopsis of the North American Odonti¬ inae, with Descriptions of New Genera and Species (Lepi¬ doptera: Pyralidae). Memoirs of the Entomological Society of Canada, Ottawa 24: 1-93. - In Dominick, R.B., et al. 1972. The Moths of America North of Mexico, fasc. 13. 1 B, Pyraloidea (in part). London: E.W. Classey, ltd. - . 1974a. New genera, species and generic transfers of Neotropical Odontiinae (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae). Canad. Entom. 106: 127-137. - . 1974b. Pyralidae of the third Archbold Expedition. 1. Subfamily Odontiinae (Lepidoptera). Tijds. voor Entom. 117(2): 27-37. - . 1977. Synopsis of Ileortia Lederer, with descriptions of a new species and a new subspecies (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae: Odontiinae). Canad. Entom. 109: 429—44 1 . - . 1995. Odontiinae. Pp. 51—52 in Ileppner, J.B. (ed.) Checklist: Atlas of Neotropical Lepidoptera. Gainesville: Assoc, for Neotropical Lepidoptera. Nixon, K.C. 1999-2002. WinClada ver. 1.00.08. Published by the author, Ithaca, NY, USA. http://www.cladistics.comAvincDownload.htm [accessed 2004] - & J.M. Carpenter. 1993. On outgroups. Cladistics 9: 413-426. - & J.I. Davis. 1991. Polymorphic taxa, missing values and cladistic analysis. Cladistics 7: 233-241 . Nuss, M. & Rallies, A. 2001. Titanio caradjae (Rebel, 1902) comb, n., transferred from Brachodidae (Sesioidea) to Crambidae (Pyraloidea). Nota Lepid. 24 (3): 33-39. - and collaborators. 2008. GlobIZ: Globales Information- ssystem Ziinslerfalter. www.pyraloidea.org, accessed June 2009. Rawlins, J.E. & J.S. Miller. 2008. Dioptine moths of the Caribbean Region: description of two new genera with notes on biology and biogeography (Lepidoptera: Notodon- tidae: Dioptinae). Ann. Carnegie Mus. 76(4): 203—225. Robinson, G.S. 1976. The preparation of slides of Lepidoptera genitalia with special reference to the Microlepidoptera. Entom. Gazette 27: 127-132. - . P.R. Ackery, I.J. Kitching, G.W Beccaloni and L.M. HernAndez. 2001. Hostplants of the moth and butterfly caterpillars of the Oriental Region. London: The Natural History Museum. - , - , - , - AND - . 2008. I IOSTS: a Database of the World's Lepidopteran Hostplants. The Natural Histoiy Museum (London), www.nhm.ac.uk/research-curation/pro- jects/hostplants/ [accessed 23 Jan. 2008], Rothschild, L.W. 1916. Lepidoptera of the British Ornithol¬ ogists' Union and Wollaston Expeditions in the Snow Moun¬ tains, Southern Dutch New Guinea. Zoological Museum, Tring. 1-148. Shaffer, J.C. and Munroe, E. 2007 [2003]. Crambidae of Aldabra Atoll (Lepidoptera: Pyraloidea). Trop. Lepid. 14(1-2): 1-110. Singh, S., N.D. Barthakur, and D. Gurung. 2000. Bioecol¬ ogy of Heortia vitessoides Moore (Lepidoptera: Pyralidae: Odentiinae [sic]), a major defoliator of Aquilaria malaccen- sis Lam. (Indian Eagle-wood). Ann. For. 8(1): 109-115. Slamka, F. 2006. Pyraloidea (Lepidoptera) of Europe, Volume 1 : Pyralinae, Galleriinae, Epipaschiinae, Cathariinae & Odontiinae. Bratislava: by the author. Smith, D.S., L.D. Miller, & J.Y. Miller. 1994. The Butter¬ flies of the West Indies and South Florida. Oxford U. Press. Snellen, P.C.T. 1880. In Piepers, M.C. & Snellen, P.C.T.: Nieuwe Pyraliden op het Eiland Celebes gevonden. Tijds. Entom. 23 (1879): 198-250. - . 1892. Bijdrage tot de Kennis der Pyralidina. Tijds. En¬ tom. 35: 152-178. - . 1899. Nieuwe Aanteekeningen over Pyraliden. Tijds. En¬ tom. 42: 58—95. Solis, M.A. & K.V.N. Maes. 2002. Preliminary phylogenetic analysis of the subfamilies of Crambidae (Pyraloidea Lepi¬ doptera). Belgian J. Entom. 4: 53-95. SoMMERER, M. 2002. To agree or not to agree — the question of gender agreement in the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. Nota Lepid. 25(2/3): 191-204. Stephens, J.F. 1834. Illustrations of British Entomology; or, a synopsis of indigenous insects. London: Baldwin and Cradock. 1—433. Sutrisno, H. 2002. Cladistic analysis of the Australian Gh/phodes Guenee and allied genera (Lepidoptera: Cram¬ bidae; Spilomelinae). Entom. Science 5(4): 457—467. Swinhoe, C. 1887. On the Lepidoptera of M how, in Central India. Proc. Zool. Soc. London 1886: 421-465. - . 1894. New species of Geometers and Pyrales from the Khasia Hills. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (6) 14: 135-149. Swofford, D.L. & WP Maddison. 1987. Reconstructing an¬ cestral character states under Wagner Parsimony. Math. Biosci. 87: 199-229. Tominaga, S. 1999. Hostplants of five species of Pyralidae in Okinawa. Yugato 156 (20 Apr.): 61-62. Turner, A.J. 1908. New Australian Lepidoptera of the families Noctuidae and Pyralidae. Trans. & Proc. of the Roy. Soc. of South Austr. 32 (Dec.): 102. Viette, P. 1953 a. Nouvelles Pyrales de Madagascar. Rev. 204 Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society frang. Entom. 20(1): 130-137. - . 1953 b. Descriptions tie nouvelles especes de pyrales de la faune Malgache (Ins. Lepid.) Bull. Mens. Soc. Linn, de Lyon 22(8): 203-209. - . 1954 [1953]. Nouvelles descriptions de Pyrales malgaches (Lepid. Pvraustidae). Bull. Mus. Nat. Hist. Naturelle (2) 25 (Octobre): 483—488. - . 1958. Pyrales de la region Malgache nouvelles ou pen connues (Lepidoptera). Mem. Inst. Sci. Madagascar (Ser. Entom.) 9: 119-156. - . 1960. Pyrales nouvelles ou peu connues de Madagascar et des Comores (Lep.). Ann. Soc. Entom. France 129: 151-177. - . 1990. Crambidae (pp. 84-103) in Faune de Madagascar, supplement 1 : A provisional check-list of the Lepidoptera Heteroeera of Madagascar. Published by the author. Walker, F. 1859. Pyralides. List of the Specimens of Lepi- dopterous Insects in the Collection of the British Museum 18: 509-798. - . 1862. Characters of undescribed Lepidoptera in the Col¬ lection of W. W. Saunders, Esq. Trans. Entom. Soc. London (3) 1: 70-128. - . 1866 [1865], Suppl. 4. List of the Specimens of Lepi- dopterous Insects in the Collection of the British Museum, London 34: 1121-1533. Warren, W. 1889. On the Pyralidina collected in 1874 and 1875 by Dr. J.W.H. Trail in the basin of the Amazons. Trans. Entom. Soc. London 1889: 227-295. - . 1890. Descriptions of some new genera of Pyralidae. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (6) 6: 474-479. - . 1892. Descriptions of new genera and species of Pyrali¬ dae contained in the British Museum collection. Ann. Mag. Nat. Hist. (6) 9: 172-179, 294-302, 389-397, 429-442. Waterhouse, D.F. 1998. Ch. 4.6 in ACIAR Monograph No. 51: Biological Control of Insect Pests: Southeast Asian Prospects. Canberra: ACIAR, pp. 105-112. Wilkinson, M. 1995. Coping with abundant missing entries in phylogenetic inference using parsimony. Syst. Biol. 44(4): 501-514. Zeller, PC. 1847. Bemerkungen ilber die auf einer Reise naeli Italien und Sicilien beobachteten Schmetterlingsarten. Isis von Oken (Leipzig) 8: 561—594. Received for publication 2 January 200,9,- revised and accepted 27 May 2009. Please see Appendices on next 4 pages Volume 63, Number 4 205 Appendix A: Characters. Head 0. Antennal sensilla: sensilla short in both sexes = 0; male antenna thicker = 1; male sensilla longer = 2; sensilla long in both sexes = 3. 1. Labial palpi, aspect: porrect = 0; upturned = 1. Difficult to discern for species with very short palpi, such as C. ostreonalis. 2. Labial palpi, length: shorter than or equal to head = 0; longer than length of head = 1 . 3. Frontoclypeal margin: straight = 0; prong = 1; A-shaped arch = 2 (figs 5, 6: Fc). Despite its exaggeration, the nearly circular structure in Suinoorda is homologized with the sharply angled shape in other tax a. At the other extreme, some species have an slightly bowed arch. The double prong, two horizontal projections above the haustellum shared by Eurrhi/pis and Tegostoma, is common in many Odontiini. Wings 4. Forewing medial area, color: terminal and medial areas translucent or paler than postmedial line = 0; terminal area dark, medial area pearly white or yellow = 1 (figs 1, 3, 4); terminal and medial areas dark = 2 (fig. 2); terminal area lighter than medial area = 3. In practice, states 0 and 2 may be hard to discern, e.g. comparing Dicepolia to Hemiscopis and Hi/drorybina . In state 0, the red or violet terminal forewing band is fundamentally absent, and any coloration affects the whole forewing de novo. In state 2, the terminal band is fundamentally present, and the medial area is suffused with the same coloration. State 1 broadly characterizes the sharply different coloration between medial and postmedial areas, seen in the white/red pattern of Suinoorda, Autocharts , etc., the Schinia- like pattern of Mimoschinia, and the modified aposematic pattern of Heortia. 5. Forewing medial area suffusion: absent = 0; with yellow or orange scales = 1. The yellow scales may be diffusely dispersed among whiter scales (E. ocellata), or may occupv the entire wing. In some cases ( Heortia ), the pattern is implicated in aposematic mimicry. 6. Extension of forewing costa: absent = 0; costa approximating or fused to postmedial line through discal spot = 1. Applicable only for char. 4 state 1. 7. Sheen of wings and body scales: matte = 0; opalescent, silkv, or hyaline = 1; metallic = 2. The difference between states 0 and 1 can best be distinguished on the hindwings. State 2 is restricted to the legs, lower thorax and underside of the wings in C. orientalale and C. vohilavale, whereas in other species C. atristriatum and C. sericialc, it also occurs on the dorsal side of the wings. 8. Antemedial line: absent or reduced = 0; present = 1. 9. Proximity of forewing postmedial line to distal wing margin: narrow (PM line near distal margin) = 0; broad (PM line ca. 3/5 from base of wing) = 1. 10. Forewing fovea: absent = 0; present = 1 . 11. Forewing Rsp not stalked with Rs9+3 = 0 (fig. 10); stalked with Rs9+3 = 1 . 12. Hindwing M2, M3: arising separately from cell = 0; stalked = 1. 13. Color in terminal hindwing anal area: not suffused = 0 (figs 1-4); suffused = 1 . Inapplicable where the hindwing lacks any trace of color. The absence or strong reduction of coloration on the anal area, at least indicated by the postmedial line’s abrupt cessation or convergence with the margin at Al, is also common in Glaphyriinae, Evergestinae, Pyraustinae s. str. and a few Spilomelinae. 14. Hindwing anal margin, emargination: absent = 0; present = 1. The round notch in the basal half of the hindwing anal area appears to articulate with the metathoracic legs. Tympanal organs 15. Saccus tympani, medial rounding: rounded and deep: = 0 (fig. 17: ST); medially oblong: = 1. The pair of sacci extend anteriad under S2. The outline of state 0 is like a D, and state 1 is more like a “I)” shape. Male genitalia 16. A8 tergite posterior fringe: not expanded = 0; expanded, square, like whole tergite = 1. All Odontiinae have a distinct fringe of hairs on the posterior edge of T8. The fringe is normally a narrow strip (state 0; fig. 12: F); state 1 describes cases where the scale-bearing field is expanded, up to a length:width ratio of 1:1. Sipitonarcha also has an expanded fringe (Gwynne & Edwards 1986, fig. 2: “cuticular flap”). 17. S8 bilobate: straight or monolobate = 0; weakly bilobate (lobe depth less than width) = 1 (fig. 12); strongly bilobate (lobe depth exceeds width) = 2. The anterior, internally extended lobes of sternite 8 evidently serve as muscle insertion sites for the retraction of the genitalia. In state 2, the medial concavity is deeper than the width of either lobe. 18. S8 posterior median projection: absent = 0 (fig. 12); present = 1. This is in the same plane as the rest of the selerite (cf. characters 19, 20). 19. S8 posterior median projection, shape: simple, triangular = 0; bilobate or trapezoidal = 1. Inapplicable if char. 18 absent. 20. S8 posterior edge: straight = 0; excavate or concave = 1 (fig. 12); boss or saddle-horn = 2 (fig. 9). In state 2, the medial posterior margin emerges out of the plane of the rest of S8. 206 Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society Appendix A (continued) 21. Lamelliform structures: absent = 0 (fig. 12); present = 1 (fig. 9: Lm). 22. Sepiform structures: absent = 0 (fig. 9); present = 1 (fig. 8: Sep). 23. Piluli of S8 (posterolateral of lamelliform structures): absent = 0; present = 1 (fig. 12: Pi). These sensillae occur posterolaterally of lamelliform structures, closer to the posterior corners of S8. See also Nuss & Kallies 2001: fig. 2. 24. Squamiform structures: absent = 0; present = 1 (figs 8-10). These are the paired “riffled membranes” of Nuss & Kallies (2001: fig. 1). 25. Squamal symmetry: symmetrical = 0 (figs 8-10); asymmetrical = 1. See Gwynne & Edwards 1986 for an asymmetrical example not included in this study. 26. Squamiform structures, distal edge: squarish = 0 (fig. 9); rounded = 1 (figs 8, 10). 27. Squamal enations: absent = 0; present = 1 (fig. 8: En). These fold around the sepiform structures where the latter are present, but the presence of a similar mid-squamal protuberance in Hemiscopis warrants coding them as a separate character. 28. Basicostal androconia: absent = 0; medium-length to long scales from field at base of costa = 1 (figs 18 & 19: BA); long scales from discrete field at end of sclerotized costa = 2. 29. Main patch of nondeciduous setae: not differentiated = 0; massive, robust setae = 1 . Restricted to Heortia and Cliniodes. In C. paradisalis, this is represented by a single, hook-like, basally directed spine near the apex of the valve. Like other sensilla chaetica, it does not absorb Chlorazol stain. 30. Scoop-shaped scales: absent = 0; present = 1 (fig. 18: ScS). These broad scales have fine, closely spaced ridges, pearly lustre, and are shaped like potato chips. They commonly arise from the dorsal side of the valve and curve over the edge. They are often apparent by their lustre and dense packing on the valval edges of partly exposed genitalia. 31. Vincular androconia: absent = 0; present = 1 (fig. 18: VA). Common to most Pyraloidea, this is the pair of androconia on the pleural portion of the A8-A9 intersegmental membrane. Often called “coremata” (e.g. Sutrisno 2002, char. 30; Landry 1995, “coremata on intersegmental membrane VIII-IX”). 32. Apex of costa: not projecting = 0; straight hook = 1 ; blunt sigmoid (apex out-turned) = 2 (fig. 19); downcurved hook fused to pleated flap = 3. 33. Juxta apex: not differentiated = 0; recurved hook = 1. 34. Gnathos apex: blunt and linguiform = 0; sharp, acute = 1; hatchet-shaped = 2. 35. Gnathos sides: inverse V = 0; inverse Y, with medial process = 1 (fig. 1 1); compact base with ventral notch = 2; transverse bar = 3. Some gnathoi coded as state 0, including S. maccabei, have bent lateral arms and approximate state 1, but the bends lie well below the medial junction, more like a capital upsilon. 36. Gnathos base-uncus base: gnathos base not articulating with uncus lower corners = 0; gnathos base near or articulating with uncus lower corners = 1 (fig. 11). 37. Phallus: not spiral = 0; spiral = 1 . Female genitalia 38. Ovipositor length: short = 0 (fig. 16); long = 1. 39. Colliculum: short = 1 (fig. 16: C); long (most of length of ductus) = 2. 40. Ductus bursae sclerotization: absent = 0; smooth, extending along the long, narrow ductus bursae = 1; rough, on limited area of cervix bursae = 2. In many Eurrhypini, including Suinoorda, the ductus bursae is expanded as a cervix bursae (fig. 16: CvB). In this sample of taxa. no clear distinction could be made between the typically long, narrow ductus and a short, inflated cervix bursae. Species with state 1 have the ductus bursae mostly but weakly sclerotized, whereas state 2 represents a limited area that is often granular. Suinoorda and Noordodes share a large cervix bursae occupied by massive, irregular sclerotization. 41. Appendix of ductus bursae: absent = 0; present = 1. 42. Corpus bursae signum: absent = 0; present (1 or 2) = 1 (fig. 16). 43. Corpus bursae signum shape: round = 0 (fig. 16); linear = 1. Inapplicable if char. 42 absent. 44. Ductus seminalis origin: from ductus bursae = 0 (fig. 16: DS); from corpus bursae, with signum extension = 1. 45. Ductus seminalis basal width: narrow = 0; enlarged = 1. 46. Pleats or wrinkles on cervix bursae: absent = 0; present = 1; present over both cervix and corpus bursae = 2. State 2 represents cases where there is no clear distinction between the plications of the cervix and corpus bursae. In Suinoorda , pleats occur on the corpus, but they are clearly not continuous from the irregularly shaped sclerotization of the cervix. Larva 47. Feeding habit: tube-dwelling stem borer or leaf miner = 0; seed and fruit pulp feeder = 1; folivore, Thymelaeaeeae = 2; folivore, other = 3. The states reflect plausible physiological and metabolic constraints. The external silken tube of Eurrhypis and Tegostoma is probably a modification of an ancestrally internal gallery, retained for feeding on thin-branched hostplants. Thymelaeaeeae produce many unique feeding deterrents (Maistrello et al. 2005), and folivory on this family is rare in Lepidoptera (Robinson et al. 2008). How correctly the states are defined will emerge as new records are obtained (see the predicted values). Volume 63, Number 4 20 Appendix B: Data matrix. ?: unobserved, inapplicable. More than one state: A: [01], B: [02], C: [12], D: [23] Terminal Character Number Cynaeda dentalis— — — Tegostoma comparale — ■ — - — Aeglotis argentalis-- - Argyrarcha margarita - - Autocharis alblplaga - — Autocharis barbieri - Autocharis fessalls — - - Autocharis mlmetlca — - - Cliniodes costlmacula - Cllnlodes opalalls - - - Cliniodes ostreonalis — • — Cllnlodes paradlsalls - Clupeosoma atrlstrlatum — Clupeosoma orlentalale - Clupeosoma sericlale - — — Clupeosoma vohllavale — • — Deanolls sublimballs - — • — Dlcepolla munroealls - Dlcepolla roseobrunne - Dlcepolla rufltlnctalls — Ephells cruentalls - - — Eplpagls ocellata - Eurrhypls polllnalls - Hemiscopls suffusalls - Heortia domlnalls - Heortia vitessoldes - Hyallnarcha hyallnalls - Hydroryblna polusalls - — Mecyna catalalls ■ - - — Mecynarcha aplcalls- - - Mlmoschlnla rufofasclalls Noordodes magnlflcalis - - Pltama hermesalis - Pseudonoorda brunneiflava Pseudonoorda distlgmalis— Pseudoschlnla elautalis — - Sobanga rutilalis- - Sulnoorda maccabei — -- - — Vlettessa bethalis - - 05 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 200000-0-0100000000-00000 - 00010010000100110000 200120-010000100000-00000 - 000100100011000-0000 D010 10 111000000 10 10-1 100 100000 1000 1300?????????? 0000101110000001100-210011000010001210010010001? 2012100110000000020-010110001011202000012011000? 2012A00 11000000002 111101 1000101?20 1100 12001 10003 2012100100001000020-1101100010113010001220110003 2012100100000000020-01011000101120200012200-000? 000021-110000101010-210110000011000010012010101? 310020-110000100010-2101100021110112100220101012 1A0000-1 10000-010 10-2 101 100000 110 103 100 120 10 10 ID 1100 101 110000 1000 10-C101 10002 1100 110 100 1200-101? 001020-2001110001110101010110011101000?????????? 000030-2000 100000 110 1010 10 11001 110 10001 100 100 1A? 000020-2001110001110101010110011101000110010011? 10A020-2 100 100000 110 10 10 10 1100 11 1000001 100 100 1A? 001010010001001001111010101100110020001100100101 ?0 1200-1 1000000101 10 1101 1000 101 ?30 11010 10 10-00A? 201200-11000000002100101100010113011010101100001 001200-1100010000210110110001011301101010010000? 2000100010000000010-01011000000100100001000-000? 1000111110000001010-210110001011001000110110100? 2001111010000100010-01011000000100100001000-0010 00 1020-1 1 1000 10 101 102 10 1 100 110 1 10000000 100 10000D 1010111110000101100-110110001111000000012010000? 1100111111000101110-1101100011110000000120100022 200200-110000000010-210010001010301100010011001? 001020-111010001021011011000101100000011000-0013 00002 1-1 1000000 10 110 110 11000001 100 1A000 1000-000? 000020-110000101100-110011000000001210010010001? 2000100010000000010-11011000000100100011100-0021 0002100110010000010-101010110011001000112010001? 1000100101000001020-010110001011001100010010000? 0002A0010001QQ0Q010-001010Q10011001000A1200Q011? 00101001000100100111101010110011002000110010010? 2000100010000000010-11011000000100100001100-0001 0000101110000001100-00000 - 000?00 12 100 100 10001? 0002C001000000000 10-101 110 11 10 1100 10 100 120 1000A? 1000 101 10 100000 1020-B10 11000 101 100 1000 11000-000? 208 Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society Appendix C: Unambiguous character state changes of nodes for cladogram (fig. 7). Format: “character: primitive state — > de¬ rived state.” Obtained with TNT commands “Optimize / Synapomorphies / List synapomorphies.” Cynaeda dentalis : 5: 0 -> 1 31: 1 -> 0 Node 59 : No autapomorphies 6: 0 -> 1 Node 42 : 10: 0 -> 1 Tegostoma comparale : 1 3: 0 ~> 1 6: 0 ~> 1 12: 0 -> 1 3: 0 ~> 1 46: 0 -> 1 15: 0 ~> 1 16: 0 -> 1 13: 0 -> 1 Hemiscopis suffusalis : Node 43 : Node 60 : 38: 0 -> 1 13: 0 ~> 1 0: 2 -> 0 4: 1 -> 2 Aeglotis argentalis : 20: i -> 2 43: 1 -> 0 7: 1 -> 2 0:0 ~> 23 27: 0 -> 1 Node 44 : 32: 0 -> 1 2: 0 -> 1 Heortia dominalis : 7: 0 -> 1 Node 61 : Argyrarcha margarita : 2: 0 -> 1 30: 0 -> i 3: 2 -> 0 20: 1 -> 2 17: 1 -> 0 42: 0 -> 1 18: 0 -> 1 Autocharts albiplaga : Heortia vitessoides : Node 45 : 40: 2 -> 0 38: 1 -> 0 1: 0 -> 1 20: 0 --> l Node 62 : 39: 2 -> 1 9: 0 -> 1 47: 0 -> 1 45: 0 -> 1 Autocharts barbieri : 46: 0 --> 2 Node 46 : Node 63 : No autapomorphies Hyalinarcha hyalinalis : 17: 0 -> 1 11: 0 -> 1 Autocharts fessalis : 20: 1 -> 2 21: 0 ~> 1 23: 1 --> 0 12: 0 -> 1 23: 1 ~> 0 23: 0 --> 1 38: 0 -> 1 Autocharts mimetlca : 31: 1 -> 0 24: 0 --> 1 Node 64 : 42: 1 -> 0 46: 0 -> i Node 47 : 21: 1 -> 0 Cliniodes costimacula : Hydrorybina polusalis : 16: 0 -> 1 22: 0 -> 1 0: 1 --> 0 11:0 -> i 17: 1 -> 0 26: 0 -> 1 Cliniodes opalalis : 17: 1 -> 2 25: 0 -> 1 27: 0 --> 1 0: 1 -> 3 38: 0 -> 1 36: 0 -> 1 40: 0 -> 2 35: 0 ~> 2 46: 0 -> 1 Node 48 : Node 65 : 39: 1 -> 2 Mecyna catalalis : 20: 1 -> 0 2: 0 -> 1 Cliniodes ostreonalis : 5: 0 ~> 1 34: 1 --> 2 14: 0-> 1 4: 12 -> 0 Mecynarcha apicalis : Node 49 : 19: 0-> 1 35: 0 -> 3 4: 1 ~> 2 35: 1 -> 0 34: 1 ~> 2 Cliniodes paradisalis : 13: 0 -> 1 40: 0 -> 2 46: 1 -> 0 31: 1 -> 0 Mimoschinia Node 50 : Node 66 : 42: 1 -> 0 rufofascialis : 38: 0 -> 1 41 : 0 -> 1 Clupeosoma atristriatum : 38: 0 -> 1 39: 1 ~> 2 Node 67 : 2: 0 ~> 1 46: 0 -> 2 47: 1 -> 3 37: 0 -> 1 Clupeosoma orientalale : Noordodes magnificalis : Node 51 : 43: 1 --> 0 4: 2 --> 3 No autapomorphies 2: 0 -> 1 Node 68 : Clupeosoma sericiale : Pitama hermesalis : 17: 1 -> 2 2: 0 -> 1 No autapomorphies 6: 1 ~> 0 Node 52 : 9: 0 -> 1 Clupeosoma vohilavale : 35: 0 -> 1 32: 0 -> 3 34: 1 ~> 0 0: 0 -> 1 Pseudonoorda 35: 0 -> 1 Node 69 : 8: 0 ~> 1 bninneiflava : Node 53 : 4: 1 ~> 2 34: 1 -> 0 20: 1 -> 0 28: 1 -> 0 18: 0 -> 1 Deanolis sublimbalis : 26: 1 -> 0 36: 0 -> 1 Node 70 : No autapomorphies 42: 1 -> 0 46: 0 -> 1 16: 0 -> 1 Dicepolia munroealis : Pseudonoorda Node 54 : 29: 0 -> 1 15: 0 ~> 1 distigmalis : 13: 0 -> 1 Node 71 : 17: 2 --> 1 No autapomoiphies 34: 1 -> 0 30: 1 -> 0 42: 1 -> 0 Pseudoschinia elautalis : 40: 0 -> 2 Node 72 : Dicepolia roseobrunnea : No autapomoiphies Node 55 : 40: 0 -> 1 20: 1 -> 0 Sobanga rutilalis : 5: 0 -> 1 Node 73 : Dicepolia rufitinctalis : 20: 1 -> 0 Node 56 : 8: 1 ~> 0 0: 2 -> 0 21: 1 -> 0 0: 0 -> 1 9: 0 -> 1 12: 0 ~> 1 24: 1 -> 0 Node 57 : 17: 1 -> 2 Ephelis cruentalis : Suinoorda maccabei : 15: 1 -> 0 No autapomoqrhies 36: 0 -> 1 28: 0 ~> 2 Epipagis ocellata : Viettessa bethalis : 29: 0 -> 1 38: 0 --> 1 38: 0 -> i 34: 0 -> 1 41: 0~> 1 42: 1 -> 0 Node 58 : Eurrhypis pollinalis : Node 41 : 5: 1 ~> 0 3: 0 -> 1 23: 1 ~> 0 33: 0 -> 1 Volume 63, Number 4 209 Journal of the Lepidopterists' Societi/ 63(4), 2009, 209-213 KY BUTTERFLY NET: AN INTERACTIVE WEB DATABASE TO FACILITATE LEPIDOPTERA RESEARCH AND EDUCATION IN KENTUCKY Charles V. Covell Jr. Department of Biology, University of Louisville, Louisville, Kentucky 40292, USA and McGuire Center for Lepidoptera and Biodiversity, Florida Museum of Natural History, SW 34th Street and Hull Road, PO Box 112710, Gainesville, Florida 32611-2710, USA; email: covelI@Iouisville.edu, Benjamin D. Marcus Fourth Floor Equipment Corp., 72 Reade Street, 2nd Floor, New York, New York 10007, USA; email: bmarcus@pobox.com AND Jeffrey M. Marcus Department of Biology, Western Kentucky University, Bowling Green, Kentucky 42101-1080, USA and Department of Biological Sciences, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3T 2N2, CANADA, email: marcus@cc.urrianitoba.ca (author for correspondence) ABSTRACT. Kentucky Butterfly Net is a World Wide Web database that collects and reports distribution data for the 2,488 species of Lep¬ idoptera (butterflies and moths) known from the state of Kentucky, USA. It includes tools lor entering, editing, and curating new records. Species queries in Kentucky Butterfly Net can be initiated using either scientific or common names. Species query reports include range maps and phenology spindle diagrams dynamically generated from the data. Location queries can produce species lists of all Lepidoptera, just but¬ terflies or just moths for 244 geographic localities, corresponding to the 120 counties of Kentucky, plus an additional 124 conservation units. To date, a total of 61.231 records covering the years 1872-present are included in the database. These data represent an important resource for both education and research on the Lepidoptera of Kentucky. Additional key words: biogeography, climate change, citizen science, web database. Regional guides to Lepidoptera are an important resource for both professionals and amateurs. They serve a wide variety of purposes as varied as facilitating the identification of crop pests, providing the raw data for the study of biogeography, and satisfying the curiosity of casual inquirers. In the United States important examples of such guides include the 4 volumes of The Lepidoptera of New York and Neighboring States (Forbes 1923, 1948, 1954, I960), The Lepidoptera of Florida: An Annotated Checklist (Kimball 1965), and the 3 volumes of A List of the Lepidoptera of Maine (Brower 1974, 1983, 1984). For the study of butterflies and moths in Kentucky and adjacent states, Covell (1999) has been an important reference. However, these print guides have limitations. They veiy quickly go out of date as additional collections and observations are made (Covell & Gibson 2008, Covell et al. 2000, Gibson & Covell 2006), as new species are described or species names are revised (Covell et al. 2000), and as species distributions change over time (Gibson & Covell 2006). Regional guides can also be difficult to obtain after they go out of print, making it difficult (and sometimes expensive) for those newly interested to access the information that they contain. To address these issues, a number of World Wide Web-based projects have been initiated (see http://www.lepsoc.org/lepidoptera_websites_databases. php). These include projects that attempt to cover Worldwide (Oehlke 2007, Pittaway & Kitching 2008), North American (Opler et al. 2006, Poole 1999), or national (CBIF 2006, Roy 2008), distributions of select species, or more comprehensive treatments of all Lepidopteran species in particular conservation units, such as Great Smoky Mountains National Park, USA (NPS 2007) or Area de Conservation Guanacaste, Costa Rica (Janzen & Hallwachs 2005). Our own project is a World Wide Web-based description of the known lepidopteran fauna on an intermediate geographic scale, the state of Kentucky, USA, which covers approximately 10.5 million square kilometers. The history of Kentucky Lepidoptera studies and early publications, almost exclusively restricted to Kentucky butterflies, can be found in the “History” section of Covell (1999, pp. 2-6). Beginning in 1964, a file of data on collections and observations of all Kentucky Lepidoptera was begun by Covell from historical and current field collections and reliable observations. To add to the known state fauna, the Society of Kentucky Lepidopterists was formed in 1974, 210 Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society and members have met in various localities in the state to collect specimens and record observations. Unidentified specimens were taken to various moth specialists, notably at the U. S. National Museum of Natural Histoiy (Smithsonian Institution) in Washington, DC. These colleagues identified many moths, some of them found to be new to science, and others found to represent major extensions of known ranges. The project described here builds upon these earlier efforts to collect, organize, and share Kentucky Lepidoptera records. We have created a world wide web-based version of a Microsoft Access database, complete with tools for distributed data entiy, euration, and visualization by species or locality to facilitate research and educational activities concerning the Lepidoptera of this region. This resource is known as Kentucky Butterfly Net and is available at http://www.kybutterfly.net. Materials and Methods Database histoiy and design. Efforts to systematically inventory the Lepidoptera of Kentucky began in 1964 with records entered by hand on large file cards, and filed alphabetically by family, genus, and species. In 1995, data were transferred from these cards to a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet to facilitate the preparation of Coveil (1999), The butteiflies and moths ( Lepidoptera ) of Kentucky: an annotated checklist , but data continued to be organized alphabetically. In 2002, with the assistance of Rick Ruggles, the data were transferred to Microsoft Access to create a desktop computer-based relational database. In creating the relational Microsoft Access database, specific requirements were: to reorganize the data to store it efficiently and to facilitate queries; to include all previously recorded data, making concessions for records that are incomplete or vague; to migrate the existing data cost effectively minimizing manual re¬ entry; to allow queries of the data based on taxonomy, location and date; to allow the entiy of new data with additional information such as GPS location; and to provide a mechanism of euration and validation of newly entered data. As currently construed, Kentucky Butterfly Net is a Microsoft Access relational database installed on a server running Microsoft IIS (Internet Information ' Services) and ASP (Active Server Pages). Records for species and geographic localities must match entries that appear in the respective lookup tables. The addition of a new species to the Kentucky species list or the addition of a new conservation unit to the locality list requires correspondence with one of the database curators. For more routine additions to the database, a series of dynamic web pages were created in ASP to permit users from remote locations to query the database or add new records over the web through a browser interface. We chose to utilize a database structure that is non-normalized to accommodate legacy data. New data are validated by automated validation routines as well as by an administrative user to ensure accuracy and completeness. Finally, queries take into account both normalized and non-normalized data to display the resulting dataset accurately. Data entiy and euration. Data entry permission is password protected to prevent hacking and electronic vandalism. People with Lepidoptera records from Kentucky to include in the database should contact one of the authors to receive a username and password. A convenient set of pull-down menus and text boxes allows rapid data entiy, and users can correct or delete their own records that contain errors. Once entered, records are placed in an approval queue, but are not part of the searchable database until the records are approved by a database curator with administrative access. Administrative access is also password protected, and currently restricted to the authors of this paper. Database curators can approve records, deny them, or leave them in the queue pending receipt of further information (digital photos, specimens, or other opinions). Queries by species. Species queries in Kentucky Butterfly Net can be initiated by entering either scientific or common names. Species query reports include range maps and phenology spindle diagrams dynamically generated from the records in the data, a complete list of which is also included in the report (Fig. 1). Also included in each species report are links to digital photos of mounted specimens for each species from the image libraries of the North American Moth Photographers Group (Patterson 2005), Tortricid Net (Gilligan 2008) and Nearctica.com (Poole 1999). Queries by location. To facilitate the compilation of species lists for particular localities, location queries are available by county or by conservation unit. Locations can be selected by name or by clicking through a map- based interface. Some large conservation units span county boundaries, so records can be called up lor portions of the unit or for the unit as a whole. County record lists include records from conservation units within the county. Location queries can produce a list of all Lepidopteran species, just butterfly species, or just moth species recorded from that location, with a link to the species query report for each taxon on the list. Volume 63, Number 4 21 1 Results To date, a total of 61,231 records describing 2,488 known species for the state of Kentucky are included in the database. Included among these are the records contained in published species lists for the state of Kentucky (Coveil 1999, Covell & Gibson in press., Covell et al. 2000, Gibson & Covell 2006), records published in the Season Summaries of the Lepidopterists’ Society and in the Newsletter of the Society of Kentucky Lepidopterists, as well as numerous unpublished observations. The records cover the period of 1872-present, with the majority of records dating from the last 45 years. Each record corresponds to one or more specimens of a single species collected, photographed, or observed together on a single day in one of 244 geographic localities, corresponding to the 120 counties of Kentucky, plus an additional 124 conservation units (National Parks, National Forests, State Parks, Wildlife Management Areas, etc.). For a small minority of recent records, GPS coordinates are also available. Moth records are generally specimen-based. Butterfly records include a mixture of specimen-based, photograph- based, and observation-based reports. Reports based on photographs or observations are indicated as such. Discussion Education and public outreach. On-line databases such as Kentucky Butterfly Net can play an important role in raising public awareness about the Lepidoptera of a particular region. Casual visitors to the web site, especially those from understudied counties within the state, upon finding that many species are missing, frequently begin to document the species found within their area and report them. More formally, the database is used in conjunction with field collections in entomology and biodiversity courses at Western Kentucky University, and K-12 schools are beginning to take advantage of its availability as well. Since it went live in January 2007, over 1900 users have consulted the Kentucky Butterfly Net database. Invasive Species. Kentucky Butterfly Net and other similar databases are very useful for monitoring invasive species. Information about the detection and spread of KY Butterfly Net Database Query Results New Query Image © Robert W. Poole at Nearctica.com Family Nymphalidae Genus Limenitis Species archippus Common Name Viceroy 'iikbi Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Spindle Detail Earliest Sighting: April 27 Date of first observation: August 25, 1890 Latest Sighting: October 10 Most recent observation: May 13, 2008 Date #of Specimens Location County Collected By Determined By Notes GPS N GPS W May 13. 2008 1 Menifee photo Rita S. Adkins Joe Harmon Rd, Frenchburg.Ky. September 19, 2007 1 Menifee photo Rita S. Adkins On Joe Harmon Rd.. about 2.5 miles South of Frenchburg September 8, 2007 1 Paducah McCracken Loran Gibson Loran Gibson Streetman's Property August 25, 2007 1 Meade Loran Gibson Loran Gibson Lapland and Vicinity of Battletown June 17. 2007 1 McCracken Loran Gibson Loran Gibson Littleville May 22, 2007 1 Bracken Loran Gibson Loran Gibson Meldahl Dam Fig. 1 . Example of a species query report from Kentucky Butterfly Net for the viceroy, Limenitis archippus (Cramer, 1776). This species is the state insect of Kentucky. Included in the report is a photo of the species, a dynamically generated range map, a dy¬ namically generated phenology chart (or “spindle diagram”), the dates of the first and most recent observations of the species in t he state, and a comprehensive list of records for the species. The list of records has been truncated for inclusion here. 212 Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society such species needs to be shared quickly and must be accessible to as many interested people as possible, making web-based technologies particularly appropriate. There are a number of non-native Lepidoptera known from Kentucky, some of which, such as the meadow fritillary, Boloria bellona (Fabricius), invaded and spread from East to West through the state in less than 25 years, perhaps along the interstate highway system (Coveil 1999). Another species, the European skipper Thymelicus lineola (Ochsenheimer), was present in the state for decades, becoming locally common in some areas, but did not spread as widely, and may now be extirpated since it has not been recorded from Kentucky since 1989 (Covell 1999). In 2000, Jonathan Smith collected the first Kentucky specimen of a Eurasian noctuid moth, Noctua pronuba (Linnaeus), which has been spreading throughout North America since its apparent introduction from Europe in 1979 (Covell & Gibson in press.). Rare and Threatened Species. Databases such as Kentucky Butterfly Net are also important for monitoring populations of rare or threatened species. The distribution maps included in species reports can be used to illustrate to landowners the rarity of Lepidopteran populations on their properties and may help to enlist their cooperation in protecting those populations. It can also help governmental regulatory agencies and nonprofit conservation groups to identify populations that are in need of protection. Species that may fit these criteria in Kentucky include the Duke’s Skipper, Euphyes clukesi (Lindsey), the broad-winged skipper, Poanes viator (W.H. Edwards), the Olympia marble, Euchloe olympia (W. H. Edwards), the Ozark Swallowtail, Papilio joanae (J. R. Heitzman), the Northern metalmark, Calephelis borealis (Grote & Robinson), the swamp metalmark, Calephelis mutica (McAlpine), and the rattlesnake master borer moth, Papaipema eryngii (Bird). It can also help identify outlying populations of species that are geographically and possibly also genetically distinct from the rest of the species distribution. An example may be the population of brown elfin butterflies Calloplirys augustus (Kirby) discovered in Mammoth Cave National Park in 2005 by Ian Segebarth during a Lepidoptera inventory, which is over 200 km away from the nearest known neighboring population of that species. Global Climate Change and Habitat Loss. Lepidoptera are frequently used as indicator species because many species (especially butterflies) are easy to observe and identify and also respond to changes in habitat very quickly. The United Kingdom Butterfly Monitoring Scheme in particular has provided important insights into the effects of habitat loss and climate change on Lepidopteran populations (Warren et al. 2001). Kentucky Butterfly Net reveals several different ways in which Lepidopteran populations respond to climate change. First, Lepidoptera respond by changing their phenology and emergence times. The Olympia marble butterfly, Euchloe olympia has a single brood each year in the early spring, with adults flying for a period of about two weeks, typically centered around 15 April. In late March 2007, presumably in response to unseasonably warm weather (daily highs of 32-35 C), E. olympia emerged early in disparate areas of the state, emerging by 24 March in Owsley County and by 2 April in Mammoth Cave National Park, Edmonson County. These are the two earliest emergence times for E. olympia on record in Kentucky, and 2-3 weeks earlier than in a typical year. The third earliest Kentucky record for this species is from 7 April 1963 by Jack Dempwolf, from Natural Bridge State Resort Park in Powell County. Species also respond by shifting their ranges. Kentucky seems to be experiencing an increase in the occurrence of migrants from the South. In 2008, two different individuals photographed a small pink moth, Pyrausta inornatalis (Fernald)(Crambidae), known before only from Texas to Tennessee. Southern butterfly species rarely seen in Kentucky have been recorded in recent years more often, and also earlier in the season. These colonize northward into Kentucky, become frequent in late summer, then die back in winter. Species in this categoiy include the long-tailed skipper, Urbanus proteus (Linnaeus), and the Gulf Fritillary, Agraulis vanillae (Linnaeus). Oldham County, Ky. July 4th butterfly counts, conducted since 1976 around the beginning of July by Covell, reveal that one cloudless sulfur, Phoebis sennae (Linnaeus), was seen in 1992 — a unique occurrence from 1976 to 2002 — while 6-17 individuals were counted in each year, 2004-2007. Similarly, two individuals of the sleepy orange, Eurema nicippe (Cramer), were recorded in 1992 as the only occurrences between 1976 and 2000. In 2001, 4 were seen, and 44 have appeared in 2003-2008. The gemmed satyr, Cyllopsis gemma (Hubner), was not found at all until 1999 since which a total of 43 have been seen. In like manner, the Carolina Satyr, Hermeuptychia sosybius (Fabricius) was first discovered at the study site in 2002, and has since been seen there in 3 of the six subsequent counts (Covell unpublished). However, when these observations are paired with a third pattern, the apparent disappearance of several “Northern” species that used to be observed in Kentucky, suspected effects of climate change become Volume 63, Number 4 213 even more apparent. Species in this category include the regal fritillary, Speyeria idalia (Drury), not seen since 1972, the green comma, Polygonia faunus (W. H. Edwards), not seen since 1973, and the gray comma, Polygonia progne (Cramer), not reported since 1977. These apparent disappearances have occurred in spite of considerable effort to find these species, so changes in collector effort cannot be used to explain the disappearance of these species. It is possible that each of these changes is caused by factors other than global climate change, but taken together they indicate the Lepidopteran fauna of Kentucky is clearly changing in a manner consistent with a gradual increase in average annual temperatures. Future directions. We hope to continue to develop tools to facilitate research and educational activities that take advantage of Kentucky Lepidoptera distribution data. We are particularly looking forward to developing connections between Kentucky Butterfly Net and other projects involving Lepidoptera in Kentucky such as the Upper Green River Barcode of Life Project (Marcus et al. 2010, unpub. data). We would also welcome the opportunity to help others develop web database applications for collecting and sharing distribution data for both Lepidoptera and other organisms. Acknowledgements We thank the members of the Society of Kentucky Lepi- dopterists and others who have generously contributed records to the Kentucky Butterfly Net Database, especially Rita Adkins, Gerald Burnett, Roseanna Denton, Loran Gibson, Steve Hahus, Tony Merkle, Dave Roemer, and Jonathan Smith. Rick Ruggles kindly assisted with transfer of the database to Microsoft Access. Ashley Wint, Katrease Hale, and Rachel Barber did miracles with data entry. Thanks to all of the Lepidoptera photographers who granted permission to use their images. Brian Scholtens and two anonymous reviewers provided helpful comments on a draft of the manuscript. Support for this research is from the University of Louisville’s Carl Cornett Endowment, the Ogden College of Science and Engineering at Western Kentucky Uni¬ versity, the National Science Foundation and the Common¬ wealth of Kentucky through EPSCoR awards (EPS-0132295 and 0447479), a grant from the US Environmental Protection Agency (X796463906-0), and from a National Institutes of Health and National Center for Research Resources Grant (P20 RR16481). Literature Cited Brower, A. E. 1974. A list of the Lepidoptera of Maine. Part 1: The macrolepidoptera. Maine Agr. Expt. Stn. Tech. Bull. 66: 1-136. _ . 1983. A list of the Lepidoptera of Maine. Part 2: The mi- crolepidoptera. Section 1, Limacodidae through Cossidae. Maine Agr. Expt. Stn. Tech. Bull. 109: 1-60. _ . 1984. A list of the Lepidoptera of Maine. Part 2: The mi- crolepidoptera. Section 2, Cosmopterigidae through Hepi- alidae. Maine Agr. Expt. Stn. Tech. Bull. 114: 1-70. CBIF. 2006. Butterflies of Canada. http:/Avww.cbif.gc.ca/ spp_pages/butterflies/index_e.php. Covell, C. V., Jr. 1999. The butterflies and moths (Lepidoptera) of Kentucky: an annotated checklist. Kentucky State Na¬ ture Preserves Commission Scientific and Technical Series 6: 1-220. Covell, C. V., Jr. & L. D. Gibson. 2008. More new moth records (Lepidoptera) from Kentucky. |. Ky. Acad. Sei. 69: 193-196 Covell, C. V., Jr., L. D. Gibson & D. J. Wright. 2000. New state records and new available names for species of Ken¬ tucky Moths (Insecta: Lepidoptera). [. Ky. Acad. Sci. 61: 105-107. Forbes, W. T. M. 1923. The Lepidoptera of New York and neighboring states: 1. Primitive forms, Micro lepidoptera, Pyraloids, Bombyces. Memoir 68. Cornell University Agri¬ cultural Experiment Station, Ithaca, NY, 729pp. _ . 1948. The Lepidoptera of New York and neighboring states: 2. Geometridae, Sphingidae, Notodontidae, Ly- mantriidae. Memoir 274. Cornell University Agricultural Experiment Station, Ithaca, NY. 263pp. _ . 1954. The Lepidoptera of New York and neighboring states: 3. Noctuidae. Memoir 329. Cornell University Agri¬ cultural Experiment Station, Ithaca, NY. 433pp. _ . 1960. The Lepidoptera of New York and neighboring states: 4. Agaristidae through Nymphalidae including but¬ terflies. Memoir 371. Cornell University Agricultural Ex¬ periment Station, Ithaca, NY. 188pp. Gibson, L. D. & C. V. Covell Jr. 2006. New records of butter¬ flies and moths (Lepidoptera) from Kentucky. J. Ky. Acad. Sci. 67: 19-21. Gilligan, T. M. 2008. Tortricid Net. http://www.tortricid.net. Bioagricultural Sciences and Pest Management, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO. Janzen, D. H. & W. Hallwachs. 2005. Dynamic database for an inventory of the macrocaterpillar fauna, and its food plants and parasitoids, of Area de Conservacion Guanacaste (ACG), northwestern Costa Rica http://janzen. sas.upenn.edu. Kimball, C. P. 1965. The Lepidoptera of Florida: An annotated checklist. Division of Plant Industry, State of Florida De¬ partment of Agriculture, Gainesville, FL. 363pp. Marcus, J. M., T. M. Hughes, D. M. McElroy & R. E. Wyatt. 2010. Engaging first year undergraduates in hands-on re¬ search experiences: The Upper Green River Barcode of Life Project. J. Coll. Sci. Teach. 39 (3): 24-30. NPS. 2007. Discover Life in America (http://www.dlia.org/). Great Smoky Mountains National Park, Gatlinburg, TN 37738-3627.' Oehlke, B. 2007. World's Largest Saturniidae Site. http://www.siIkmoths.bizland.com/indexos.htm. Opler, P. A., H. Pavulaan, R. E. Stanford & M. Pogue, 2006. Butterflies and Moths of North America. Bozeman, MT: NBII Mountain Prairie Information Node, http://www.but- terfliesandmoths.org/. Patterson, R. 2005. North American Moth Photographers Group, http://mothphotographersgroup.msstate.edu. Pittaway, A. R. & I. J. Kitching, 2008. Sphingidae of the Eastern Palaearctic. http://tpittaway.tripod.com/china/china.htm. Poole, R. W. 1999. Nearctica.com: The Natural History of North America, http://www.nearctica.com/. Roy, D. 2008. United Kingdom Butterfly Monitoring Scheme. http://www.ukbms.org/. Warren, M. S., J. K. Hill, J. A. Thomas, J. Asher, F. R., B. Huntley, D. B. Roy, M. G. Telfer, S. Jeffcoate, P. Harding, G. Jeffcoate, S. G. Willis, J. N. Greatorex- Davies, D. Moss & C. D. Thomas. 2001. Rapid responses of British butterflies to opposing forces of climate and habi¬ tat change. Nature 414: 65-69. Received for publication 14 September 2008; revised and accepted 21 April 2009. 214 Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society 63(4), 2009, 214-232 ARSENURINAE AND CERATOCAMPINAE (SATURNIIDAE) OF RIO GRANDE DO SUL STATE, RRAZIL Andersonn Silveira Prestes Laboratorio de Entomologia, Pontiffcia Universidade Catolica do Rio Grande do Sul. Caixa postal 1429, 90619-900 Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil; email: andernnn@gmail . com Fabricio Guerreiro Nunes Laboratorio de Entomologia, Pontiffcia Universidade Catolica do Rio Grande do Sul. Caixa postal 1429, 90619-900 Porto Alegre, RS, Brazil; email: fgnunes@pucrs.br Elio Corseuil Laboratorio de Entomologia, Pontiffcia Universidade Catolica do Rio Grande do Sul. Caixa postal 1429, 90619-900 Porto Alegre. RS, Brazil; email: corseuil@via-rs.net AND Alfred Moser Avenida Rotermund 1045, 93030-000 Sao Leopoldo, RS, Brazil; email: a.moser@ensinger.com.br .•ABSTRACT. The present work aims to offer a list of Arsenurinae and Ceratocampinae species known to occur in Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. The list is based on bibliographical data, newly collected specimens, and previously existing museum collections. The Arsenurinae are listed in the following genera (followed by number of species): Arsenura Duncan, 1841 (4), Caio Travassos & Noronha, 1968 (1), Dysdaemonia Hiibner, [1819] (1), Titaea Hiibner, [1823] (1), Paradaemonia Bouvier, 1925 (2), Rhescyntis Hiibner, [1819] (1), Copiopteryx Duncan, 1841 (2). Cerato¬ campinae are listed in Adeloneivaia Travassos, 1940 (3), Adelcewalkeria Travassos, 1941 (2), AlmeidelJa Oiticica, 1946 (2), Cicia Oiticica, 1964 (2), Citheronia Hiibner, [1819] (4), Citioica Travassos & Noronha, 1965 (1), Eacles Hiibner, [1819] (4), Mielkesia Lemaire, 1988 (1), Neocarne- gia Draudt, 1930 (1), Oiticella Travassos & Noronha, 1965 (1), Othorene Boisduval, 1872 (2), Procitheronia Michener, 1949 (1), Psilopygida Michener, 1949 (2), Scolesa Michener, 1949 (3) and Syssphinx Hiibner, [1819] (1). Rhescyntis pseudomartii Lemaire, Titaea tamerlan tamerlan (Maassen), Eacles bertrandi Lemaire, Eacles mayi Schaus and Mielkesia paranaensis (Rego-Barros & Mielke) are new records for Rio Grande do Sul. To facilitate identification we provide photographs, morphological characteristics of each species, and dichotomous keys. Also, we dis¬ cuss briefly their distribution and the inventorying status of Lepidoptera in Rio Grande do Sul. Additional key words: inventory, biodiversity, distribution, survey The Saturniidae are among the world’s most popular and beautiful groups of moths, with an enormous variety of sizes, shapes and colors. Their beauty and peculiarity have attracted many lepidopterists, making them relatively well studied and frequently collected. The Neotropical Region, despite Lemaires’ extensive work (1980, 1988, 1.996), is poorly documented in some places. In this paper we present a study of the Arsenurinae and Ceratocampinae of Rio Grande do Sul, the southern-most Brazilian State, a region with limited documentation. The Lepidoptera survey from Rio Grande do Sul started at the end of the nineteenth century with publications by Weymer (1894) and Mabilde (1896). Later, Ronna (1923, 1933) and Biezanko and collaborators (1939, 1948, 1949, 1957, 1986) made important contributions throughout much of the twentieth century. The collections of Mabilde and Ronna are at the Museu de Ciencias Naturais da Fundagao Zoobotanica do Rio Grande do Sul, in Porto Alegre, and Biezanko’s material is deposited at the Museu Entomologieo Ceslau Biezanko, in Pelotas. The present study aimed to update the existing lists of Arsenurinae and Ceratocampinae in Rio Grande do Sul, to identify diagnostic characters for these species, and to map their distribution in the State. Arsenurinae The species of the Arsenurinae Jordan, 1922 are generally large with a robust body and gray or brown ground color; the most significant external feature is the variable shape of the wings, especially the hindwing, which is more or less prominently tailed in most of the species (Lemaire, 1980). They contain large and Volume 63, Number 4 215 protuberant mandibular rudiments; the tibial epiphysis is about half as long as the tibia; the forewing has the discal cell closed, vein Ml not or only briefly stalked with radius, M2 arising from the cell at about the middle of outer margin; vein 3A of the hindwing is very short or absent (Michener 1952; Lemaire 1980). According to Silva et al. (1968) and Stone (1991), the caterpillars are polyphagous, feeding on Annonaceae, Euphorbiaceae, Lauraceae, Malvaceae, Myristicaceae, Sapindaceae and Sapotaceae. The species Arsenura xanthopus, according to Mariconi & Lordello (1953), was considered a pest of Luhea divaricato Mart in the southern part of Brazil. The Arsenurinae are exclusively distributed in the Neotropical region (Michener 1952; Lemaire 1980, 1996), being well-represented in southern Brazil where about 36% of the known species occur (Lemaire 1980). There are 58 known species of Arsenurinae, 27 of which have been reported for Brazil (Lemaire 1996). Ceratocampinae The species of Ceratocampinae Harris, 1841 are generally characterized by the peculiar structure of the males antennae, usually sphingiform wings of males, and the comparatively, long and heavy body in both sexes. They are extremely variable in size, including some of the smallest as well as some of the largest American Satnrniidae (Lemaire 1988). The antennae of the male are quadripectinate for about the three-fifths of the flagellum and then simple to the apex; the female’s antennae either are like those of the males or simple. There are three or four radial branches in the venation of the forewing; the diseal cell is closed; vein Ml is basally stalked with the radials, M2 arises in front of the middle of the apex of the (fiscal cell; vein 3A of the hindwing is present; veins CuAl and CuA2 arise directly from the cell (Michener 1952; Lemaire 1988). The caterpillars are polyphagous, feeding on Anacardiaceae, Aquifoliaceae, Asteraceae, Betulaceae, Burseraceae, Caprifoliaceae, Caryocaraceae, Coehlospermaceae, Combretaceae, Cupressaceae, Ebenaceae, Euphorbiaceae, Fabaceae, Fagaceae, Hamamelidaceae, Juglandaceae, Lauraceae, Loranthaceae, Malvaceae, Melastomataceae, Moraceae, Myricaceae, Myrtaceae, Oleaceae, Pinaceae, Platanaceae, Rosaceae, Rubiaceae, Salicaceae, Sapindaceae, Sapotaceae and Ulmaceae (Silva et al. 1968; Stone 1991; Pastran 2004). According to Gallo et al. (2002), Citheronia laocoon (Cramer, 1777) and Eacles imperialis magnijica Walker, 1855 were considered pests, the former of Psidium g uajava (L.) and Psidium cattleianum (Sabine) and the latter of Coffea arabica L. The larvae are remarkable for their hypertrophy of the armature, especially in the early instars, which has been dubbed “diabolic”; the pupae are more or less deeply situated in the soil, they usually have spines which certainly help them ascend to the surface of the soil just prior to emergence of the imago (Lemaire 1988). According to Lemaire (1988), Ceratocampinae are widely distributed from southern Canada to northern Argentina, being well-represented in southeastern Brazil and adjacent areas; there are 170 known species in 27 genera, 86 of which have been reported for Brazil. Rio Grande do Sul Rio Grande do Sul has an area of 282.184 km2 and represents 3.32% of the Brazilian territory. It is the southern-most State of Brazil, where the northern extreme lies at latitude of 27°03’42”s and the southern limit at 33o45’09"’s. The weather has been characterized as mesothermic humid, without a dry season and highly humid in some areas. The climate uniformity across the State is a striking feature. The dynamic factors are represented by atmospheric circulation, especially the Atlantic and Polar anticyclone masses of air. Static factors carry out local influences. Maximum temperature averages are 21°C to 25°C, and minimum 10°C to 14°C, with extremes being determined by latitute and altitude; at higher altitudes, mainly in northeast, low temperatures reach 4°C, and, in the plain, the highest are above 35°C. Snowfall is occasional, but frost in winter is frequent. Precipitation is regularly distributed over the year, with a monthly average between 100mm and 150mm (Vieira 1984). The north-northeast portion of Rio Grande do Sul includes the southern extent of the Atlantic forest biome, comprising 37.4% of the State. This region has a mountainous relief rising from the sandstone-basaltic plateau. The altitude varies from 400m to a bit more than 1000m, with the highest elevations located in the northeast. The vegetation is represented mainly by Araucaria moist forest, deciduous tropical forest and semi-deciduous tropical forest, with a small portion of Atlantic moist forest near the coast. The Pampa biome, which also includes Uruguay and part of Argentina, is responsible for the remaining 63.6% of the State. The geomorphology of this region includes the Central Depression located below the sandstone-basaltic plateau, the Campain Plateau in the west-southwest, with altitudes rarely above 200m, the South-riograndense Plateau (Riograndense Shield), 216 Journal of the Lepidopteuists’ Society with average altitudes from 200m to 400m, and, finally, the Coastal Plain. The vegetation is characterized by fields and savannas, with some portions of semi- deciduous tropical forest. Details about the vegetation of Rio Grande do Sul are presented in Figure 1. Materials and methods Data were obtained from bibliographical sources, newly collected specimens and analysis of 534 specimens in the collections of Centro de Pesquisa Agropecuario Clima Temperado da Embrapa (CAMB), Museu Cientifico da Universidade Catoliea de Pelotas (MUCP) and Museu Entomologico Ceslau Biezanko (MECB), in Pelotas; Museu Anchieta de Porto Alegre (MAPA), Museu de Ciencias e Tecnologia da Pontificia Universidade Catoliea do Rio Grande do Sul (MCTP), Museu de Ciencias Naturais da Fundagao Zoobotanica do Rio Grande do Sul (MCNZ), Museu Ramiro Gomes Costa da Fundagao Estadual de Pesquisa Agropecuaria (MRGC) and Setor de Entomologia da Faculdade de Agronomia da Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (FASE), in Porto Alegre; Colegao Lepidoptera Alfred Moser (CLAM), in Sao Leopoldo; Departamento de Zoologia da Universidade Federal do Parana (DZUP), in Curitiba; Museu de Zoologia da Universidade de Sao Paulo (MZSP), in Sao Paulo and Museu Nacional da Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro (MNRJ), in Rio de Janeiro. Specimens were identified based on the current sources (Draudt 1929-30; Lemaire 1988; D’Abrera 1995) and comparisons with specimens in the collections listed above. Nomeclature follows Lemaire (1996). Measurements of forewing length were taken for the specimens observed in the collections from Porto Alegre and Sao Leopoldo. Hostplant family information was gathered from Silva et al. (1968), Stone (1991) and Pastran (2004). Species are listed following the arrangement of Lemaire (1996); “f’ indicates female and “m” male. New records for Rio Grande do Sul are identified with an asterisk. Steppes Steppe Open wooded steppe with gallery forest Park steppe with gallery forest Park steppe without gallery forest Woody gramineous steppe without gallery forest Woody gramineous steppe with gallery forest Atlantic moist forest ■ Atlantic moist forest of low lands ■ Mountain atlantic moist forest ■ Sub-mountain atlantic moist forest Araucaria moist forest ■ Araucaria moist forest ■ High-mountain araucaria moist forest ■I Mountain araucaria moist forest Semi-deciduous tropical forest Semi-deciduous tropical forest Alluvial semi-deciduous tropical forest ■ Semi-deciduous tropical forest of low lands r- 1 Sub-mountain semi-deciduous tropical forest ■ Mountain semi-deciduous tropical forest Deciduous tropical forest ■I Deciduous tropical forest Alluvial deciduous tropical forest Sub-mountain deciduous tropical forest ■ Mountain deciduous tropical forest Pioneer formations Pioneer formations Vegetation with marine Influence Vegetation with wooded marine influence Vegetation with herbaceous marine influence Vegetation with wooded fluvial and/or lacustrine inlfuence Vegetation with herbaceous fluvial and/or lacustrine inlfuence without palm tree Ecological tension areas Woody gramineous savanna-steppe contact with seasonal forest Fig. I . Simplified map of the vegetation of Rio Grande do Sul. Following Projeto Radambrasil - IBGE (1986). Volume 63, Number 4 217 Results The available evidence indicates that 12 species ol 7 genera for Arsenurinae and 30 species of 15 genera for Ceratocampinae occur in Rio Grande do Sul. Arsenurinae Jordan, 1922 Arsenura armida (Cramer, 1779) - Fig. 4. Rhescyntis erythrina ; Mabilde (1896) Arsenura erythrinae; Costa Lima (1936) Rhescyntis erythrinae; Silva et al. (1968) Rhescyntis (Arsenura) armida; Biezanko (1986) Forewing length - f: 75.4mm [according to illustration by Lemaire (1980)]; m (9): 63.6 ± 1.2mm. Host families: Annonaceae, Euphorbiaceae, Malvaceae. Flight period: January to March, June, September and October. Material examined. Porto Alegre, (no date), (no collector), 1 m (MZSP); Santa Maria, 15. i. 1926, (no collector), 1 m (MCNZ); Caxias do Sul, 1932, (no collector), 1 m (MCNZ); Pelotas, 15. i. 1939, Irmas Figueiredo leg., 1 m (CAMB); Pelotas, ii. 1939, Irmas Figueiredo leg., 1 m (CAMB); Santa Maria, 09.iii. 1971, S. Bressan leg., 1 m (MECB); Santa Maria, 15. i. 1973, S. Carvalho leg., 1 m (MECB); Pelotas, 12. i. 1975, A. Witauper leg., 1 m (MECB); Pelotas, 12.vi.1976, Edison leg., 1 m (MECB); Morro Reuter, 02. i. 1983, A. Moser leg., 3 m (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 09. i. 1983, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Passo Fundo, 07.ix.1994, A. C. P. Peres leg., 1 m (MCTP); Irai, 27.X.1998, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Derrubadas, 24. i. 2001, R. Di Mare leg., 1 m (MCTP); Morro Reuter, 17-194.2005, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM). Arsenura biundulata Schaus, 1906 - Fig. 5. Lemaire (1980); Lemaire (1996); Nunes et al. (2003) Rhescyntis (Arsenura) biundulata; Biezanko (1986) Forewing length - f (2): 88.3 ± 0.3mm; m (27): 83.8 ± 0.6mm. Flight period: January to May. Material examined. Canoas, (no date), (no collector), 1 m (MCNZ); Porto Alegre, (no date), A. Miranda leg, 1 f'(MZSP); Porto Alegre, (no date), A. Miranda leg, 1 m (MZSP); Caxias do Sul, (no date), (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Caxias do Sul, 25. iv. 1927, (no collector), 1 m (MCNZ); Porto Alegre, 294.1934, A. Baumann leg, 1 f (DZUP); Pared Novo, OS.v.1937, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Charqueadas, iii.1941, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Porto Alegre, 10.iv.1961, C. Mario leg., 1 m (FASE); Porto Alegre, iv.1962. C. Sallenave leg., 1 m (FASE); Porto Alegre, 154.1946, A. Baumann, 1 m (DZUP); Pelotas, 214ii. 1957, Modemell leg., 1 m (MECB); Canela, 194.1964, F. Luca leg., 1 m (FASE); Dois Irmaos, Ol.v.1971, D. Scholia leg., 1 m (FASE); Porto Alegre, 06.iv.1964, S. Manfredini leg., 1 f (FASE); Porto Alegre, lO.v.1964, Leonir leg., 1 m (FASE); Porto Alegre, 20.iv.1968, R. Baerverleg., 1 m (MCTP); Pelotas, 15.ii.1971, M. Elias leg., 1 m (MECB); Porto Alegre, 21.iv.1971, C. B. Costa leg., 1 f (FASE); Porto Alegre, 23.iv.1971, Neuremberg leg.. 1 m (FASE); Porto Alegre, 29.iv.1971, E. Soares leg., 1 m (FASE); Porto Alegre, 29.iv.1971, N. Cortes leg., 1 m (FASE); Santa Maria, 16.iv.1973, S. Carvalho leg.. 1 m (MECB); Porto Alegre, 20.V.1975, Illegible leg., 1 m (FASE); Pelotas, 12.iii.1983, Reinhordt leg., 1 m (MECB); Sao Francisco de Paula, 1 1 4i. 1999, A. Specht leg., 6 m (MCTP); Sao Francisco de Paula, 1 2.ii. 1999, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Sao Francisco de Paula, 12.ii.1999, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP). Arsenura orbignyana (Guerin-Meneville, [1844]) - Fig. 6. Lemaire (1980) Forewing length - f: 64.8mm [according to illustration by Lemaire (1980)]; m (8): 61.2 ± 0.8mm. Flight period: January, February, May, September to November. Material examined. Porto Alegre, (no date), (no collector), 1 m (MZSP); Estrela, 20.xi.1919, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Pared Novo, 21.x. 1933, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Santa Cruz do Sul, 29. ii. 1937, A. Baumann leg., 1 f (DZUP); Pared Novo, x.1945, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Santa Cruz do Sul, 294.1946, A. Baumann leg., 1 m (DZUP); Pareci Novo, x. 1947. (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Pelotas, 05.x. 1975, J. Palndo leg., 1 m (MECB); Pelotas, 10.x. 1976, (no collector), 1 m (MECB); Porto Alegre, 13.V.1977, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Morro Reuter, 26. Lx. 1983, A. Moser leg., 2 m (CLAM); Ereehim, 08. xi. 1985, Mielke & Casagrande leg., 2 m (DZUP); Morro Reuter, 20. x. 2001, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM). Arsenura xanthopus (Walker, 1855) - Fig. 7. Rescyntis (Arsenura) xanthopus; Biezanko (1986) Forewing length - f: 67.2mm [according to illustration by Lemaire (1980)]; m (6): 63.3mm ± 0.5mm. Host family: Malvaceae. Flight period: January, February, September, October and December. Material examined. Porto Alegre, (no date), (no collector), 1 f (MNRJ); Porto Alegre, (no date), (no collector). 1 m (MNRJ); Santa Maria, 02.xii.1970, D. Link leg., 1 m (MECB); Santa Cruz do Sul, 26. Lx. 1971, D. Schoninger leg., 1 m (MECB); Santa Maria, 12.X.1971, Sidnei leg., 1 m (MECB); Pelotas, 30. x. 1976, J. Paiz leg., 1 m (MECB); Morro Reuter, 25.ix.1982, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Bento Gonsalves, 17.x. 1985, L. Jnruema leg., 1 m (MRGC); Bento Gongalves, 17.x. 1985, L. Jnruema leg., 1 m (MRGC); Salvador do Sul, 07. ii. 1998, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Piratini, 07.x. 1999, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Morro Reuter, 11.x. 1999, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 8-9..X.2004, A. Moser, 1 m (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 17-194.2005. A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM). Caio romulus (Maassen, 1869) - Fig. 8. Nunes et al. (2003) Forewing length - f: 89.1mm [according to illustration by Lemaire (1980)]; m (1): 83.5mm. Flight period: October. Materiaf examined. Sao Francisco de Paula, 1 l.x.1996, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP 7713); Maquine, 10.x. 2004, Quadros & Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Sao Fancisco de Paula. 24-25. x. 2005, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM). Dysdaemonia brasiliensis W. Rothschild, 1906 - Fig. 9. As Dysdaemonia boreas (Cramer) "misidentification; Biezanko (1986) (see discussion below). Forewing length - f: 62.6mm [according to illustration by Lemaire (1980)]; m (2): 65.1 ± 0.2mm. Flight period: January and February. Material examined. Pelotas, 124.1970, J. Ferro leg., 1 m (MECB); Derrubadas, 244.2001, R. Di Mare leg., 2 m (MCTP); Derrubadas, 218 Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society l-6.ii.09, Moser leg., 2 m (CLAM). “Titaea tamerlan tamerlan (Maassen, 1869) - Fig. 10. Forewing length - f: 90.5mm [according to illustration by Lemaire (1980)]; m: 78.9mm. Flight period: February. Host family: Malvaceae. Material examined. Sao Francisco de Paula, 23. ii. 1998, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP). Paradaemonia meridionalis A. J. A. Camargo, Mielke & Casagrande, 2007 - Fig. 11. A. J. A. Camargo, Mielke & Casagrande (2007) Forewing length - f: 74-79mm [according to A. (.A. Camargo et al. (2007)]; m (2): 67.6 ± 2.4mm. Flight period: January and February. Material examined. Sao Francisco de Paula, i. 1955, L. E. Backup leg., 1 m (MCNZ); Barracao, 21. ii. 2001, R. Di Mare leg., 1 m (MCTP); Sao Francisco de Paula, 241.2006, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Sao Francisco de Paula, 241.2006, A. Moser leg., 1 m (MCTP). Paradaemonia tlielia (Jordan, 1922) - Fig. 12. Biezanko & Baucke (1948); Lemaire (1980) Dysdaemonia thelia; Draudt (1929-30) Rhescijntis ( Paradaemonia ) wagneri; Biezanko (1986) Forewing length - f (1): 67.3mm; m (19): 58.7 ± 0.6mm. Flight period: February to April, June, and September to November. Material examined. Sao Lourengo do Sul. (no date), (no collector), 1 m (MNRJ); Santa Maria, 1925, (no collector), 1 m (MCNZ); Sao Leopoldo, x.1932, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Pared Novo, 15.x. 1936, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Pelotas, 13. ii. 1942, Irmas Figueiredo leg., 1 m (MUCP); Pelotas, 23.iii.1944. Irmas Figueiredo leg., 1 m (MUCP); Pelotas, xi.1944, Irinas Figueiredo leg., 1 m (MUCP); Porto Alegre, 30.x. 1946, M. Faescli leg., 1 m (MECB); Porto Alegre, 16.x. 1958, E. Corseuil leg., 1 m (FASE); Porto Alegre, 08.x. 1966, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Porto Alegre, 06.iii.1967, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Santa Maria, 07.vi.1968, J. Mantovani leg., 1 ni (MECB); Porto Alegre, 03.x. 1969, Stoffel leg., 1 f (MAPA); Porto Alegre, 10.x. 1969, Stoffel leg., 1 m (MAPA); Santa Maria, 09.x. 1971. C. Rizzato leg., 1 m (MECB); Santa Maria, 14.x. 1971, A. Aita leg., 1 in (MECB); Porto Alegre, 15.vi.1974, Mello leg., 1 m (MAPA); Porto Alegre, 13.x. 1977, E. Borsa leg., 1 m (MCNZ); Pelotas, 04.X.1978, M. Rodrigues leg., 1 m (MECB); Pelotas, 16.x. 1980, M. Romilda leg., 1 m (MECB): Pelotas, 13.iv.1981, A. Lanz leg., 1 m (MECB); Sao Jeronimo, 10. ix. 1982, T. Arigony leg., 1 m (MCNZ); Sao Jeronimo, 20.Lx.1982, H. A. Gastal leg., 1 m (MCNZ); Sao Jeronimo, 23. ix. 1982, II. A. Gastal leg., 1 m (MCNZ); Morro Reuter, 25. ix. 1982, A. Moser leg.. 1 m (CLAM); Sao Jeronimo, Ol.x.1982, C. J. Becker leg., 1 m (MCNZ); Sao Jeronimo, 11.x. 1982, C. J. Becker leg., 1 m (MCNZ); Sao Jeronimo, 13. x. 1982, H. A. Gastal leg., 1 m (MCNZ); Pelotas, 01.iii.1983, Jacira leg., 1 m (MECB); Porto Alegre, 04. xi. 1992, P. R. Rambo leg., 1 m (MCTP); Cachoeira do Sul, 21. ix. 1998, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Alegrete, 23. xi. 2000, R. Di Mare leg., 1 m (MCTP); Alegrete, 24.xi.2000, R. Di Mare leg., 1 m (MCTP). * Rhescijntis pseudomartii Lemaire, 1976 - Fig. 13. Forewing length - f: 81.7mm [according to illustration by Lemaire (1980)]; m: 85.7mm. Flight period: April. Material examined. Sao Francisco de Paula, 19.iv.2004. F. Nunes leg., 1 m (MCTP). Figs. 2-3. Some morphological aspects used in the dichotomous keys. 2. Arsenurinae. a) submarginal black spot between Ml and M2; b) forewing discal spot; c) convexities between M3-CuA2 on the submarginal band; d) hindwing discal spot; e) clear interve- nous mark on the submarginal region; f) concave line on the anal angle to wing prolongation; g) hindwing prolongation. 3. Cerato- campinae. a) apex; b) distal hand; c) forexving subcircular discal spot; d) forewing tornus; e) hindwing subcircular discal spot; f) hindwing tornus; g) abdomen. Volume 63, Number 4 219 Figs. 4-15. Figs. 4-9. Arsenurinae of Rio Grande do Sul. Brazil (male dorsal view). 4. Arsenura armida. 5. Arsenura biundulata. 6. Arsenura orbygniana. 7. Arsenura xanthopus. 8. Caio romulus. 9. Dysdaemonia brasiliensis . Figs. 10-15. Arsenurinae of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (male dorsal view). 10. Titaea tamerlan tamerian. 1 1. Paradaemonia meridionalis. 12. Paradaemonia thelia. 13. Rhescyntis pseudomartii. 14. Copiopteryx sonthonnaxi. 15. Copioptenyx derceto. Figs. 16-26. Ceratocampinae of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (male dorsal view). 16. Eacles imperialis magnifica. 17. Eacles ducalis. 18. Eacles mayi. 19. Eacles bertrandi. 20. Citheronia brissotii brissotii 21. Citheronia johnsoni (cf. D’Abrera 1995). 22. Citheronia laocoon. 23. Citheronia vogleri (cf. D’Abrera 1995). 24. Procitheronia purpurea. 25. Othorene cadmus. 26. Othorene purpurascens . 220 Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society Copiopteryx sonthonnaxi E. Andre, 1905 - Fig. 14. Biezanko (1986) Forewing length - f (1): 53.5mm; m (17): 49.7 ± 0.3mm. Host family: Lauraceae. Flight period: eveiy month except May and December. Material examined. Osorio, (no date), (no collector), 1 m (MCNZ); Lajeado, 14.viii.1900, Mabilde leg., 1 m (MCNZ); Porto Alegre, 05. ix. 1928, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Taquara, 03. ii. 1929, A. Baumann leg. 1 m (DZUP); Pareci Novo, 16.xdi.1933, (no cellector), 1 m (MAPA); Porto Alegre, 19.iii. 1939, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Sao Leopoldo, x.1940, (no collector), 1 f (MAPA); Sao Leopoldo, x.1940, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Bento Gongalves, iii.1954, J. Steiger leg., 1 m (MCNZ); Porto Alegre, 20.vdii.1957, J. Azerolo leg., 1 m (FASE); Porto Alegre, 23.vdi.1962, (no collector), 1 m (FASE); Porto Alegre, 27.x. 1969, A. Gentilli leg., 1 m (DZUP); Porto Alegre, 17. ix. 1980, L. Ramos leg., 1 m (FASE): Morro Reuter, 28.X.1982. A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Pelotas, \d.l986, P. Peterle leg., 1 m (MECB); Sao Pedro do Sul, 04.lx.1994, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Salvador do Sul, 04.x. 1995, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Morro Reuter, 12-19. iv.1997, A. Moser leg, 1 m (CLAM); Sao Francisco de Paula, 20.xi.1998, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Sao Francisco de Paula, 19.iii.2001, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Sao Francisco de Paula, 20.iii.2004, F. G. Nunes leg., 1 m (MCTP); Pelotas, 204.2005, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM). Copiopteryx derceto (Maasen, [1872]) - Fig. 15. Nunes et al. (2003) Forewing length - f: 64.4mm [according to illustration by Lemaire (1980)]; m (4): 67.3 ± 2mm. Flight period: January, March, and November. Material examined. Sao Francisco de Paula, 064.1997, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Sao Francisco de Paula, 074.1997, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Sao Francisco de Paula, 20. xi. 1998, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Sao Francisco de Paula, 194.2001, R. Di Mare leg., 1 m (MCTP); Maquine, 6-7.iii.2005. A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM). Ceratocampinae Harris, 1841 Eacles imperialis magnified Walker, 1855 - Fig. 16. Costa Lima (1936); Biezanko; Baucke (1948); Biezanko et al. (1949); Silva et al. (1968); Nunes et al. (2003) Eacles magnified-, Mabilde (1896); Ronna (1923); Ronna (1933) Forewing length - f (14): 60.1 ± 2.3mm; m (34): 53.3 ± 0.4mm. Host families: Anacardiaeeae, Betulaceae, Burseraceae, Capri foliaceae, Cochlospermaceae, Combretaceae, Cupressaceae, Ebenaceae, Euphorbiaceae, Fabaceae: Caesalpinioideae, Fabaceae: Faboideae, Fagaceae, Hamamelidaceae, [uglandaeeae, Lauraceae, Malvaceae, Moraceae, Myricaceae, Myrtaceae, Oleaceae, Pinaceae, Platanaceae, Rosaceae, Rubiaceae, Salicaceae, Sapindaceae, Ulmaceae. Flight period: eveiy month except June and July. Material examined. Cerro Largo, (no date), (no collector), 3 m (MAPA); Sao Francisco de Paula, (no date), (no collector), 2 f (MAPA); Estrela, ix.1919, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Estrela, 20. ix. 1919, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Estrela, 24.ix.1919, (no collector), 1 f (MAPA); Estrela, 02.xii.1919, (no collector), 1 f (MAPA); Estrela, 15.xii. 1919, (no collector), 1 f (MAPA); Porto Alegre, 1 l.ix.1929, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Pareci Novo, 05. ix. 1933, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Pareci Novo, 02.X.1936, (no collector), 1 f (MAPA); Pelotas, 22.ii.1939, 1. Figueiredo leg., 1 m (MUCP); Pelotas, 24.ii.1939, I. Figueiredo leg., 1 f (MUCP); Sao Leopoldo. v.1940, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Porto Alegre, 18.ix.1940, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Sao Francisco de Paula, 314.1941, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Pelotas, xi.1942, I. Figueiredo leg., 1 f (MUCP); Porto Alegre, 27.ii.1943, R.G. Costa leg., 1 m (MRGC); Pelotas, 16.x. 1944, I. Figueiredo leg., 1 m (MUCP); Pelotas, 15.iii. 1945, I. Figueiredo leg., 1 f (MUCP); Porto Alegre, 1946, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Pareci Novo, 21 .viii. 1946, (no collector), 1 f (MAPA); Pelotas, 23.ix.1946, C. Biezanko leg., 1 m (MECB); Pelotas, 30.X.1946, C. Biezanko leg., 2 m (MECB); Pelotas, 31.x. 1946, C. Biezanko leg., 1 m (MECB); Pelotas, 25.ii.1948, 1. Figueiredo leg., 1 m (MUCP); Pelotas, 06.iii.1950, I. Figueiredo leg., 1 m (MUCP); Porto Alegre, 19.x. 1951, D.C. Radaelli leg., 1 f (MRGC): Montenegro, 07.ii.1953, O. Baucke leg., 1 m (MRGC); Montenegro, 07.ii.1953, O. Baucke leg., 2 f (MRGC); Santa Maria, 15.iii.1956, O.R. Camargo leg., 1 m (MRGC); Porto Alegre, 17.iii.1958, E. Corseuil leg., 1 m (FASE); Porto Alegre, 174ii. 1958, E. Corseuil leg., 1 m (FASE); Porto Alegre, 17.iii.1958, E. Corseuil leg., 1 m (FASE); Porto Alegre, ll.v.1960, C. Barrada leg., 1 m (FASE); Porto Alegre, 20.x. 1965, L. Wisse leg., 1 m (FASE); Porto Alegre, 24.viii.1972, C. Trois leg., 1 m (FASE); Porto Alegre, 15.viii.1978, Valdirleg., 1 t'(FASE); Taquarf, 12.Lx.19S0, J. Muller leg., 1 f (FASE); Morro Reuter, 25.ix.1982, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Cassino, 314.1988, (no collector), 1 m (MCNZ); Morro Reuter, 24.x. 1992, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Salvador do Sul, 03.iv.1994, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Salvador do Sul. 13.viii.1994, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Morro Reuter, 08.X.1994, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 24.ii.1996, A. Moser leg., 1 f (CLAM); Sao Francisco de Paula, 11. x. 1996, A. Specht leg., 1 in (MCTP); Sao Francisco de Paula, 11.x. 1996, A. Specht leg., 1 f (MCTP); Encruzilhada do Sul, 02-03.xi.2000, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Derrubadas, 244.2001, R. A. Di Mare leg., 1 m (MCTP); Sao Francisco de Paula, 20.iii.2Q04, F. G. Nunes leg., 2 m (MCTP). Eacles ducalis (Walker, 1855) - Fig. 17. Nunes et al. (2003) Forewing length - f (1): 65mm; m (35): 53.5 ± 0.5mm. Host families: Anacardiaeeae, Fagaceae, [uglandaeeae, Loranthaceae, Malvaceae, Melastomataceae, Oleaceae, Poaceae. Flight period: January to March and July to October. Material examined. Pareci Novo, vii.1932, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Pareci Novo, 15.X.1939, (no collector), 1 f (MAPA); Sao Francisco de Paula, 214.1941, (no collector), 1 in (MAPA); Sao Francisco de Paula, 05. ii. 1941, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA): Porto Alegre, 10. x. 1947, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Lajeado, 12.viii. 1948, R.G. Costa leg.. 1 m (MRGC); Canela, 134.1955, O. Baucke leg., 2 m (MRGC); Porto Alegre, 17.iii.1958, E. Corseuil leg., 1 m (FASE); Porto Alegre, 14.X.1958, E. Corseuil leg.. 1 m (FASE); Porto Alegre, 1 l.vii. 1960, E. Corseuil leg., 1 in (FASE); Porto Alegre, 12.x. 1961. K. Zimermman leg., 1 m (FASE - 621); Pelotas, 234.1965, Illegible leg., 1 m (MECB); Viamao, 06.iii.1965, R. S. Grillo leg., 1 m (FASE); Porto Alegre, II. vii.1966, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Porto Alegre, 20.viii.1967. Ropero leg., 1 m (FASE); Viamao, 10-15. ix. 1972, T. M. Pereira leg., 1 in (FASE): Porto Alegre, ll.ix.1972, C. Trois leg., 1 in (FASE): Porto Alegre, 25.viii.1975, Voigt leg., 1 m (FASE); Porto Alegre, 12.ix.1977, Bianchin leg.. 1 m (FASE); Salvador do Sul, 08. x. 1994, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Morro Reuter, 19.ii.1996, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 034.1998, A. Moser leg., 1 in (CLAM); Camaqua, 20. viii. 1998, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Piratini, 144.1999. A. Specht leg., 1 m Volume 63, Number 4 22 J (MCTP); Sao Francisco de Paula, ll.ii.L999, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Morro Reuter, 29.vii.1999, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Piratini, 11. ix. 1999, A. Specht leg., 2 m (MCTP); Piratini, 07.x. 1999, A. Specht leg., 3 m (MCTP); Encruzilhada do Sul, 02-03. i. 2000, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Morro Reuter, I8.viii.2001, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Sao Francisco de Paula, 20.iii.2004, F. G. Nunes leg., 2 m (MCTP); Encruzilhada do Sul, 4-6. ix. 2004, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM). aEacles tnayi Schaus, 1920 - Fig. 18. Forewing length - f: 98-1 14mm [wingspan according to Lemaire (1988)]; m (3): 39.5 ± 0.4mm. Flight period: January, September, October and November. Material examined. Sao Francisco de Paula, 21. i. 1942, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Porto Alegre, 14.xi.1960, A. Baumann leg.. 1 f (DZUP); Sao Francisco de Paula 11.x. 1996, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Sao Francisco de Paula 10. ix. 1999, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP). ° Eacles bertrandi Lemaire, 1981 - Fig. 19. Forewing length - m (2): 37 ± 1.6mm. Flight period: January and February. Material examined. Sao Francisco de Paula 23. ii. 1998, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Sao Francisco de Paula, 18. i. 2005, A. Prestes leg., 1 m (MCTP); Cambara do Sul, 1— 4.i.2006, C. Mielke leg., 4 m (CLAM). Citheronia brissotii brissotii (Boisduval, 1868) - Fig. 20. Nunes et al. (2003) Forewing length - f (8): 55.5 ± 1.9mm; m (22): 46.9 ± 0.6mm. Hostfamilies: Aquifoliaceae, Euphorbiaeeae, Juglandaceae, Oleaceae, Rosaceae. Flight period: every month except March, May, and June. Material examined. Porto Alegre, x.1904, (no collector), 1 f (MAPA); Porto Alegre, 03.x. 1930, (no collector), 1 f (MAPA); Porto Alegre, 20. ix. 1933, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Pelotas, 10. xi. 1941. I. Figueiredo leg., 1 m (CAMB); Pelotas, 28.ix.1944, 1. Figueiredo leg., 1 m (MUCP); Pelotas. 16.X.1944, I. Figueiredo leg., 1 f (MUCP); Pelotas, 10. ii. 1945, I. Figueiredo leg., 1 m (MUCP); Sao Sebastiao do Cai, 28.iv.1945, A. Paiva-Neto leg.,' 1 f (MRGC); Pelotas, iv.1947, E. Poetsch leg., 1 m (MECB); Pelotas, 21 .viii. 1947, I. Figueiredo leg., 1 m (MUCP); Canoas, 13.viii.1949, (no collector), 1 f’(MCNZ); Canela, 13. i. 1955, O. Baucke leg., 1 m (MRGC); Porto Alegre, 1956, J. Sousa leg., 1 f (FASE); Porto Alegre, 22. ix. 1959, C. Scherer leg., 1 m (FASE); Porto Alegre, ll.vii.1960, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Porto Alegre, viii. 1962, C. Trois leg., 1 m (FASE); Porto Alegre, 05.ix.1962, M. Barreto leg., 1 m (FASE); Porto Alegre, 05.X.1962, (no collector), 1 m (FASE); Rio Grande, lO.x.1962, (no collector), 1 m (MECB); Lajeado, 284.1980, Nilde leg., 1 m (MECB); Sao Jeronimo, 26. viii. 1982, (no collector), 1 m (MCNZ); Sao Jeronimo, 07. ix. 1982, (no collector), 1 m (MCNZ); Rio Grande, 15.X.1985, C. J. Becker leg., 1 f (MCNZ); Rio Grande, 16. xi. 1985, II. A. Gastal leg., 1 m (MCNZ); Rio Grande, 04. xi. 1986, A. A. Lise leg., 1 m (MCNZ); Salvador do Sul, OS.x.1994, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Venancio Aires, 13.xii.1995, (no collector), 1 f (MCTP); Sao Francisco de Paula, 20. xi. 1996, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Sao Francisco de Paula, 23. ii. 1998, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Sao Francisco de Paula, ll.ix.1998, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Cachoeira do Sul, 21.ix.1998, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Camaqua, 19.X.1998, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Morro Reuter, 20. ix. 1999, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Piratini, 07.x. 1999, A. Specht leg., 2 m (MCTP); Encruzilhada do Sul. 02-034.2000, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Sarandi, 264.2001, R. A. Di Mare leg., 1 m (MCTP); Encruzilhada do Sul, 4-6.ix.2004, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM). Citheronia johnsoni Schaus, 1928 - Fig. 21. Draudt (1929-1930); Lemaire (1988); D’Abrera (1995); Lemaire (1996) Lorewing length - f: 108-1 15mm [wingspan according to Lemaire (1988)]; m: 67-84mm [wingspan according to Lemaire (1988)]. Flight period: November and December. Material examined. Porto Alegre, 17.xi.1934, Baumann leg., I f (MNRJ); Porto Alegre, 02.xii.1954, Baumann leg., 1 f (MNRJ). Citheronia laocoon (Cramer, 1777) - Fig. 22. Lemaire (1988) Citheronia cacicus; Mabilde (1896) Eacles cassicus; Ronna (1933) Citheronia laocoon laocoon; Silva et al. (1968) Citheronia (Citheronia) laocoon; Biezanko (1986) Lorewing length - f (2): 56.6 ± 0.1 mm; m (1): 46.2mm. Host families: Anacardiaceae, Aquifoliaceae, Asteraeeae, Caryocaraceae, Combretaceae, Cucurbitaceae, Cujrressaeeae, Ebenaceae, Euphorbiaeeae, Malvaceae, Myrtaceae, Rosaceae. Flight period: [anuary, February, October and November. Material examined. Porto Alegre, (no date), (no collector), 1 f (MZSP); Cerro Largo, i.1931, (no collector), 1 f (MAPA); Charqueadas, ii. 1948. (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Porto Alegre, 21. x. 1961, A. Gentilli leg., 1 m (DZUP); Porto Alegre, 314.1965, (no collector), 1 f (MAPA); Porto Alegre, 29.X.1965, A. Gentilli leg., 1 f (DZUP); Porto Alegre, 08. xi. 1967, A. Gentilli leg., 1 m (DZUP); Porto Alegre, 23.xi.1970, A. Baumann leg., 1 m (DZUP); Viamao, 03. xi. 1971, A. Gentilli leg., 1 in (DZUP); Pelotas, 184.1977, Niemaber leg., 1 m (MECB); Morro Reuter, 12.ii.1983, 1 f (CLAM). Citheronia vogleri (Weyenbergh, 1881) - Fig. 23. Biezanko; Baucke (1948); Biezanko et al. (1949); Silva et al. (1968) Forewing length - f: 103-1 16mm [wingspan according to Lemaire (1988)]; m: 103-1 18mm [wingspan according to Lemaire (1988)]. Host families: Anacardiaceae, Loranthaeeae, Myrtaceae. Llight period: February, October and December. Materiaf examined. Pelotas, 29.x. 1939, Irmas Figueiredo leg., 1 f (MUCP); Pelotas, x.1945, (no collector), 1 f (DZUP); Pelotas, 22. xii.1945, Irmas Figueiredo leg., 1 f (DZUP); Pelotas, 124i. 1940. Irmas Figueiredo leg., 1 f (MUCP). Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society Procitheronia purpurea (Oiticica, 1942) - Fig. 24. Nunes et al. (2003) Citheronia (Procitheronia) principalis purpurea; Biezanko (1986) Forewing length - f: 124— 128mm [wingspan according to Lemaire (1988)]; m (1): 57.7mm. Flight period: November. Material examined. Sao Francisco de Paula, 20. xi. 1998, A. Specht leg.. 1 m (MCTP). Othorene cadmus (Herrich-Schaffer, [1854]) - Fig. 25. Adelocephala (Adelocephala) cadmus; Biezanko (1986) Forewing length - f: 130mm [wingspan according to Lemaire (1988)]; m: 95-1 12mm [wingspan according to Lemaire (1988)]. (see discussion below). Othorene purpurascens (Schaus, 1905) - Fig. 26. Nunes et al. (2003) Adelocephala (Oiticicia) purpurascens; Biezanko (1986) Forewing length - f (1): 50.3mm; m (8): 38.3 ± 0.7mm. Host families: Combretaceae, Myrtaceae, Sapotaceae. Flight period: January, February, September and October. Material examined. Canela, 13. i. 1955, E. Corseuil leg., 1 m (MRGC); Sao Francisco de Paula, 07.i,1997, J. Teston leg., 1 m (MCTP); Sao Francisco de Paula, 10. i. 1997, j. Teston leg., 1 m (MCTP); Sao Francisco de Paula, 12. ii. 1999, Teston leg., 1 f (MCTP); Encruzilhada do Sul, 02-03. ii. 2000, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Barracao, 21.ii.2000, R. A. Di Mare leg., 1 m (MCTP); Encruzilhada do Sul, 04-06. ix. 2004, A. Moser leg., 2 m (CLAM); Sao Francisco de Paula, 1 2-14. x. 2004, Moser, Nunes & Prestes leg., 1 m (CLAM); Sao Francisco de Paula, 20-22. x.2006, F. Quadros leg., 1 m (MCTP). Cicia crocata (Boisduval, 1872) - Fig. 27. Adelocephala ( Oiticicia ) crocata; Biezanko (1986) Forewing length - f: 40-53mm [wingspan according to Lemaire (1988)]; m: 34-42mm [wingspan according to Lemaire (1988)]. (see discussion below). Host familiy: Fabaceae: Caesalpinioideae. Cicia nettia (Schaus, 1921) - Fig. 28. Adelocephala (Oiticicia) nettia; Biezanko (1986) Forewing length - f: 67mm [wingspan according to Lemaire (1988)]; m: 47-52mm [wingspan according to Lemaire (1988)]. Flight period: September and November. Material examined. Guarani das Missoes, 05. xi. 1932, C. Biezanko leg., 1 m (MECB); Guarani das Missoes, 20.ix.1933, C. Biezanko leg., 1 m (MECB). Almeidella approximans (Schaus, 1921) - Fig. 29. Biezanko (1986); Nunes et al. (2003) Forewing length - f: 68-82mm [wingspan according to Lemaire (1988)]; m (3): 33.2 ± 0.5mm. Flight period: October. Material examined. Sao Francisco de Paula, 08.x. 1999, A. Specht leg., 1 in (MCTP); Sao Francisco de Paula, Q8.X.1999, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Sao Francisco de Paula, 08.X.1999, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Sao Francisco de Paula, 12-14. x. 2004, Nunes, Prestes & Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM). Almeidella corrupt a (Schaus, 1913) - Fig. 30. Biezanko (1986) Forewing length - f: 84-88mm [wingspan according to Lemaire (1988)]; m (1): 33.9mm. Flight period: October. Material examined. Morro Reuter, 08.x. 1994, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 10-14. x. 2005, A. Moser leg., 1 f (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 5-6.X.2007, A. Moser leg., 1 f (CLAM). “Mielkesia paranaensis (Rego-Barros & Mielke, 1968) -Fig. 31. Forewing length - m (1): 26.4mm. Flight period: September. Material examined. Piratini, 11. ix. 1999, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP). Psiloptjgida crispula (Dognin, 1905) - Fig. 32. Biezanko (1986) Forewing length - f: 42-55mm [wingspan according to Lemaire (1988)]; m: 31-43tnm [wingspan according to Lemaire (1988)]. (see discussion below). Host family: Fabaceae: Caesalpinioideae, Fabaceae: Mimosoideae. Psiloptjgida walkeri (Grote, 1867) - Fig. 33. Adelocephala rosea; Mabilde (1896); Mielke & Casagrande (1990) Syssphinx apollinairei; Draudt (1929-1930) Adelocephala walkeri; Travassos & May (1943) Adelocephala (Oiticicia) walkeri rosea; Biezanko (1986) Forewing length - f (6): 31.4 + 0.5mm; m (3): 25.6 ± 0.2mm. Flight period: January to April, June, November and December. Material examined. Pareci Novo, 30.vi.1932, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Pareci Novo, 24. xi. 1932, (no collector), 1 f (MAPA); Pelotas, 15.xii.1938, I. Figueiredo leg., 1 f (MUCP); Pelotas, 02. ii. 1941, I. Figueiredo leg., 1 f (MUCP); Pelotas, iv.1944, C. Biezanko leg., 1 m (MECB); Porto Alegre, 27.iii.1958, R. G. Costa leg., 1 m (FASE); Canoas, 28.ii.1959, E.R. Netto leg., 1 f (MRGC); Pelotas, 29.i. 1960, C. Biezanko, 1 m (MECB); Porto Alegre, 19.iii. 1960, (no collector), 1 f (MAPA); Pelotas, 21.iii.1963, C. Biezanko leg., 1 f (MECB); Porto Alegre, 16. i. 1967, J. Mendicelli leg., 1 1 (FASE); Pelotas, 16.iii. 1969, C. Brack leg., C. Biezanko, 1 m (MECB); Porto Alegre, 17.iii.1971, Volume 63, Number 4 223 (no collector), 1 f (MAPA); Salvador do Sul, i.1995, A. Specht leg., 1 f (MCTP); Torres 13.iii.2000, A. Parise leg., 1 m (MCTP); Maquine, 1 3- 14. i. 2005, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM). Syssphinx molina (Cramer, 1780) - Fig. 34. Ronna (1933); Costa Lima (1936); Biezanko et al. (1949); Biezanko (1986); Lemaire (1988) Syssiphinx molina; Mabilde (1896); Silva et al. (1968) Forewing length - f (3): 49.8 ± 3mm; m (14): 38.2 ± 0.6mm. Host families: Anacardiaceae, Ebenaceae, Fabaceae: Caesalpinioideae, Fabaceae: Faboideae, Fabaceae: Mimosoideae, Moraceae, Salicaceae. Flight period: January to March, May, and September to November. Material examined. Pelotas, 30.xi.1932, C. Biezanko leg., 1 m (MECB); Porto Alegre, Xl.x.1934, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Pelotas, 19. ix. 1939, 1. Figueiredo leg., 1 m (MUCP); Taquarf, ii. 1941, R. Paiin leg., 2 m (MRGC); Porto Alegre, 22.iii.1941, (no collector), 1 m (MAPA); Pelotas, 13. ii. 1942, I. Figueiredo leg., 1 f (MUCP); Porto Alegre, 22. ii. 1945, C. Machado leg., R.G. Costa, 1 in (MRGC); Porto Alegre, 13.V.1948, M. Jorge leg., J.M. Botelho, 1 f (MRGC); Pelotas, 25.x. 1952, C. Biezanko leg., 1 in (MECB); Pelotas, 11. xi. 1952, C. Biezanko leg., 1 m (MECB); Bento Gonsalves, ii. 1954. |. Steiger leg., 1 f (MCNZ); Montenegro, 17.iii.1956, O. Baucke leg., 2 m (MRGC); Nova Petropolis, 02. ii. 1961, (no collector), 1 in (MCNZ); Nova Petropolis, 17. ii. 1964, (no collector), 1 f (MCNZ); Pelotas, 16.iii. 1968, Illegible leg., 1 m (MECB); Santa Maria, 30.x. 1971, J. Vasconcelos leg., 1 in (MECB); Sao Jeronimo, 24.ix.1982, T. Arigony leg., 1 m (MCNZ); Morro Reuter, 24.x. 1992, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Derrubadas, 244.2001, R. A. Di Mare leg., 3 m (MCTP); Morro Reuter, 20.X.2Q01, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Pelotas, 204.2005, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 5-7.ii.2005, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Maquine, 6-7. iii. 2005, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM). Adeloneivaia subangulata mbangulata (Herrich- Sehaffer. [1855]) - Fig. 35. Adelocephala subangulata-, Weymer (1894); Mabilde (1896); Ronna (1933) Syssphinx subangulata-, Costa Lima (1936); Silva et al. (1968) Forewing length - f: 67-84mm [wingspan according to Lemaire (1988)]; m (23): 28.2 ± 0.3mm. Host families: Moraceae, Salicaceae. Flight period: January to March and September to December. Material examined. Bento Gonsalves, ii. 1 954, J. Steiger leg., 1 m (MCNZ); Sao Sebastiao do Cal, 17.iii.1956, O. Baucke leg., 1 m (MRGC); Sao Jeronimo, 24.ix.1982, (no collector), 1 m (MCNZ); Sao Jeronimo, 24.ix.1982, (no collector), 1 m (MCNZ); Sao Jeronimo, 22.x. 1982, (no collector), 1 m (MCNZ); Morro Reuter, 30.X.1983, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 24.x. 1992, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Salvador do Sul, 12.x. 1993, A. Specht leg., 1 in (MCTP); Pelotas, 22. ii. 1994, Victor Becker leg., 1 m (MECB); Morro Reuter, 08.x. 1994, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 03. xi. 1995, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 24—28. xii. 1996, A. Moser leg., 2 m (CLAM); Salvador do Sul, 014.1997, D. Becker leg., 1 in (MCTP); Iraf, 18. xii. 1998, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Sao Pedro da Serra, 19.ii.1999, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Derrubadas, 14- 184.2000, Moser & Araujo leg., 1 m (CLAM); Alegrete, 23.xi.2000, R. A. Di mare leg., 1 m (MCTP); Derrubadas, 244.2001, R. A. Di Mare leg., 2 m (MCTP); Barracao, 21. ii. 2001, R. A. Di Mare leg., 4 in (MCTP); Morro Reuter, l-4.iii.2005, A. Moser leg., 1 f (CLAM). Adeloneivaia catharina (Bouvier, 1927) - Fig. 36. Adeloneivaia apicalis; Biezanko (1986) Forewing length - f: 68-77mm [wingspan according to Lemaire (1988)]; m (8): 27 ± 0.3mm. Flight period: January, April, May and October. Material examined. Guarani das Missoes, 17.x. 1932, C. Biezanko leg., 1 in (MECB); Guarani das Missoes, 19.X.1933, C. Biezanko leg., 1 m (MECB); Santa Maria, 25.x. 1971, D. Link leg., 1 m (MECB); Santa Maria, 09.iv.1992, S. J. Bressan leg., 1 m (MECB); Morro Reuter, 184.1997, A. Moser leg., 1 in (CLAM); Derrubadas, 244.2001, R. A. Di Mare leg., 6 m (MCTP); Osorio, 05.V.2001, A. Ferrari leg., 1 m (MCTP); Derrubadas, 14-184.2000, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM). Adeloneivaia fallax (Boisduval, 1872) - Fig. 37. Biezanko (1986); Lemaire (1988); Nunes et al. (2003) Forewing length - f: 44.3mm; m (8): 33.6 ± 0.3mm. Host family: Fabaceae: Mimosoideae. Flight period: January to March, July, September to November. Material examined. Guarani das Missoes, 16.x. 1933, C. Biezanko leg., 1 m (MECB); Nova Petropolis, 024.1961. (no collector), 1 f (MCNZ); Nova Petropolis, 07. ii. 1961, (no collector), 1 in (MCNZ); Nova Petropolis, 07.ii.1961, (no collector), 1 in (MCNZ); Morro Reuter, 28.vii.1982, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Salvador do Sul, 07.ix.1995, A. Specht leg., 1 f (MCTP); Morro Reuter, 07—11 .ii. 1997, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Camaqua, 19.x. 1998, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Barracao, 21.ii.2001, R. A. Di Mare leg., 1 in (MCTP); Morro Reuter, 17-20. ix. 2004, A. Moser leg., 1 in (CLAM); Sao Francisco de Paula, 24-25. x. 2005, A. Moser leg., 1 in (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 1-4. iii. 2005, A. Moser leg., 1 f (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 12-15. xi. 2005, A. Moser leg., 1 in (CLAM). Adelowalkeria flavosignata (Walker, 1865) - Fig. 38. Biezanko (1986); Lemaire (1988) Forewing length - f (4): 51.4 ± 0.4mm; m (7): 38.1 ± 0.7mm. Host family: Fabaceae: Faboideae. Flight period: January, February, and September to December. Material examined. Caxias do Sul, 20.ii. 1931, (no collector), 1 m (MCNZ); Pared Novo, 25.ix.1932, (no collector), 1 1 (MAPA); Porto Alegre, 01.xi.1953, L. Buckup leg., 1 in (MCNZ); Nova Petropolis, 274.1961, (no collector), 1 m (MCNZ); Santa Maria, 28.ix.1971, Link leg., 1 in (MECB); Santa Maria, 28.X.1971, Bergmann leg., 1 in (MECB); Lajeado, 284.1980, Nikle leg., 1 m (MECB); Morro Reuter, 30.X.1983, A. Moser leg., 1 in (CLAM); Erechim, 08. xi. 1985, Mielke & Casagrande leg., 1 f (DZUP); Morro Reuter, 19.ii. 1996, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 13-164.2002, A. Moser leg., 1 f (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 31. xii. 2003-02. 1. 2004, A. Moser leg., 2 in (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 104.2004, A. Moser leg., 2 f (CLAM). Adelowalkeria tristygma (Boisduval, 1872) - Fig. 39. Biezanko (1986); Lemaire (1988); Nunes et al. (2003) Forewing length - f: 90-98mm [wingspan according to Lemaire (1988)]; m (8): 31.8 ± 1mm. 224 Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society Flight period: January to March and jnly to November. Material examined. Guarani das Missoes, 03.iii. 1932, C. Biezanko leg., 1 m (MECB); Guarani das Missoes, 08.iii.1932, C. Biezanko leg., 1 m (MECB); Guarani das Missoes. 14.iii. 1932, C. Biezanko leg., 1 m (MECB); Guarani das MissSes, 29.vii.1932, C. Biezanko leg., 1 m (MECB); Guarani das Missoes, 18.X.1939, C. Biezanko leg., 1 f (MECB); Farroupilha, iii.1951, (no collector), 1 m (MECB); Guarani das Missoes, ll.xi.1952, C. Biezanko leg., 1 m (MECB); Canela, 13. i. 1955, E. Corseuil leg., 1 m (MRGC); Santa Maria, 23.viii.1971, J. Vasconcelos leg., C. Biezanko, 1 in (MECB); Santa Maria, 25.x. 1971, D. Link leg., 1 m (MECB); Santa Maria, 28.x. 1971. L. I. Traesel leg., 1 f (MECB); Morro Reuter, OS.x.1994, A. Moser leg., 2 m (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 07-11. ii. 1997, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Sao Francisco de Paula, 28. ii. 1998, A. Speght leg., I m (MCTP); Barracao, 21. ii, 2000, R. A. Di Mare leg., 2 m (MCTP); Encruzilhada do Sul, 04-06. ix. 2004, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Sao Francisco de Paula, 12-15.X.2007, F. Quadras leg., 1 m (MCTP). Scolesa totoma (Schaus, 1900) - Fig. 40. Nunes et al. (2003) Forewing length - f (5): 30.5 ± 0.5mm; m (18): 23.8 ± 0.4mm. Flight period: every month except April, July, and December. Material examined. Pelotas, 14.viii. 1939, C. Biezanko leg., 1 m (MECB); Nova Petropolis, 05. ii. 1961, (no collector), 1 f (MCNZ); Nova Petropolis, 06. ii. 1961, (no collector), 1 m (MCNZ); Nova Petropolis, 01. xi. 1961, (no collector), 1 f (MCNZ); Nova Petropolis, 15. xi. 1961, (no collector), 1 m (MCNZ); Nova Petropolis, 15. xi. 1961, (no collector), 1 in (MCNZ); Morro Reuter, 084.1983, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 15.V.1983, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 30.x. 1983, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 09. ii. 1991, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 06.vi.1992, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 24.x. 1992, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 08.X.1994, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Salvador do Sul 214.1995, A. Specht leg., 1 nr (MCTP); Morro Reuter, 19.ii. 1996. A. Moser leg., 1 f (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 19.ii. 1996. A. Moser leg., 2 m (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 07.iii. 1998, A. Moser leg., 1 f (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 27.iii.1998, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Sao Francisco de Paula, ll.ii.1999, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Sao Francisco de Paula, 16.vi.1999, A. Specht leg., 1 m (MCTP); Barracao, 21.ii.2001, R. A. Di Mare leg., 1 f (MCTP); Sao Jose dos Ausentes, 02-04.ii.2002, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Encruzilhada do Sul, 04-06.ix.2004, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Sao Francisco de Paula, 12-15.X.2007, F. Quadras leg., 1 m (MCTP). Figs. 27—45. Ceratocampinae of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil (male dorsal view). 27. Cicia crocata. 28. Cicia nettia (cf. D’Abrera 1995). 29. Almeidella approxirnans . 30. Almeidella comipta. 31. Mielkesia paranaensis. 32. Psilopygida crispula (cf. D’Abrera 1995). 33. Psilopygida walkeri. 34. Syssphinx rrwlina. 35. Adeloneivaia subangulata subangulata. 36. Adeloneivaia catharina. 37. Adeloneivaia fallax. 38. Adelowalkeria flavosignata. 39. Adelowalkeria tristygma. 40. Scolesa totoma. 41. Scolesa viettei. 42. Scolesa hypoxantha (cf. D’Abrera 1995). 43. Citioica anthonilis. 44. Oiticella luteciae. 45. Neocamegia basirei. Volume 63, Number 4 225 Scolesa viettei Travassos, 1959 - Fig. 41. Lemaire (1988) Forewing length - f (2): 40 ± 0.5mm; m (16): 32.3 ± 1mm. Flight period: January to March, May, and August to October. Material examined. Guarani das Missoes, 13.iii.1932. C. Biezanko leg., 1 in (MECB). Guarani das Missoes, 21.iii.1932, C. Biezanko leg., 1 m (MECB); Guarani das Missoes, 19. ii. 1933, C. Biezanko leg., 1 m (MECB); Guarani das Missoes, 05.V.1933, C. Biezanko leg., 1 m (MECB); Sao Sebastiao do Cai, 16.X.1954, O. Baucke leg., 1 m (MRGC); Canela, 13. i. 1955, O. Baucke leg., 1 m (MRGC); Sao Sebastiao do Cat, 17.iii. 1956. O. Baucke leg., 1 m (MRGC); Morro Reuter, 07.ix.1982, A. Moser leg., 1 in (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 12-16. x.1983, A. Moser leg., 1 in (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 24.x. 1992, A. Moser leg., 1 in (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 06.x. 1995, A. Moser leg., 1 in (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 04.X.1996, A. Moser leg., 1 f (CLAM); Barracao 21. ii. 2001, R- A. Di Mare leg., 6 m (MCTP); Barracao 21. ii. 2001, R. A. Di Mare leg., 1 m (MCTP); Morro Reuter, 18.viii.2001, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 1 7-20. ix. 2004, A. Moser leg., 1 f (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 1 7-20. ix. 2004, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 1-4. iii. 2005, Moser leg., 1 f'(CLAM); Maquine, 6-7. iii. 2005, A. Moser leg., 2 in (CLAM); Sao Francisco de Paula, 12-14.X.2004, Nunes, Prestes & Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Sao Francisco de Paula, 20-22.X.2006, F. Quadras leg., 1 m (MCTP). Scolesa hijpoxantha (W. Rothschild, 1907) - Fig. 42. Adelowalkeria (Scolesa) hijpoxantha- Biezanko (1986) Forewing length - m: 54mm [wingspan according to Lemaire (1988)]. Flight period: October. Material examined. Santa Maria, OS.x.1971, D. Link leg., 1 m (MECB). Citioica anthonilis (Herrich-Schaffer, [1854]) - Fig. 43. Adelocephala anthonilis- Mabilde (1986) Adelowalkeria ( Scolesa ) anthonilis-, Biezanko (1986) Forewing length - f: 75-106mm [wingspan according to Lemaire (1988)]; m (1): 29mm. Flight period: January. Host families: Fabaceae: Faboideae, Salicaceae. Material examined. Derrubadas, 14—184.2000, A. Moser & Araujo leg., 1 m (CLAM). Oiticella luteciae (Bouvier, 1924) - Fig. 44. Lemaire (1988) Forewing length - f: 79mm [wingspan according to Lemaire (1988)]; m (7): 31.9 ± 1.6mm. Flight period: January to April, August, and October. Material examined. Guarani das Missoes, 09. iii. 1932, C. Biezanko leg., 2 m (MECB); Guarani das Missoes, 04.iv.1932, C. Biezanko leg., 1 m (MECB); Guarani das Missoes, 05.iv.1933, C. Biezanko leg., 1 m (MECB); Porto Alegre, viii.1940, R.G. Costa leg., 1 m (MRGC); Canela, 134.1955, O. Baucke leg., 1 m (MRGC); Morro Reuter, 30. x.1983, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Pelotas, 134.1984, Abud leg., 1 m (MECB); Morro Reuter, 24.X.1992, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 04.X.1996, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Morro Reuter, 07—1 1 .ii . 1997, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM); Derrubadas, 244.2001. R. A. Di Mare leg., 1 m (MCTP); Morro Reuter, l-4.iii.2005, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM). Neocarnegia basirei (Schaus, 1892) - Fig. 45. Biezanko & Baucke (1948); Biezanko (1986); Lemaire (1988) Forewing length - f (7): 43.5 ± 0.7mm; m: 54-73mm [wingspan according to Lemaire (1988)]. Host families: Fabaceae: Caesalpinioideae, Fabaceae: Faboideae. Flight period: January, October and December. Material examined. Pared Novo, 20.x. 1932, (no collector), 1 f (MAPA); Pared Novo, 20.x. 1933, (no collector), 1 f (MAPA); Pareci Novo, 2Lx.19.33, (no collector), 1 f (MAPA); Sao Leopoldo, i.1962, (no collector), 2 f (MAPA); Morro Reuter, 12.xii. 1982, A. Moser leg., 1 f (CLAM); Salvador do Sul, 17.xii.1998, A. Specht leg., 1 f (MCTP); Morro Reuter, 10-14.X.2Q05, A. Moser leg., 1 m (CLAM). Discussion There are some species not included in the list because (A) - they were not found at the examined collections, (B) - their respective geographical distributions are discrepant following Lemaire (1980, 1988, 1996), and (C) - they were previously misidentified. The inclusion of these species must be verified with vouchers from the State: Arsenurinae - Paradaemonia pinto (Westwood). Reported for Rio Grande do Sul by Silva et al. (1968), (as Dysdaemonia pinto) Ronna (1934), and Costa Lima (1936): A and B. Vouchered distribution: Rio de Janeiro. Copioptenjx semiramis phoenix (Deyrolle). Reported for Rio Grande do Sul by Costa Lima (1936), and Biezanko & Baucke (1948), (as Eudemonia semiramis phoenix) Mabilde (1896) and Silva et al. (1968): A and B. Vouchered distribution: Minas Gerais, Espirito Santo, Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paulo. - Rhescyntis hippodamia hippodamia (Cramer). Reported for Rio Grande do Sul (as Machaerosema martii) by Silva et al. (1968): A and B. Vouchered distribution: Bolivia, Brazil (Amapa, Para, Distrito Federal and Goias), Colombia, Equador, Guyana, French Guyana, Peru, Surinam and Venezuela. - Arsenura aspasia (Herrich-Schaffer). Reported for Rio Grande do Sul by Biezanko & Seta (1939), and Biezanko & Baucke (1948), (as Rhescyntis aspasia) Mabilde (1896), Silva et al. (1968) and Biezanko (1986): B and C. Vouchered distribution: Rio de Janeiro. We identified the specimens found at the Biezanko (MECB) and Mabilde (MCNZ) collections as Arsenura biundulata. - Dysdaemonia boreas (Cramer). Reported for Rio Grande do Sul (as Rhescyntis boreas) by Biezanko 226 Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society (1986): B and C. Vouchered distribution: Central America, Andes (low altitudes), and Guyana-amazonian region, Brazil (Para and Mato Grosso). We identified the specimen found at the Biezanko collection (MECB) as Dysdaemonia brasiliensis. - Dysdaemonia fosteri W. Rothschild. Reported for Rio Grande do Sul (as Rhescyntis fosteri) by Biezanko (1986): A and B. Vouchered distribution: Bolivia, Paraguay and Argentina (Jujuy, Tucuman). - Arsenura pandora (Klug). Reported for Rio Grande do Sul by Costa Lima (1936), (as Rhescyntis pandora) Mabilde (1896), Ronna (1933), Biezanko (1986) and Silva et al. (1968): B and C. Vouchered distribution: Goias and Minas Gerais (endemic to Brazilian plateaus). We identified the specimens found at the Biezanko collection (MECB) as Arsenura orbignyana. Ceratocampinae - Adeloneivaia irrorata (Schaus). Reported for Rio Grande do Sul by Biezanko (1986): A and B. Vouchered distribution: Mexico, Belize and Guatemala. - Scolesa leucantha (Boisduval). Reported for Rio Grande do Sul by D'Abrera (1995), and (as Adelowalkeria (Scolesa) argyracantha (Boisduval)) by Biezanko (1986): B and C. Vouchered distribution: endemic to southeastern Brazil - Rio de Janeiro and Sao Paulo. We identified the specimens found at the Biezanko collection (MECB) as Scolesa viettei after genitalic observation. - Oiticella brevis (Walker). Reported for Rio Grande do Sul (as Adelowalkeria brevis and as Adelowalkeria (Scolesa) lanaris (Rothschild)) by Biezanko (1986): B and C. Vouchered distribution: northeast, central-west and southeast of Brazil. We identified the specimens found at the Biezanko collection (MECB) as Oiticella luteciae after genitalic observation. - Citheronia brissotii meridionalis (Bouvier). Reported for Rio Grande do Sul by Biezanko & Baucke (1948), Silva et al. (1968) and Biezanko (1986): B and C. Vouchered distribution: Argentina. We identified the specimens found at the Biezanko collection (MECB) as Citheronia brissotti brissotti. - Citheronia splendens splendens (Druce). Reported for Rio Grande do Sul (as Eacles splendens splendens) by Mabilde (1896), Ronna (1933), Costa Lima (1936) and Silva et al. (1968): A and B. Vouchered distribution: North America. - Eacles imperialis cacicus (Boisduval). Reported for Rio Grande do Sul (as Citheronia imperialis cacicus) by Ronna (1933), Biezanko et al. (1957) and Biezanko (1986): B and C. Vouchered distribution: Guyana- amazonian region. We identified the specimens found at the Biezanko collection (MECB) as Eacles imperialis magnifica. Lemaire (1988) definied E. imperialis as a complex of 11 subspecies distributed from southern Canada to northern Argentina. Phenotypically and according to its range our vouchers were identified as E. i. magnifica. - Eacles imperialis imperialis (Druiy). Reported for Rio Grande do Sul by Biezanko & Baucke (1948), Biezanko et al. (1949) and Silva et al. (1968): A and B. Vouchered distribution: United States. - Eacles penelope (Cramer). Reported for Rio Grande do Sul by Mabilde (1896), Ronna (1933), Costa Lima (1936), Biezanko et al. (1949), Silva et al. (1968) and Biezanko (1986): B and C. Vouchered distribution: Central America and South America; in Brazil, Santa Catarina is the southern State in its distribution; it flies just in low altitude. We identified the specimens found at the Biezanko collection (MECB) as Eacles ducalis. These two species are similar in their wing facies, but the distinction is visualized on the sub-circle discal spot, which is hyaline in E. penelope. The high frequency of citations may be related to that similarity. We kept in the list three species of Ceratocampinae reported by Biezanko (1986), although we had not found specimens in the examined collections. These moths have their distribution recorded near to Rio Grande do Sul following Lemaire (1988, 1996) and we admit that they probably occur in the State. These species are: - Cicia crocata , it occurs in the central-meridional region of Brazil. - Othorene cadmus , its distribution is from Espirito Santo to Santa Catarina. - Psilopygida crispula, it occurs in northeastern Argentina (Entre Rios). Well-sampled and undersampled areas. The survey of Rio Grande do Sul has been done sporadically over several years. There are 49 sampled localities in different environments in the State, however, four areas have the greatest effort — Porto Alegre (84), Morro Reuter (82), Sao Francisco de Paula (59), and Pelotas (59) are the best-known cities, comprising 53,4% of our data. Pelotas is located in the southern part of the State, near Patos lagoon in the Riograndense Shield; it includes fields, savannas and semi-deciduous tropical forest. Biezanko and Irmas Figueiredo had done collecting in this region in the early 1940s to 1970's, but since then few expeditions have been done. Porto Alegre, the State s capital, has always had entomologists; nonetheless, due to extensive urbanization, few places remain as refuges for the species. The city is in the beginning of the mountain ridge of the sandstone- Volume 63, Number 4 227 basaltic plateau in a transitional area between the biomes, now characterized as an ecological tension zone. Morro Reuter is 50 km north from Porto Alegre; it is a rich place with conserved hillsides and an altitude lying between 400-600m. The vegetation includes semi- deciduous tropical forest and few araucaria trees; one of us (A. Moser) has collected Lepidoptera specimens there since 1980. Finally, Sao Francisco de Paula is 60 km northeast from Morro Reuter; it is among the highest places in the State where the elevation lies above 800m. Araucaria moist forest and hillsides with semi-deciduous and even Atlantic moist forest are present in this region. The PUCRS’ Entomology laboratory has frequently done expeditions to this area since the early 1990’s. In addition, other regions are relatively well known. Biezanko (1986) reported on the Lepidoptera of the Missioneira region of Rio Grande do Sul, located in the west-northwest area on the sandstone-basaltic plateau with altitude lying between 200-400m. Nevertheless, we have only 19 records for Guarani das Missoes city and 4 for Cerro Largo. It is unfortunate that many specimens from different regions might have been lost due to past lack of care at the entomological collections. The west side of Rio Grande do Sul, especially the fields and savannas of the southwest, is very poorly documented. Moreover, the anthropogenic homogenization of the landscape as a result of agricultural practices has grown rapidly throughout the south, mainly by silviculture and cattle-raising. Thus, we suggest additional collecting especially in these undersampled areas. Finally, despite the obvious shortcomings of our data, some comments can be made. Abundant species and historical presence. Together, Arsenura biundulata (33) and ParadaemWiia thelia (33) represent 44% of the Arsenurinae sampling effort. Similarly, Eacles imperialis magnified (56), Eacles ducalis (37) and Citheronia brissotii brissotii (38) comprise 34,4% of the ceratoeampine vouchers. Such species have been collected since the early part of the last century, indicating abundant populations and wide distribution over both biomes, except for P. thelia, which seems to occur mainly in low altitudes at the Pampa This wide range may explain phenotypic variation in some of these species. C. b. brissotii, particularly, shows variation on its hindwing where the size of the basal mark can cover more than a half the wing or not. Also, E. i. magnified and E. ducalis vaiy in the small spots along the wings, being more or less numerous. There are some historically recorded species that have not been seen in a long time: Citheronia johnsoni (since 1954), Citheronia laocoon (since 1983), Citheronia vogleri (since 1945), Cicia nettia (since 1933), and Scolesa hypoxantha (since 1971). Citheronia johnsoni was described in 1928 by Schaus, and its type locality is Santa Cruz do Sul, situated at the States middle-west in the Central Depression. Lemaire (1988) wrote that it is probably endemic to southern Brazil. We examined two vouchers from Porto Alegre (140 km east from Santa Cruz do Sul) collected in 1939 and 1959. This species may actually be restricted in its distribution, yet additional collecting in its type locality and surrounding areas has to be done. Similarly, C. laocoon was seen in Porto Alegre and nearby cities beyond, Pelotas, Cerro Largo, and Morro Reuter between 1948 and 1983; it has a wide distribution at the eastern Andes of almost all South America (Lemaire 1988). Gallo et al. (2002) consider this species to be a pest of Cofifea arabica L., an important Brazilian product. Regardless, its population seems to be small in Rio Grande do Sul, or at least not often seen. Citheronia vogleri w^as collected in Pelotas by Innas Figueiredo in the 1940’s; following Lemaire (1988) it occurs in Bolivia, Paraguay, Argentina and Uruguay; he reported the difficulty in defining its distribution due to disjointed data. He added that it was found in abundance from Entre Rios (Argentina), which indicates incompatibility with its presence in areas of semi-arid plateus and even high mountains where it has been primarily reported. Entre Rios and Pelotas are in the Pampa. However, we cannot suggest any conclusive argument about this and to consider this species rare or a stray for Rio Grande do Sul would require further evidence. The lack of such evidence also applies to C. nettia and S. hypoxantha, collected on the State’s west side. Ecological notes. Some species appear to inhabit mostly specific locations in Rio Grande do Sul. The arsenurine moths Caio romulus, Paradaemonia meridionalis, Rhescyntis pseudomartii, and Titaea tamerlan tamerlan, and ceratoeampine Eacles bertrandi, and Procitheronia purpurea seem to live at high altitudes of the State’s northeast and its hillsides regions (Maquine) in the Atlantic Forest biome. They occur in Sao Francisco de Paula and adjacent areas where the elevation lies over 800m. One of us (A. Moser) has done collecting in Morro Reuter (550m) since 1980 and did not find these species; on the other hand, going 60 km to northeast and 250m up we find all of them. Rio Grande do Sul is their extreme meridional extent. The new records for the State, R. pseudomartii, T. t. tamerlan, E. bertrandi were collected in those conditions; E. mayi was also seen in Porto Alegre in 1960, and Mielkesia paranaensis was collected just in Piratini (350m). Almeidella approximans has specimens 228 Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society Alegrete ■ A. armida • A. biundulata a A orbignyana ♦ A. xanthopus S3o Francisco de Paula * * Pelotas 46 ■ C. romulus # D. brasiliensis ♦ T. tamedan tamerlan a P meridionalis • P. thelia Iraf Pelotas 47 ' S3o Francisco de Paula a R. pseudomartii * C. derceto m C. sonthonnaxi 'Pelotas A 48 Figs. 46—48. Distribution maps of Arsenurinae of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. 46. Arsenura armida , Arsenura biundulata , Arsenura orbygniana , and Arsenura xanthopus . 47. Caio romulus , Dysdaemonia brasiliensis, Titaea tamerlan tamerlan, Paradaemonia merid¬ ionalis, and Paradaemonia thelia. 48. Rhescyntis pseudomartii, Copiopteryx derceto, and Copiopteryx sonthonnaxi. 1 S§o Francisco de Paula Sao Francisco de Paula F^orto Alegre * 5* Porto Alegre ■ E. imperialis magnifies * E. ducalis A E. may i • £ bertrandi 49 ■ C. bnssotii brissotii # C. johnsoni a C. laocoon ® C. vogleri 50 , * SSo Francisco de Paula S3o Fra^isco de Paula ■ P purpurea * O. purpuracens a C. nettia • A. approximans ® A. corrupts ♦ M. paranaensis m P walked # S. molina 52 Figs. 49-52. Distribution maps of Ceratocampinae of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. 49. Eacles imperialis magnifica, E. ducalis, E. mayi, and E. bertrandi. 50. Citheronia brissotii brissotii, C. johnsoni, C. laocoon, and C. vogleri. 51. Procitheronia pui'jnirea, Oth- orene purpurascens, Cicia nettia, Almeidella approximans, A. corrupta, and Mielkesia paranaensis. 52. Psilopygida walkeri and Syssphinx molina. Volume 63, Number 4 229 *® H Irai Sao Francisco de Paula Porto Alegre Alegrete Sao Francisco de Paula Santa Maria I Porto Alegre ■ A. subangulata subangulata * A. catharina A A. fall ax A 53 ■ A. flavosignata * A. tristygma A l 25 0 SO 100 54 Alegrete H ++H Sao Francisco de Paula 1* ♦ Porto Alegre Alegrete + Sao Francisco de Paula ♦ Porto Alegre B S. totoma * S. viettei a S. hypoxantha A 50 2S 0 50 100 150 55 B C. anthonilis * O. luteciae A N. basirei A 50 25 0 50 100 150 56 Figs. 53-56. Distribution maps of Ceratocampinae of Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil. 53. Adeloneivaia subangulata subangulata , A. catharina , and A. fallax. 54. Adelowalkeria flavosignata and A. tristygma. 55. Scolesa totoma , S. viettei, and S. hypoxantha. 56. Citioica anthonilis , Oiticella luteciae, and Neocarnegia basirei. only from Sao Francisco de Paula in our data; however, this species was reported by Biezanko (19S6) in the Missioneira region. The majority of Rio Grande do Sul’s species are endemic to east-southeastern Brazil, following Lemaire (1980, 1988, 1996). In the Arsenurinae, only 4 species do not inhabit exclusively this region: Arsenura artnida (widely ditributed from Mexico to Brazil), A. orbignijana (Bolivia and Brazil), Paradaemonia meridionalis (Brazil’s central-meridional portion), and P. thelia (Paraguay and Brazil). In the Ceratocampinae, 16 species are endemic to the east-southeast of Brazil - Eacles imperialis magnified, E. ducalis, E. mayi, E. bertrandi, Citheronia brissotii brissotii, C. johnsoni, Procitheronia puqmrea , Othorene cadmus, Cicia nettia, Almeidella approximans, A. cormpta , Mielkesia paranaensis, Adeloneivaia fallax, Scolesa totoma , S. viettei, and Neocarnegia basirei. This area includes the Atlantic forest biome and the Pampa biome at the southern extreme, where not all species were observed. Also, Cicia crocata is endemic to Brazil, flying over the central-meridional region. The greatest number of species in the State occurs in an area corresponding to the beginning of the mountain ridge and the hillside regions, located on the east and northeast of the sandstone-basaltic plateau in the Atlantic Forest biome (see figs. 46-56). The greater diversity and abundance may be due to the variation in vegetation (Fig. 1) and the hyposometric characteristic of the region. Similarly, the lower diversity and abundance elsewhere in the State could be due to the anthropogenic homogenization of the landscape. I lowever, sampling effort has been much greater in this region as well, and we suggest that additional collecting in undersampled regions may change our current understanding of the lepidopteran diversity in Rio Grande do Sul. Dichotomous keys. Figures 2 and 3 show some morphological aspects used in the keys. 230 Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society Arsenurinae Dichotomous Keys 1 Four concavous median bands on the forewing . Rhescyntis pseudomartii F Forewing with another aspect . .....2 2 Submarginal small black spots below CuAl to the forewings end and on the hindwing’s anal margin to CuA2 . Titaea tamerlan tamerlan 2’ Wings without spots like above . 3 3 Forewing with hyaline sub-triangular discal spot; hindwing prolongation longer than wing . 4 3’ Forewing with hyaline sub-circular discal spot or discal spot absent; hindwing prolongation absent or less than wing . 5 4 Submarginal hyaline marks between Ml-CuAl . . . Copiopteryx sonthonnaxi 4’ Submarginal hyaline marks absent . Copiopteryx derceto 5 Intervenous sub-triangular ribbon-like marks on the submarginal region of the wings . 6 5’ Intervenous sub-triangular ribbon-like marks absent . 7 6 Brown frontal coloration between scapes . Paradoemonia meridionalis 6’ White frontal coloration between scapes . Paradoemonia thelia 7 Hyaline sub-circular discal spot on the wings; concave line on the anal angle to hindwing prolongation . Dysdaemonia brasiliensis T Simple discal spot or with white axis; concave line on the anal angle absent . 8 8 Simple discal spot . 9 8’ Discal spot with white axis . 10 9 Clear intervenous marks on the submarginal region of the hindwing . Arsenura biundulata 9’ Clear intervenous marks on the submarginal region absent . Arsenura armida 10 Two submarginal black spots between M1-M3 . 11 10’ Submarginal black spots between Ml -M3 absent . Caio romulus 11 Brown tarsomeres . Arsenura orbignyana IF Yellow tarsomeres . Arsenura xanthopus Ceratocampinae 1 Hyaline marks along the wings . Neocarnegia basirei 1' Wings without such hyaline marks . 2 2 Subcircular discal spot with axis; small intervenous hyaline marks on forewing submarginal region between Ml and CuAl . Procitheronia purpurea 2’ Discal spot, if present, with another aspect; hyaline intervenous marks absents . ....3 3 Series of intervenous spots subovular on forewing limbal area . 4 3’ Limbal area with another aspect . 7 4 Series of intervenous spots merged . Citheronia laocoon 4’ Intervenous spots not merged . 5 5 Ground color black . . . Citheronia vogleri 5’ Ground color other than black . 6 6 Hindwing discal spot subcircular, touching basal mark or visible just on die ventral face. .Citheronia biissotti brissotti 6’ Hindwing discal spot sub-circular, not touching basal mark, visible on both facies . Citheronia johnsoni 7 Subcircular discal spot on hindwing . . . . . 8 7’ Subcircular discal spot on the hindwing absent . 12 8 Forewing outer margin cut . Syssphinx molina 8’ Outer margin not cut . . . 9 Volume 63, Number 4 231 Dichotomous Keys (continued) Ceratocampinae (continued) 9 Diseal spot on wings white; meso-thorax with pair of white subcircular marks . Eacles ducalis 9’ Discal spot and mesothoracic marks, if present, witli another color. . 10 10 Clear yellow limbal region on the hindwing . Eacles imperialis magnifica 10’ Limbal region with another color. . . 11 11 Forewing apex and tornus angulated . . Eacles mayi ir Forewing apex and tornus sub-rounded . . Eacles bertrandi 12 Distal bands on wings formed by intravenous concave lines... . Mielkesia paranaensis 12’ Distal bands, if present, with another aspect . . 13 13 Strongly marked venation on the wings . . 14 13’ Weakly marked venation on the wings . . 16 14 Ground color yellow. . . Adeloneivaia fallax 14’ Ground color brown or gray. . . 15 15 Hindwing ground color gray. . . Citioica anthonilis 15’ Hindwing ground color brown, with a purple basal mark . . Oiticella luteciae 16 Discal spot on forewing white or absent . . 7 16’ Discal spot on forewing black . . 26 17 Two to four subcircular discal spots on forewing . . 18 17’ Zero or one discal spots on forewing . . 19 18 Abdomen with brown inter-segmental rings;distal band absent on forewing . ..Adelowalkeria flavosignata 18’ Abdomen without rings;distal band present on forewing . . Adelowalkeria tristygma 19 Pink basal and limbal regions on forewing . . Psilopijgicla walkeri 19’ Basal and limbal regions on forewing with other colors . . 20 20 Distal band present on forewing . . 21 20’ Distal band absent on forewing . . 23 21 Ground color brown . . Almeidella corrupt a 21' Ground color other than brown . 22 22 Meso and meta-thoracic legs white;hindwing ground color purple . . Almeidella app roxima i is 22’ Legs yellow; hindwing ground color vellow. . . Cicia nettia 23 Abdominal ground color black . . Scolesa totoma 23’ Abdominal ground color other black . . 24 24 ( .’on vex distal band directed to forewing basal area . . Cicia c meat a 24’ Rectilinear or weakly concave distal band directed to forewing inner margin . 25 25 Forewing outer margin convex . . Othorene purpurascens 25’ Forewing outer margin rectilinear . . Othorene cadmus 26 Forewing tornus angulated . . 27 26’ Forewing tornus sub-rounded . . 28 27 Hindwing purple . . Acleloneivaia subangulata subangnlata 27’ Hindwing brownish-yellow. . . Adeloneivaia catliarina 28 Thorax gray with yellow ring . . Scolesa lu/poxantha 28’ Thorax with other aspect . . 29 29 Purple discal spot on the forewing ventral face; hindwing purple . . Scolesa viettei 29’ Forewing without purple spot on ventral face;hindwing with other color. . . Psilopygida crispula 232 Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society Acknowledgements We express our gratitude to Taran Grant for the English re¬ view, collaboration and incentive. We thank Alexandre Soares (MNRJ), Eduardo J. Ely e Silva (MECB), Elvia E. S. Vianna (CAMB), Felipe do Canto Quadros (MCTP), Fernando R. Meyer (MAPA), Fernando Z. da Cruz (FASE), Luciano Moura (MCNZ), Marcelo Duarte (MZSP), Mirtes Mello, Olaf PL H. Mielke (DZUP) and Vera R. S. Wolff (MRGC) for assistance in observing material in their institutions, Carlos E. Mielke for col¬ laboration, and Jose Antonio Figueiredo, Brian Scholtens and Alessandra Ceratti for the language support. Also, we thank two anonymous reviewers for helpful comments, especially one, whose comments greatly improved the paper. Literature Cited Balcazar-Lara, M. & K. L. Wolfe. 1997. Cladisties of the Cer- atocampinae (Lepidoptera: Saturniidae). Tropical Lepi- doptera, Gainsville 8 (Suppl. 2): 1-53. Biezanko, C. M. 1986. Adelocephalidae, Saturniidae, Mimal- lonidae, Lasiocampidae, Eupterotidae e Lymantriidae da Regiao Missioneira do Rio Grande do Sul. Revista Centro de Ciencias Rurais, Santa Maria 16 (2), 89-1 12. Biezanko, C. M. & O. Baucke. 1948. Nomes populares dos lep¬ idopteros no Rio Grande do Sul. Agros, Pelotas 1(3): 164-177. Biezanko, C. M., R. E. Bertholdi, & O. Baucke. 1949. Re- layao dos principals insetos prejudiciais observados nos arredores de Pelotas, nas plantas cultivadas e selvagens. Agros, Pelotas 2: 156—213. Biezanko, C. M., A. Ruffinelli, & C. C. Carbonell. 1957. Lepidoptera del Uruguay. Lista anotada das especies. Re- vista Facultad Agronomia, Montevideo 46: 1-152. Biezanko, C. M. & F. D. Seta. 1939. Catalogo dos insetos en- contrados em Rio Grande e seus arredores: 1 - Lep¬ idopteros. A. Universal, Pelotas. 15pp. Camargo, A. J. A., O. H. H. Mielke, & M. M. Casagrande. 2007. Nova especie de Paradaemonia Bouvier (Lepidoptera, Saturniidae, Arsenurinae) do centro-sul do Brasil. Revista Brasileira de Zoologia, Curitiba 24(4): 1131—1138. Costa Lima, A. M. 1936. Terceiro catalogo de insectos que vivem nas plantas do Brasil. Ministerio da Agricultura, Rio de Janeiro. 464pp. Costa Lima, A. M. 1950. Insetos do Brasil: Lepidopteros. Es- cola National de Agronomia, Rio de Janeiro. 420pp. Cunha, S. B. & A. J. T. Guerra. 1998. Geomorfologia do Brasil. Bertrand Brasil, Rio de Janeiro. 388pp. D'Abrera, B. 1995. Saturniidae Mundi: Saturniid moths of the World. Part I. Keltern: Automeris Press. 177pp. Draudt, M. 1929-30. Familie: Saturnidae [sic]. Pp. 713-768 (1929); 769-827, pi. 101-137, 142 (1930). In Seitz (ed.). Die Gross-Schmetterlinge der Erde, 6 Die Amerikanischen Spinner und Schwarmer. A. Kernen. Sttutgart. 1452pp. Gallo, D., O. Nakano, S. S. Neto, R. P. L. Carvalho, G. C. Baptista, E. B. Filho, J. R. P. Parra, R. A. Zucchi, S. B. Alves, J. D. Vendramim, L. C. Marchini, J. R. S. Lopes, & C. Omota. 2002. Entomologia Agrlcola. ESALQ, Firaci- caba. 920pp. IBGE. 1986. Levantamento dos reeursos naturais Folha SH.22 Porto Alegre e parte das folhas SH.21 Urnguaiana e SI. 22 Lagoa Mirim: geologia, geomorfologia, pedologia, vege- tayiio, uso potential da terra. Projeto Radambrasil, Rio de Janeiro. 796pp. Lemaire, C. 1980. Les Attacidae Americains: Arsenurinae. Neuilly-sur-Seine: C. Lemaire. 199pp. + 76 illustrations. Lemaire, C. 1988. Les Attacidae Americains: Ceratocampinae. Museo Nacional de Costa Rica, San Jose. 616pp. Lemaire, C. 1996. Bombycoidea, Saturniidae. Pp. 28-49. In Ileppner, J. B. (ed.). Atlas of neotropical Lepidoptera, checklist. Part 4B. Drepanoidea, Bombycoidea, Sphin- goidea. Association for Tropical Lepidoptera, Gainsville. 87pp. Mabilde, A. P. 1896. Guia practice para os principiantes colle- cionadores de insectos, contendo a descriyao fiel de perto de 1000 borboletas com 180 figuras lytographadas em tamanho, forma e desenhos conforme o natural. Estudo so- bre a vida de insectos do Rio Grande do Sul e sobre a caya, classificayao e conservayao de uma eoleyao mais ou menos regular. Gundlach & Schuldt, Porto Alegre. 238pp. Mariconi, F. A. M. & L. G. E. Lordello. 1953. Uma praga flore- stal Arsenura xanthopus (Walker, 1855). O Biologico, Sao Paulo 10: 175-181. Michener, C. D. 1952. The Saturniidae (Lepidoptera) of the Western Hemisphere: morphology phvlogeny, and classifi¬ cation. Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural Plis- toiy. New York 98: 335-502. Mielke, O.H. H. & M. M. Casagrande. 1990. Sobre os tipos de lepidoptera depositados em museus brasileiros. XXI Pa- pilioniclae, Hesperiidae e Pieridae descritos por F. Hoff¬ mann; Nymphalidae (Brassolinae) por L. Travassos & E. May; Lycaenidae por Draudt (suplemento); Papilionidae por Niepelt; Noctuidae por C. M. Biezanko e Saturniidae e Apatelodidae por A. Mabilde. Revista Brasileira de Ento¬ mologia, Sao Paulo 34(4): 713-719. Nunes, F. G., A. Specht, & E. Corseuil. 2003. Saturnudeos (Lepidoptera, Saturniidae) ocorrentes no centra de pesquisas e conservayao da natureza Pro-Mata. Divulgayoes do Museu de Ciencias e Tecnologia - UBEA/PUCRS, Porto Alegre 8: 55—62. Pastran, A. j. 2004. Los Lepidopteros Argentines: sus plantas hospedadoras y otros sustratos alimenticios. Sociedad Ento- mologica Argentina, Buenos Aires. 334pp. Ronna, E. 1923. Apontamentos de microfauna rio-grandense. I serie. Lepidopteros. Egatea, Porto Alegre 8(4): 253-257. Ronna, E. 1933. Catalogo dos insetos ate hoje encontrados nas plantas do Rio Grande do Sul. Egatea, Porto Alegre 18(1-2): 47-53, (3): 96-100, (4): 197-202, (5): 275-578, (6): 329-334. Silva, A. G. d’A., C. R. Gonqalves, D. M. GalvAo, A. J. L. Gonqalves, J. Gomes, M. N. Silva, & L. Simoni. 1968. Quarto catalogo dos insectos que vivem nas plantas do Brasil: Seus parasitos e predadores. Ministerio da Agricul¬ tura, Rio de Janeiro. 622pp. Stone, S. E. 1991 . Foodplants of world Saturniidae. Memoir of the Lepidopterists’ Society 4: 1-181. Travassos, L. & E. May. 1943. Adelocephalinae da eoleyao Julius Arp. Boletim do Museu Nacional (nov. ser.), Rio de Janeiro I 1 : 1—22. Vieira, E. F. 1984. Rio Grande do Sul: geografia fisica e vege- tayao. Sagra, Porto Alegre. 18 pp. Weymer, G. 1894. Exotisehe Lepidopteren VII. Beitrag zur Lepidopterenfauna von Rio Grande do Sul. Entomologis- che Zeitung, Stettin 10-12: 312—333. Received for publication 18 May 2008; revised and accepted . 1 6 October 2008. Volume 63, Number 4 233 Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society 63(4), 2009, 233-235 SYNONOMIZATION OF THE EUPHONIOUS ARCTONOTUS BOISDUVAL, 1852 (SPHINGIDAE: MACROGLOSSINAE) BASED ON MOLECULAR PHYLOGENETIC ANALYSIS Additional key words: Bear Sphinx, cytochrome oxidase I, elongation factor-la-, lucidus, paraphyly, Proserpinus , wingless Arctonotus Boisduval, 1852 is a monotypic hawkmotSi genus proposed for the type species, A. lucidus Boisduval, 1852. In their monumental revision, Rothschild & Jordan (1903) inexplicably transferred Proserpinus terlooii Henry Edwards, 1875 to Arctonotus. This error was repeated by a few other workers (e.g., Holland 1903; d’Abrera 1987; Comstock 1948), but Hodges (1971) and Tuttle (2007) correctly recognized the many morphological similarities tying P. terlooii to the rest of Proserpinus Hiibner, [1819], Less clear were those features tying A. lucidus to Proserpinus, and the validity of Arctonotus as a genus distinct from Proserpinus has never been challenged, though several authors recognized the possibility of a sister taxon relationship (Hodges 1971; Kitching & Cadiou 2000; Tuttle 2007). Pronounced, ciliate male antennae and unusually heavy adult vestiture drove the recognition of Arctonotus (Boisduval, 1852). Additional unusual traits including a winter flight period, a reduced, vestigial proboscis, loss of the pulvillus, and inferred physiological adaptations required to fly in very cold temperatures (Edwards 1875; Holland 1903; Rubinoff 2002) are unique to Arctonotus and equivocally support its separation from Proserpinus. However, we have suspected that Arctonotus might not be the sister taxon to Proserpinus but rather that A. lucidus’ traits were derived by intense selective pressures associated with the winter flight period. This position is supported by many morphological and ecological similarities between the two genera. Arctonotus lucidus shares the green adult coloration, pattern of forewing banding, hindwing maeulation and color all nearly identical to P. terlooii and P. vega (Dyar, 1903). Larvae of A. lucidus and all but one Proserpinus ( P. terlooii ) feed exclusively on Onagraceae. Further, the genera share virtually identical larval moiphology and development patterns, including a dramatic change in the final instars (Osborne 1995, 2000; Rubinoff 2002; Tuttle 2007). In particular, color and maeulation of fifth instar A. lucidus and P. terlooii are veiy similar (Osborne pers. obs.) whereas these traits are widely divergent and varied across other Proserpinus (Osborne 1995, 2000; Tuttle 2007). These moiphological characters, though highly suggestive, have never lead to more than a proposed sister-taxon relationship between Arctonotus and Proserpinus (Hodges 1971; Kitching & Cadiou 2000; Tuttle 2007). Recent molecular phylogenetic analysis (Fig 1.) has demonstrated that not only is Arctonotus lucidus a member of Proserpinus, but also that A. lucidus is deeply nested among the other species of Proserpinus, rendering Proserpinus paraphyletic and therefore systematically uninformative (Rubinoff & Le Roux 2008). Rubinoff and Le Rouxs initial findings were subsequently corroborated with a different set of genes (Kawahara et al. 2009). Thus, the dramatic differences in the ecology and physiology of Arctonotus lucidus belie a phylogenetic relationship that places the genus squarely within Proserpinus. This is remarkable because it suggests the possibility of saltational evolution in those particular characters that have changed so dramatically in Arctonotus (Rubinoff & Le Roux 2008), while genes of A. lucidus have remained very typical of Proserpinus. A discussion of the evolutionary implications and phylogenetics of Proserpinus and Arctonotus is detailed in Rubinoff & Le Roux (2008). Because Proserpinus has priority, the nomenelatural change placing Arctonotus as a junior synonym and thereby maintaining the monophyly of Proserpinus is proposed here. Proserpinus lucidus (Boisduval) = [Combination Revised]: Arctonotus lucidus Boisduval, 1852: 319. comb. rev. We propose to maintain the common name Bear Sphinx for P. lucidus, in use for over a century (Holland 1903). The Greek root of Arctonotus refers to the stout, hairy ursine quality of the adult moth, and while the generic placement has changed, this reference remains accurate. Occasionally websites and authors have used ‘Pacific Green Sphinx’ for P. lucidus, but this more recent common name has no connection to the original description. It is further disadvantaged and confused due to the presence of P. clarkiae, another green Proserpinus widespread across the Pacific Region of North America. Acknowledgements Our Fig. 1 is modified from Rubinoff & Le Roux (2008) with photographs from K II. Osborne. J. Le Roux made invaluable contributions to the molecular analysis that inspired this work. A research permit for some Eu proserpinus samples was granted by Pinnacles National Monument. This research was funded in part by a grant to D.R. from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Recovery Branch of the Sacramento Field Office. 234 Journal of the Lepidopteihsts’ Society 100 fW — MO rFR j-DE LDE p proserpina P. gaurae - 0.01 substitutions/site Fig. 1. Phylogeny of Proserpinus. Euproserpinus phaeton Grote & Robinson used as an outgroup. Modified from Rubinoff & Le Roux (2008), Bayesian consensus tree generated with posterior probabilities inferred from 1,965 base pairs of combined COI, EF- la, and wingless DNA sequence data. Branch support is given as posterior probabilities (numbers beneath branches). Length of branches corresponds to number of substitutions per site. Accession location data are mapped onto the tree (AB. Alberta [Canada]; AZ, Arizona; CA, California; CO, Colorado; IDE, Germany; FR, France; MO, Missouri; NB. New Brunswick [Canada]; NM, New Mexico; SK, Saskatchewan [Canada]). Saltational taxa are highlighted in green. Volume 63, Number 4 235 Literature Cited Boisduval, J. A. 1852. Lepidopteres de la Califomie. Ann. Soc. Ent. France, 2nd ser., 10:275-324. Comstock, J. A. 1948. Tire mature larva and pupa of Arctonotus terlootii Hy. Edw. Bull. S. Calif. Acad. Sci. 47: 49-51. d’Abrera, B. 1987. Sphingidae Mundi: Hawk Moths of the World. London: E. W. Classey. Dyar, II. G. 1903. New North American Lepidoptera with notes on larvae. Proc. Ent. Soc. Wash. 5: 290-298. Edwards, H. 1875. Pacific coast Lepidoptera. no. 11- list of the Sphingidae of California and adjacent districts, with de¬ scriptions of new species. Proc. Calif. Acad. Sci. 6: 86-94. Hodges, R.W 1971. Sphingidae. Fascicle 21 of The Moths of North America North of Mexico, ed. R. B. Dominick et al. London: E. W. Classey. Holland, W. f. 1903. The Moth Book. New York: Doubleday and Page. Kawai-iara, A. Y., Mignault, A. A., Regier. J. C., Kitching, I. J., & C. MlTTER. 2009. Phylogeny and biogeography of hawkmoths (Lepidoptera: Sphingidae): evidence from five nuclear genes. PLoS ONE: 4(3): e5719. doi: 10. 137 1/jour¬ nal. pone. 00057 19. Kitching, I. f. & J. Cadiou. 2000. Hawkmoths of the World. Ithaca, Cornell University Press. Osborne, K. H. 1995. Biology of Proserpinus clarkiae (Sphingi¬ dae). J. Lepid. Soc. 49: 72-79. _ . 2000. Additional notes on Proserpinus clarkiae and Arctonotus lucidus (Sphingidae) life histories from the Pa¬ cific Coast of North America. J. Lepid. Soc. 53:170-172. Rothschild, L. W. & K. Jordan. 1903. A revision of the lepi- dopterous family Sphingidae. Novitates Zoologicae 9: 1-972. Rubinoff, D. 2002. Observations of adult and larval behavior in the winter sphingid, Arctonotus lucidus (Sphingidae). J. Lepid. Soc. 55: 78-79. Rubinoff, D. & J. |. Le Roux. 2008. Evidence of repeated and independent saltational evolution in a peculiar genus of sphinx moths ( Proserpinus : Sphingidae). PLoS ONE 3 (12): e4035. doi: 10. 1371/journal. pone. 0004035. Tuttle, J. P. 2007. The Hawk Moths of North America. Lawrence Kansas: Allen Press. Daniel Rubinoff 310 Gilmore Hall, Department of Plant and Environmental Protection Sciences, 3050 Maile Way, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI, 96822, email: nibinojf@haivaii.edii; Kendall H. Osborne Osborne Biological Consulting, 6675 Avenue Juan Diaz, Riverside, CA, 92509, USA, email: Euprosetyinus@msn.com; and Akito Y. Kawaiiara Department of Entomology, University of Maryland, 4112 Plant Sciences Building, College Park, MD, 20742, USA, email: kawahara@mnd.edu. Received for publication 10 Februanj 2009; revised and accepted 27 May 2009. INDEX FOR VOLUME 63 (New names in boldface) Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society 63(4), 2009, 236-238 Aberration, 118-126 Abisara abnormis, 74 attenuata, 75-76 bifasciata angustilineata, 74 biirnii timaeus , 77 echerias echerias , 70 echerias paionea, 71 freda, 77 fylla magdala, 76 kausambi, 75 latifasciata , 74 neophron chelina, 75 saturata meta, 71 Adams, James K., 21, 173 Adeloneivaia, 214 catharina, 223 fallax, 223, 229 irrorata, 226 subangulata, 223 Adelowalkena , 214 flavosignata, 223 tristygma, 223 Adult resources, 83—88, 179—181 Aeglotis argentalis, 187-188, 191, 197-198 Agraulis vanillae , 127 Almeidella, 214 approximans, 222, 227, 229 cor nipt a, 222, 229 Anacrucis, 27 Arctonotus, 233-235 lucidus , 233-235 Argyrarcha, 185, 197 margarita, 188, 191, 198-199 Arizona, 1—10 Arsenura, 214 aspasia, 225 arrnida, 217, 229 biundulata , 217, 227 orbignyana, 217, 229 pandora, 226 xanthopus, 217 Arsenurinae, 214—232 Asplundia, 141, 148 Astraptes fulgerator, 142 Astrotischeria , 93, 98-99 Atteria, 27 Autocharts, 185, 195, 197, 199-200 albiplaga, 188, 191, 198 barbieri, 187-188, 190-191, 194, 198 fessalis, 188, 190-191, 197 mimetica, 188, 191, 198 Barcoding, 100-109, 141-153 Basonga, 185, 192, 200 Bilateral gynandromorphs, 37-47 Biogeography, 61-62, 199 Boeotarcha , 185 Boloria eunomia dawsoni, 177 frigga saga, 177-178 Books, 154-163 Book reviews, 58, 182 Borkowsky, Christie, 110 Brazil, 214-232 Burns, John M., 137 Caio, 214 romulus, 227 Calhoun, John V., 137 Callaghan, Curtis J., 61 Callophrys augustinus, 177 Canada, 31-36 Canavalia pubescens, 13 Caripeta divisata, 164-165 piniata, 164 triangidata, 164-165 Caribbean, 185-204 Cat ocala andromache, 89, 92 benjamini ute n. ssp., 89-92 chelidonia, 92 delilah, 89, 92 Catocalinae, 1—10, 89-92 Ceratocampinae, 214-232 Cicia , 214 crocata, 222, 226, 229 nettia, 222, 227, 229 romulus, 217 Cissia alcinoe, 171 confusa, 171 usitata, 171 Citheronia, 214 brissotii, 221, 226-227, 229 johnsoni, 221, 227, 229 laocoon, 215, 221, 227 splendens, 226 vogleri, 221, 227 Cithaerias menander, 169 pie ret a, 169-172 Citioica, 214 anthonilis, 225 Climate change, 212 Cliniodes, 199 costimacula, 188, 191, 198 euphrosinalis, 200 glaucescens, 200 opalalis, 188, 190-191, 200 ostreonalis, 188, 190-193, 200 paradisalis, 185-186, 188, 191-192, 195, 197-198, 200 Clupeosoma, 200-201 atristriatum, 187-188, 191, 198 orientalale, 185, 188, 191-192, 198, 200 sericiale, 188, 191, 198 vohilavale, 185, 188, 191-192, 198 Collections, 31-36 Collins, Michael M., 58 Color mosaics, 37—47 Connolly, Biyan, 48 Conservation, 83-88 Copiopteryx, 214 derceto, 220 semiramis phoenix, 225 sonthonnaxi, 220 Coptotriche japoniella, 93-99 Corseuil, Elio, 214 Covell, Charles V., Jr., 58, 209 Crambidae, 11-20, 185-204 Cyclanthus , 141, 148 Cynaeda dent alls, 186, 188, 190-191, 197 Database, 209-213 Deanolis, 187, 197, 200 sublimbalis, 188, 190-191, 200 Decelia terrosalis, 200 Deering, Mark, 37, 118 deMaynadier, Phillip G., 177 DeVries, Phil, 182 Diapause, 127 Dicepolia, 195 munroealis, 187-188, 191, 198-200 roseobnmnea, 188, 190-191, 197 nifitinctalis, 18.5-186, 188, 191, 198 Volume 63, Number 4 237 Dichocrocis catalalis, 201 Dodona adonira, 67 deodata , 69 eg eon, 67-68 katerina , 65-66 lecerfi , 69 longicaudata, 69 maculosa phuongi, 68-69 on id a palaya, 67 speciosa, 68 Dombroskie, Jason J., 31 Drasteria adumbrata alleni, 1 convergent, 3 divergent , 1, 5, 8-10 fumosa, 1, 6, 8-10 graphic,'! atlantica, 1 hastingsii, 1 howlandi, 1 inepta, 1 nichollae, 1 rada, 1 sabulosa abrupta, 1 tejonica, 1, 5 walshi n. sp., 1-10 Didcedo polita, 169, 171 Dysdaemonia , 214 boreas, 225 brasiliensis, 217 fosteri, 226 Eacles, 214 bertrandi, 214, 221, 227, 229 ducalis, 220, 227, 229 imperialis cacicus, 226 imperialis imperialis, 226 imperialis magnifica, 215, 220, 227, 229 mayi, 214, 221, 227, 229 penelope, 226 Education, 209-213 Egira, 23, 25 Endangered species, 110-117, 212 Ennominae, 164-165, 166-168 Epascestria, 200 Ephelis, 187, 197 cruentalis , 188, 191, 198 Epipagis flavispila, 200 ocellata, 187-188, 191, 198, 200-201 Euproserpinus phaeton, 234 Eurrhypis pollinalis, 188, 190-191, 197 Eurya emarginata , 93 japonica, 93 Extinction, 11-20 Extra-floral nectar, 83-88 Ferris, Clifford D., 164, 166 Florida, 127 Following behavior, 179-181 Geometridae, 164—165, 166—168 Godsoe, William K., 137 Grindelia integrifolia, 83-88 Hadeninae, 21-26 Haetera macleannania , 169, 171 Haines, William, 11 Hajibabaei, Mehrdad, 137 Hallwachs, Winnie, 137 Hapalia iospora, 200 Harris, Thaddeus W., 154—163 Hawaii, 11-20 Hayden, James, 185 Hebert, Paul D. N„ 137 Heliconia, 141, 148 Heliconius erato, 179 ethilla, 179-181 Hemaris dijfmis, 100-108 gracilis, 100, 105 senta, 100-101, 103-105 thetis, 100-109 thysbe, 100 Hemiscopis, 187, 197 suffusalis, 188, 190-191 Henshaw, Samuel, 154, 160 Heoriia, 187 clominalis, 188, 191, 198 vitessoides, 188, 190-191 Hesperia Colorado Idaho, 129-136 comma, 129, 134-135 juba, 129-136 Hesperiidae, 129-136, 141-153 Heteropogon contortus, 11—13, 15 Himella, 23 Host choice, 48-51, 94—97, 137-140, 148, 169-172, 197 Hyalinarcha hyalinalis, 185-186, 189, 191-192, 197-198 Hybrids, 37-47 Hydrorybina, 187, 197 polusalis, 189-191 Hyles gallii, 110-111 Hy pliant rophaga virilis, 127 Immatures, 12-15, 48-51, 93-99, 129-136, 169-172 James, David G., 129 Janzen, Daniel H., 137 Japan, 93—99 Johnson, Charles W, 154, 160 Karacetin, Evrim, 83 Kawahara, Akito Y., 233 Kentucky, 209 King, Cynthia, 1 1 Lafontaine, J. Donald, 173 Laxita thuisto , 79 Leafmining, 48-51, 93-99 Learning, 179-181 Lespesia aletiae, 127 Life history, 11-20, 48-51, 93-99, 127, 129-136 Limenitis arthemis arthemis, 41 arthemis astyanax, 41 Lycaena xanthoides, 83—88 Lycaenidae, 83-88 Lysimachia ciliata, 48-51 Maine, 177—178 Manolis, T. D., 182-183 Marcus, Benjamin D., 209 Marcus, Jeffrey M., 209 Mecyna catalalis, 187, 189, 191, 197-198, 200-201 Mecynarcha apicalis, 189, 191, 195, 198-199 Melanism, 37—47, 118-126 Melitara dentata, 31-35 junctionella, 31 nephelepasa, 31, 33 subumbrella, 31-36 Mercader, Rodrigo, 37 Metanema bninneilinearia , 166-168 determinata, 166 inatomaria, 166-167 Metlevski, Jan, 1 Metrea , 185-186, 192, 200 Mielkesia, 214 paranaensis, 214, 222, 227, 229 Mimicry, 169-172 M imosch i nia n ifofascialis , 189-191, 197 Morrisonia, 238 Journal of the Lepidopterists’ Society confusa, 22, 25-26 evict a, 22, 24-26 latex, 22-26 mucens, 25 triangula n. sp., 21-27 Moser, Alfred, 214 Munroe, Eugene G., 52-57 Murillo- Hiller, Luis Ricardo, 169 Musa, 141, 148 Nectaring, 83-88, 110-117 Neocamegia, 214 basirei, 225, 229 Neoxeniades luda, 150 pluviasilva, 150 Noetuidae, 1-10, 21-26, 48-51, 89-92, 173-176 Nola cilicoides, 48-51 sorghiella, 50 Nolinae, 48-51 Noorda, 185, 200 Noordocles magnificalis , 185, 187, 189, 191-192, 195, 197-198 Nunes, Fabrieio Guerreiro, 214 Nymphalidae, 41, 127, 154, 158-160, 169-172, 177-178, 179-181 Obituaries, 52-57 Occurrence records, 209—213 Odontiinae, 185-204 Oeneis jutta ascerta, 177 Oishi, Masako, 93 Oiticella, 214 brevis, 226 luteciae, 225 Ohjcella, 31-36 Omiodes accept a, 12 continuatalis, 1 1-20 monogona, 13 Opuntia, 31 Orthosia , 23, 25 Osborne, Kendall H., 233 Othorene, 214 cadmus, 222, 226, 229 purpurascens , 222 Oviposition, 94—95 Papilionidae, 37-47, 118-126 Papilio alexiares, 38 appalachiensis, 43, 45 canadensis, 37-47, 118-126, 177 “fletcheri" , 118-126 glaiicus, 37-47, 118-126 multicaudatus, 37, 40-41, 43 rutulus, 37, 39-41, 43, 118-126 troilus, 125 Paraclaemonia, 214 meridionalis, 218, 227, 229 pluto, 225 thelia, 218, 227, 229 Paralaxita telesia boulleti, 79 Parasitism, 127 Parategeticula, 137 Paspalum conjugatum , 11—13, 15 Peacock, John W., 89 Pellmvr, Olle, 137 Perichares philetes, 142 Perigonica, 23 Philodendron herbaceum, 169-172 Pierella Helvetia, 169, 171 Pinheiro, Carlos E. G., 179 Pitama, 187 hermesalis, 189, 191, 197—198, 201 Pithing, 48-51 Plagiomimicus expall id us, 176 hilli, 173 kathijae n. sp., 173-176 pityochromus, 176 spumosum, 176 tepperi, 176 Platanthera praeclara , 1 10-117 Pohl, Gregory R., 31 Pollination, 110—117, 137 Polygonia comma, 154, 158—159 Powell, Jerry A., 27 Prestes, Andersonn Silveira, 214-232 Procitheronia, 214 purpurea, 222, 227, 229 Prodoxidae, 137-140 Prodoxus atascosanellus, 139 camerosanellus , 139 praedictus n. sp., 137-140 sordidus, 137-138 weethmpi , 137-138 y-inversus, 139 Proseipinus clarkiae, 234 flavofasciata , 234 gaurae, 234 juanita, 234 proserpina, 234 terlooii, 233 vega, 233 Pseudatteria, 27 Pseudonoorda, 200 brunneiflava, 187, 189-191, 195, 197-198, 200 distigmalis, 185-187, 189, 191, 198, 200 metalloma, 187, 200 minor, 200 nigropunctalis, 200 phot ina, 200 Pseu d osch i n i a ela u ta l is , 189-191, 197 Psilopygida, 214 crispula, 222, 226 walkeri, 222 Pyralidae, 31-36 Quercus pauciloba, 89-92 turbinella, 89-92 Rhescyntis, 214 hippodamia, 225 pseudomartii, 214, 218, 227 Riodinidae, 61—82 Romack, Howard, 37, 118 Rubinoff, Daniel, 11, 233 Sacramento valley, 182—183 San Francisco Bay, 182-183 Sato, Hiroaki, 93 Saturniidae, 58, 214—232 Satyrinae, 169-172 Schmidt, B. Christian, 100 Scolesa, 214 hypoxantha, 225, 227 leucantha, 226 totoma, 224, 229 viettei, 225, 229 Scriber, J. Mark, 37, 118 Severns, Paul M., 83 Shapiro, A. M . , 182—183 Simonsen, Thomas J., 31 Sobanga, 185, 197 rutilalis, 187, 189, 191, 197-199 Solis, M. A., 52 Sourakov, Andrei, 127 Volume 63, Number 4 239 Sphingidae, 100-109, 110—117, 233-235 Sphinx drupiferarum, 110—111 Stiboges elodinia , 81 nymphidia, 81 Stiriinae, 173—176 Stretchia, 23 Suinoorda n. gen., 185—204 maccahei n. sp., 185-204 Sullivan, J. Bolling, 21 Synaxis brunneilinearia , 166-168 pallulata, 164-165 triangulate ?, 165-165 Syntonarcha iriastis, 185 Syssphinx, 214 molina, 223 Tachinidae, 127 Taxila dor a, 77 hainana , 78-79 Tegeticula, 137 Tegostoma comparale, 186, 189-191, 197, 201 Telles arcalaus, 141 pyrex, 141, 151-153 Templemania, 27 Thra aides arcalaus , 141-144, 146-148, 150-152 chiricana, 141-142, 145-152 phidon, 141-152 nanea , 141-142, 148 nida, 141-142 panimeron, 142 thrasea, 142 Tina, 27 Tinacrucis apertana, 30 noroestci n. sp., 27 -30 sebasta, 30 Tischeria ceanothi, 93-94 decidua , 93 ekebladella, 93-94 quercifolia, 93 Tischeriidae, 93-99 Titaea, 214 tamerlan, 214, 218, 227 Tortricidae, 27-30 Utah, 89-92 Vanessa comma , 154, 158—159 Vietnam, 61-82 Viettessa, 187, 197 bethalis, 189, 191, 198, 201 Voltinism, 94-98 Wagner, David L., 48, 89 Webster, Reginald R, 177 Westwood, A. Richard, 110 Yoder, Jeremy B., 137 Yucca, 137-140 Zemeros flegyas, 65 Zoluerowich, Gregory, 1 EDITORIAL STAFF OF THE JOURNAL Brian Sciioltens, Editor Biology Department College of Charleston, 58 Coining Street, Charleston, South Carolina 29424-001 1, USA scholtensb@cofc.edu Pec; Toliver, Layout Editor Natural Imprints 706 Lake Road Eureka, Illinois 61530 naturimp@mtco.com Phil DeVries, Book Review Editor Department oi Biological Sciences University of New Orleans, 2000 Lakeshore Dr. New Orleans, Lousiana 70148-0001 USA pdevries@uno.edu Associate Editors: Gerardo Lamas (Peru), Kenelm W. Philip (USA). Robert K. Robbins (USA), Felix Sperling (Canada), David L. Wagner (USA), Christer Wiklund (Sweden), Carla Penz (USA), Andrew Warren (USA), NOTICE TO CONTRIBUTORS Contributions to the Journal may deal with any aspect of Lepidoptera study. Categories are Articles, Profiles, General Notes, Technical Comments, Book Reviews, Obituaries, Feature Photographs, and Cover Illustrations. Obituaries must be authorized by the president of the society. Requirements for Feature Photographs and Cover Illustrations are stated in Volume 44(2): 1 1 1 and on the Society’s web site at http://www.lepsoc.org/. Send Journal submissions electronically to: scholtensb@cofc.edu or to the editor at the above address. Contributors should feel free to recommend one or two reviewers upon submission of their manuscript. Send requests to review books for the Journal and book review manuscripts to Phil DeVries at the above address (or electronically to: pdevries@uno.edu). Short manuscripts concerning new state records, current events, and notices should be sent to the News. Dale Clark, 1732 South Hampton Rd, Glenn Heights, TX 75154-8530. Before sub¬ mitting manuscripts or electronic files, consult instructions on the Society’s web site at http://www.Iepsoc.org/. Although we prefer electronic submissions, authors may submit hard copy if they are unable to send material electronically. Submit manuscripts in triplicate, typewritten, entirely double-spaced, with wide margins, on one side only of white letter-sized paper. Prepare manuscript according to the following instructions, and submit them flat, not folded. Submit original illustrations only after the manuscript has been revised and accepted. Authors should provide an electronic copy of the final accepted manuscript in a standard PC or Macintosh-based word processing format. Abstract: Include an informative abstract for Articles, Profiles, and Technical Comments. Additional key words: Up to five key words or terms not in the title should accompany Articles, Profiles, General Notes, and Technical Comments. Text: Write with precision, clarity and economy, and use the active voice and the first person whenever appropriate. Make title explicit, descriptive, and as short as possible. The first mention of a plant or animal in the text should include the full scientific name with author, and family. Use metric units for measurements, and a 24-h clock (0930 h, not 9:30 AM) to express time. Underline only where italics are intended. Literature cited: References to Articles, Profiles, General Notes, and Technical Comments should be given as Sheppard (1959) or (Sheppard 1959, 1961a,b) and listed alphabetically under the heading Literature Cited, in plain text (do not capitalize author names) and without underlining as follows: Sheppard, P. M. 1959. Natural selection and heredity. 2nd ed. Hutchinson, London. 209 pp. - 1961a. Some contributions to population genetics resulting from the study of the Lepidoptera. Adv. Genet. 10:165-216. Illustrations: Again, electronic submissions are preferred. Initial submissions may be low-resolution °.jpg format, but final illustrations should be °.tif format at a resolution of at least 300 pixels per inch (120 pixels per cm) saved to a CD. Illustrate only half of symmetrical ob¬ jects such as adults with wings spread, unless whole illustration is crucial. Bear in mind that your illustrations will be reduced to fit a Journal page (plan to make lettering sufficiently large) and that the figure legend will appear at the bottom of the page (Journal page: 16.5 cm width, 22.5 cm height). One-column illustrations should be at least 800 pixels wide; two-column illustrations should be 1700 pixels wide. Illustra¬ tions larger than letter-size are not acceptable and should be reduced photographically to that size or smaller. Figures, both line drawings and photographs, should be numbered consecutively in Arabic numerals; do not use “plate.’’ Type figure legends double-spaced, on a separate sheet (not attached to the illustrations), headed Explanation of Figures. Use a separate paragraph for each legend. Color illustrations are encour¬ aged; contact editor or consult our web site for submission requirements and cost. Tables: Number tables consecutively in Arabic numerals. Label them in plain text (e.g.. Table 1.) and use a concise and informative heading. Type each table on a separate sheet and place after the Literature Cited section, with the approximate desired position indicated in the text. Avoid vertical lines and vertical writing. Submit tables as Microsoft Excel or Word documents, or as TI F image files at 300 ppi. Voucher specimens: When appropriate, manuscripts must name a public repository where specimens documenting the identity ol organisms can be found. Kinds of reports that require vouchering include descriptions of new taxa, life histories, host associations, immature morphology, and some experimental studies. Proofs: The edited manuscript and galley proofs will be mailed to the author for correction of printer's errors. Excessive authors changes will be charged to authors at the rate of $3.00 per line. A purchase order for reprints will accompany proofs. Page charges: For authors affiliated with institutions, page charges are $50 per Journal page. For authors without institutional support, page charges are $25 per Journal page. For authors who are not members of the Society, page charges are $75 per Journal page. Authors unable to pay page charges for any reason should apply to the editor at the time of submission for a reduced rate. Authors of Book Reviews and Obituaries are exempt from page charges. Correspondence: Address all matters relating to the Journal to the editor. Address book reviews directly to the book review editor. PRINTED BY THE ALLEN PRESS, INC., LAWRENCE. KANSAS 66044 U.S.A. CONTENTS SMITHSONIAN LIBRARIES 3 9088 01912 3918 A New Genus of Caribbean Odontiinae with Palaeotropical Affinities (Crambidae) James E. Hayden - - - 185 KY Butterfly Net: An Interactive Web Database to Facilitate Lepidoptera Research and Education in Kentucky Charles Coveil, Jr., Benjamin D. Marcus and JeJfrey M. Marcus --- 209 Arsenurinae and Ceratocampinae (Saturniidae) of Rio Grande do Sul State, Brazil Andersonn Silveira Prestes, Fabricio Guerreiro Nunes , Elio Corseuil and Alfred Moser - 214 General Notes Synonomization of the euphonious Arctonotus Boisduval, 1852 (Sphingidae: Macroglossinae) based on molecular phylogenetic analysis Daniel Rubinojf, Kendall PI. Osborne and Akito Y. Kawahara - 233 Index for Volume 63 ■236 ® This paper meets the requirements of ANSI/NISO Z39.48-1992 (Permanance of Paper).