Emesis planeca (R. de la Maza E. & J. de la Maza E.) Trujano-Ortega & Callaghan & García-Vázquez & Luis-Martínez & Ávalos-Hernández & Llorente-Bousquets, 2020

Trujano-Ortega, Marysol, Callaghan, Curtis J., García-Vázquez, Uri Omar, Luis-Martínez, Armando, Ávalos-Hernández, Omar & Llorente-Bousquets, Jorge, 2020, Emesis planeca n. comb. (Lepidoptera: Riodinidae): a new combination revealed by molecular evidence with a description of its morphological variation, Zootaxa 4853 (2), pp. 218-234 : 222-225

publication ID	https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.4853.2.4
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:4F99C503-C467-4514-84F3-486B6D65C87A
DOI	https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4498875
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/B516E37D-5934-4C0B-FF19-4AC24333FC48
treatment provided by	Plazi
scientific name	Emesis planeca (R. de la Maza E. & J. de la Maza E.)
status	comb. nov.

Treatment

Emesis planeca (R. de la Maza E. & J. de la Maza E.) n. comb. (Apodemia).

Figs. 1 View FIGURE 1 , 3–7 View FIGURE 3 View FIGURE 4 View FIGURE 5 View FIGURE 6 View FIGURE 7

Diagnosis. Postmedial region in dorsal and ventral views of both wings with a band of white spots, more evident in ventral view; submarginal area in dorsal and ventral views of both wings with a line of small black dots, six dots in dorsal view of forewing, five dots in dorsal view of hindwing, seven dots in ventral view of forewing and six dots in ventral view of hindwing ( Figs. 1 View FIGURE 1 , 3 View FIGURE 3 ). These characters distinguish Emesis planeca n. comb. from all known Emesidini species.

Description. Male. ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 A–F). Most of the examined specimens are smaller than the original description, with wingspan of 2.1–2.4 cm (n=7). Additional forewing length measurements are: a) wing base to anterior apex 12.7–14.04 mm (n=7, ẍ = 13.5 ±0.5), b) anterior apex to anal angle 9.01–9.93 mm (n=7, ẍ = 9.35 ±0.5), and c) anal angle to wing base 8.12–9.1 mm (n=7, ẍ = 8.12 ±0.33). Wing shape: Forewing is triangular with the costal margin slightly curved, apex with a small curve extending into the distal margin, thus appearing slightly convex. The internal margin is straight and shorter than the costal margin. Hindwing is more rounded than forewing, apex and distal margin convex and anal margin straight ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 ). Venation: forewing with four radial veins originating in the last third of the discal cell; subcostal vein clearly separated and parallel to R 1. Vein R 4+5 reaches the margin of the wing at the apex; 3A of hindwing slightly truncated, reaching the inner margin closer to the base ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 ).

Head ( Fig. 4 View FIGURE 4 ). Eyes bare, with orange scales at the edge, the frons orange. Labial palpi small, close to the head and directed upward, hidden in dorsal view. The length of the second segment of labial palpi is at least two and a half the length of the third segment. Labial palpi white with a few orange scales on the external side of the third segment. Antennae almost two thirds the length of the wing, ringed, dark brown flagellomeres with white scales at their bases. Antennal club formed by the last 15 flagellomeres, which are white in ventral view and in some cases dark orange. Flagellomeres are mostly dark brown in dorsal view, but apical segments are orange to brownish.

Genitalia ( Fig. 5 View FIGURE 5 ). Uncus wide with squared margin and a clear notch in the posterior margin in lateral view, with large setae. In ventral view the edge appears slightly concave in the middle with two knobs at the center, differing from the small cleavage with sharp edges described by De la Maza & De la Maza (2017). Gnathi are sickleshaped, narrower towards the apex, distal ends in a sharp tip pointing laterally, rounder in ventral view as in the original description. In ventral view, gnathi may or may not converge toward the middle. Tegumen wide, curved in the anterior margin and with weakly sclerotized areas appearing as membranes which Hall (2008) named “windows”. Vinculum narrow and straight, sometimes slightly inclining, with a curve right before turning into the saccus, which is strongly projected anteriorly, swollen in the middle portion and the posterior margin. Valvae divided in a ventral and a dorsal process, the dorsal process larger and straight and the ventral with rounded tips; both with conspicuous setae. Dorsal process is shorter than gnathi in lateral view. In ventral view, the dorsal process looks squared, wide and projected outwards; the ventral process is rounded, short, and turned inwards. Aedeagus is large, sigmoid shaped, curved before the genital capsule, with two types of cornuti, one type is laminar, larger, sclerotized, and in an anterior position in relation to the second type which is a series of small indented evenly distributed cornuti. Aedeagus joined to the capsule by a broad and strongly sclerotized strap-like pedicel.

Female. ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 G–L). Slightly larger than males, but smaller than in the original description, wingspan 2.1–3.1 cm (n=7). Forewing length: a) wing base to anterior apex 13.16–15.5 mm (n=7, ẍ = 14.17 ±10.2); b) anterior apex to anal angle 8.6–10.56 mm (n=7, ẍ =9.46 ±0.9) and, c) anal angle to wing base 9–11.25 mm (n=7, ẍ =10 ±0.7). Wing shape: forewing more convex in the distal margin than in the male.

Genitalia ( Fig. 6 View FIGURE 6 ). Anal papillae are rounded. With a membranous sterigma. Ostium bursae heptagonal not sclerotized in the dorsal and ventral regions, slightly sclerotized in the lateral edges. Ostium bursae joined the antrum which is wide and strongly sclerotized and funnel-shaped, smooth anteriorly and wrinkled posteriorly. Ductus bursae are membranous, slender, and straight, slightly longer than corpus bursae. Corpus bursae elongated and ovalshaped, with a single long invaginated signum forming a slightly inward curved sharp blade, placed at the middle and laterally in the corpus bursae. The signum has numerous tiny spines posteriorly directed on the ovoid opening to the corpus wall.

Wing pattern variation ( Figs. 1 View FIGURE 1 , 3 View FIGURE 3 ). Emesis planeca n. comb. does not show evident sexual dimorphism. Wing pattern in both wings and views are consistent, with little variation listed below: Dorsal view. Forewing; background color is originally described as dull ‘cinnamon brown’ (p. 31), as in MZFC 429990 ( Fig. 1 B View FIGURE 1 ), however, most of the examined specimens present a light ‘ochraceous tawny’ (15’.Y.O.i; in Ridgway 1912) background. The forewing fringe is bronze, with white scales only in cell R 4+5 at the apex. Discal cell with four lines of faint dark transversal scales, only the fourth line at the distal end of the discal cell is clearly visible and straight, with the same four lines in Cu 2, where the fourth line aligns with the fourth line of the discal cell. The post-medial area presents an irregular median row of white spots with dark brown scales in the basal edge, as described by De la Maza & De la Maza (2017). The row was originally described as reaching the posterior margin of M 3 (p. 32), but all examined specimens show six spots as far as Cu 1 ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 ). Since this is a distinctive character of the species, it will be described in detail ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 ): first two spots are triangular, small, sharp and evident (cells R 2 y R 4+5); third and fourth spots (M 1 y M 2) are large and visible, although barely visible in some specimens ( Fig. 1 B y L View FIGURE 1 ); the fourth spot is larger and close to the distal margin; fifth and sixth spots (M 3 y Cu 1) are generally small and faint, and in some specimens only as scattered white scales ( Fig. 1 B, H, L View FIGURE 1 ); white spot in Cu 1 is close to the wing base. Marginal and distal post-medial areas with an orange band, limited in the basal edge by an irregular line of brown-reddish scales in the post-medial area, from R s to Cu 2. Submarginal area with a line of six small black dots sometimes faint at the apex or in Cu 2, in this case are barely visible as reddish scales ( Fig. 1 F, H, J View FIGURE 1 ). Veins marked along the wing in grey.

Hindwing; with the same pattern as forewing. De la Maza & De la Maza (2017) mention seven white spots reaching Cu 1 –Cu 2; however, specimens examined show only six spots as described for forewing, although less defined in hindwing ( Figs. 1 View FIGURE 1 , 3 View FIGURE 3 ). Postmedial area with a band of reddish scales more evident than in forewing, from the apex to the tornus; sometimes not clearly defined ( Fig. 1 D View FIGURE 1 ) or with lunulae ( Fig. 1 B, G, L View FIGURE 1 ). Submarginal area with a line of five small black dots clearly defined, more evident than in forewing ( Fig. 3 View FIGURE 3 ). The hindwing fringe is entirely checkered bronze and white from distal margin to Cu 1.

Ventral view. With more intense colors in the orange range ‘ochraceous orange’ (13 O.Y.O) and ‘cadmium orange’ (13.OY.o; in Ridgway 1912), differing from the not-iridescent pearl salmon color described by De la Maza & De la Maza (2017). White spots dimmed in dorsal view (as in M 3 and Cu 1) are clearly visible in ventral view in all specimens ( Fig. 1 B, L View FIGURE 1 ). Two evident black dots in Cu 2 in both wings, therefore submarginal area has seven black dots in forewing and six in hindwing.

Habitat and phenology. All examined specimens are from the type locality ( De la Maza & De la Maza 2017), El Marqués, municipality of Múgica, in the central state of Michoacán. The site is 520 m a.s.l., forming part of the morphotectonic province of Balsas Basin ( Ferrusquía-Villafranca 1993). The dominant vegetation is Tropical Deciduous Forest, however, Tropical Subdeciduous Forest can be found along the margin of nearby rivers areas ( Rzedowski 1978; Martínez-Cruz et al. 2013). Dominant tree species are Cordia elaeagnoides , Euphorbia schlechtendalii , Randia thurberi , Manihot tomatophylla , and Acacia picachensis ( Martínez-Cruz et al. 2013) . The climate in the region is semiarid, warm, with summer rains (BS1(h’) x’igw”); annual median temperature is 26.5° C; total annual rainfall is 625.5 mm and the rainy season extends from June to September ( García, 2004). All specimens were collected by L. L. González Cota between March and April of 1997, with just one specimen from December 1996. A Mariposa database query ( Luis-Martínez et al. 2005) showed that the same collector captured specimens from other families in that site from September 1996 to June 1997. Therefore, we infer that adults of Emesis planeca n. comb. fly during the dry season of the year. It is sympatric with E. poeas Godman and probably also with other species of Emesis distributed in the state like E. mandana (Cramer) , E. saturata Godman & Salvin , E. tenedia , and E. vulpina Godman & Salvin ( Fig. 7 View FIGURE 7 ), but more sampling is required to confirm this.