Thereus endera ( Hewitson, 1867 )

Faynel, Christophe, Huertas, Blanca, Crom, Jean-François Le, O’Brien, Richard & Fåhraeus, Christer, 2025, Diagnostic male secondary sexual structures and wing patterns in the Thereus genena species group (Lepidoptera: Lycaenidae: Theclinae) with the description of nine new species from Colombia, Peru, Brazil and French Guiana, Zootaxa 5728 (2), pp. 201-246 : 211-214

publication ID	https://doi.org/10.11646/zootaxa.5728.2.1
publication LSID	lsid:zoobank.org:pub:2E6171E0-E7A7-430E-BCC0-2C583209A94F
persistent identifier	https://treatment.plazi.org/id/F8303331-AF18-EA2D-ABEF-F9C09EBCECDD
treatment provided by	Plazi
scientific name	Thereus endera ( Hewitson, 1867 )
status

Treatment

Thereus endera ( Hewitson, 1867)

Figures 2, 3 View FIGURES 2–17 , 34 View FIGURES 34–49 , 50 View FIGURES 50–59 , 66 View FIGURES 66–77 , 78, 79 View FIGURES 78–80 , 87 View FIGURES 86–87

Thecla endera : Hewitson: 1867: (3): 111

= Thecla thestia : Hewitson: 1869: (4): 122

Type material. This species was described from an unknown number of male specimens from Tefé (originally Ega), Amazonas, Brazil. One type was identified bearing the label ‘Endera’ [sic] and placed in the type collection at NHMUK (former British Museum of Natural History), coming from the collections of Henry Walter Bates. During this study, a second syntype was found and identified from the NHMUK collections, collected by Bates and matching the original description. In order to stabilize the name for taxonomic purposes, and because genomic analysis was only conducted for the syntype previously known, we here designate the specimen NHMUK015200786, as the lectotype of T. endera ( Fig. 2 View FIGURES 2–17 ). Hewitson (1867) noticed that T. endera “is very closely allied to T. Genena [sic], but differs from it chiefly in the different form of the inner band on the underside of the posterior wing, which in this species is slightly out of a straight line between the scarlet spot and the inner margin, whilst in T. Genena [sic] it forms a semicircle”.

In the same publication that T. endera was described, Thecla thestia was also described by Hewitson a few pages later, using a single female specimen from the Bates collection acquired by the NHMUK. We confirmed the specimen was catalogued by W. Kirby in 1879. Historically, T. thestia has been considered the female of T. endera ( Druce 1907; Robbins 2004), and that assumption was confirmed through our molecular study here (DNA sample ID NHMUK015200804).

LECTOTYPE ♂ ( Fig. 2 View FIGURES 2–17 ), designated here: “ SYN- // TYPE” (blue rimmed white circle label, printed); “Type” (orange rimmed white circle label, printed); “Ega // 57 20 [written on the back]” (grey blue circle label, handwritten); “Endera ” (brown rectangular label, handwritten); “B.M. TYPE // No.Rh 724” (brown square label, printed and handwritten); “ Thecla endera // Hewitson,1867 // SYNTYPE ” (white rectangular label, printed); “NHMUK015200786” (white rectangular label, printed, with a flash code); “Gen. prep. K. Florczyk // NHMUK015200786” (green rectangular label, black printed); “ Thecla endera // H.H. Druce, 1907 // LECTOTYPE // Faynel, 2025 ” (white rectangular label, printed).

PARALECTOTYPE ♂: “ SYN- // TYPE” (blue rimmed white circle label, printed); “Ega // 56-69 [written on the back]” (grey blue circle label, handwritten); “NHMUK015201074” (white rectangular label, printed, with a flash code); “ Thecla endera // H.H. Druce, 1907 // PARALECTOTYPE // Faynel, 2025 ” (white rectangular label, printed).

SYNTYPE Thecla thestia ♀ ( Fig. 3 View FIGURES 2–17 ): “ SYN- // TYPE” (blue rimmed white circle label, printed); “ ♀ // Thecla // Type // thestia // Hew.” (orange rimmed white circle label, printed and handwritten); “Amazon. // Hewitson Coll. // 79-69. // Thecla thestia . 1.” (brown square label, printed and handwritten), “B.M. Type // No.Rh 725” (brown rectangular label, printed and handwritten); “ Thecla thestia // Hewitson, 1867 // SYNTYPE ” (white rectangular label, printed); “NHMUK015200804” (white rectangular label, printed, with a flash code); “Gen. prep. K. Florczyk // NHMUK10402963” (green rectangular label, black printed).

Other material examined ( 18♂, 5♀). ECUADOR. Unknown . 1♂, 1929-435, Ex. Grose Smith. 1910, NHMUK015201091 ( NHMUK) . Napo. 1♂, Rio Napo. J. Hauxwell., Godman-Salvin Coll. 1911.-93., NHMUK015201083*, gen. prep. K. Florczyk ( NHMUK) ; 1♀, 12km Tena-Puyo Rd , 1°05.3'S, 77°47.4'W, 600m, viii.2005, Finca San Carlo, I. Aldas & R.C. Busby leg., RCB05124 ( RCB) GoogleMaps . PERU. Loreto. 1♂, Iquitos, 1911-93, H. Whitely, NHMUK015201106 ( NHMUK) ; 1♂, Iquitos , 1911-93, 18.3.05, Ex Staudinger, NHMUK015203799 ( NHMUK) ; 1♂, Pebas , 1929-435, NHMUK015201097 ( NHMUK) ; 1♂, Iquitos , 1939-1, G. King, NHMUK015201085 ( NHMUK) ; 1♀, Chaquimayo , 2500ft., 1939-1, H. & C. Watkins, NHMUK015201079 ( NHMUK) ; 1♂, Picuroyacu , 3°37' S, 73°15'W, 15-30.v.2012, J.J. Ramírez, CF-LYC-451* ( RCCF) GoogleMaps ; 1♂, Nueva York, Río Momon , xi.2011, H. Lequerica Chiong leg., CF-LYC-838* ( RCCF) ; 1♂, Rio Chanbiraz, Comunidad Atlaya, Alto de Pisco , 14.ii.2015, Fåhraeus / Santoz leg., CFC00541* ( FILS) ; 1♀, Contaya , x.2008, J.J. Ramírez, CF-LYC-450*, gen. prep. K. Florczyk CFCF031 ( RCCF) ; 1♂, El Milagro , 03° 57′S, 73° 22′W, xi.2013, J.J. Ramírez leg., CF- LYC-828*, gen. prep. K. Florczyk CFCF030 ( RCCF) GoogleMaps ; 1♂, Contamana , Rio Ucayali, x.2011, J.J. Ramírez leg., CF- LYC-839* ( RCCF) ; 1♀, Nauta , Upp. Am., A. M. Moss, NHMUK015203426* ( NHMUK) . Cusco. 1♂, Quincemil, Rd Interoceanica , 750m, 13°14'48"S, 70°46'57"W, 20.iii.2016, Fåhraeus / Miranda leg., CFC00234* ( FILS) GoogleMaps . BRAZIL. Amazonas . 1♂, San Joas , Solimões, 1929-435, NHMUK015201105 ( NHMUK) ; 1♂, Fonte Boa , 57-125, NHMUK015201092 ( NHMUK) ; 1♂, Ega [=Tefé], 1911-93, H.W. Bates, NHMUK015201086 ( NHMUK) ; 1♀, S. Paulo, U. Amazons, H.W. Bates, Godman-Salvin Coll. 1911.-93., NHMUK015201099* ( NHMUK) . Pará . 1♂, 49- 49, NHMUK015201089 ( NHMUK) . Amazonas or Pará . 1♂, Amazons , 1939-1, A. H. Fassl, NHMUK015201041 ( NHMUK) . NO LOCALITY. 1♂, 1911-93, NHMUK015201102 ( NHMUK) .

Diagnosis and description. Based on the phylogenetic tree ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 ), T. endera forms a clade with T. geminus sp. nov. and T. cacao sp. nov. Morphologically and genetically, T. endera is distinguished from T. geminus sp. nov. by: (1) dorsal coloration less blue and more dull grey-blue in males ( Figs 2, 4 View FIGURES 2–17 ); (2) wider disjunction of the VHW postmedian line in M 1 in both sexes ( Figs 2, 3, 4, 5 View FIGURES 2–17 ); (3) wider valvae at the base and less regularly tapered; (4) 3.47% mean genetic divergence ( Table 3). T. endera is distinguished from T. cacao sp. nov. by: (1) less extensive blue dorsal coloration in males ( Figs 2, 6 View FIGURES 2–17 ), also different in shade (blue-grey in T. endera , blue-violet in T. cacao sp. nov.), with a longer scent pad ( Figs 34, 36 View FIGURES 34–49 ); (2) smaller distance between the dorsal process supporting the brush organs and the saccus in lateral view in the male genitalia ( Figs 50, 52 View FIGURES 50–59 , black arrow); (3) 2.24% mean genetic divergence ( Table 3). Male genitalia ( Figs 50 View FIGURES 50–59 , 78 View FIGURES 78–80 ). Three males dissected, including the male lectotype. Terminal part of the dorsal brush organs not reaching the junction of the bilobes of the uncus. Valvae triangular, short, especially their posterior extension, forming a step on the ventral edge. Saccus pointed in ventral view. Penis short and almost straight (on the male syntype but angled at 150° for other dissected males), two cornuti at its end, turned dorsally, the posterior one being very fine. Eighth tergite subrectangular, anterior border convex, posterior one concave. Female genitalia ( Fig. 66 View FIGURES 66–77 ). Two females dissected, including the female syntype of T. thestia . Large funnel-shaped ostium bursae. Short ductus bursae, with a lightly sclerotized part in its center (probably mobile during copulation). Ductus seminalis emerging dorsally from an outgrowth of the corpus bursae, no signum observed in the bursa. Papillae anales wide in lateral view, no sclerotized element observed on the membrane in between them. Eighth tergite subrectangular, anterior border convex, posterior one concave.

DNA ( Fig. 1 View FIGURE 1 , Table 1). T. endera is identified by BIN ACK2034 on BOLD, including both T. endera and T. thestia type material. Around these specimens, there are five groups of barcoded specimens (from Peru, Bolivia, French Guiana), very close to T. endera morphologically, that have received different BINs. Two of them ( T. geminus sp. nov. and T. cacao sp. nov.) are described in this paper as new species based on both morphological and genetic differences. The sample size is too small for the others and there is no clear-cut morphological character that separate them from T. endera but it probably represents a species complex. Pending further information, the list of material examined is restricted to specimens sharing a similar wing pattern and the same BIN.

Sympatry. T. endera and T. geminus sp. nov. are sympatric in Loreto, Peru. T. endera and T. cacao sp. nov. are sympatric in Cusco, Peru ( Fig. 87 View FIGURES 86–87 ).

Known distribution ( Fig. 87 View FIGURES 86–87 ). Ecuador ( Napo). Peru (LOR, CUS). Brazil (AM, PA?).

Remarks. No molecular data is available to confirm the presence of this species in lower Amazon ( Brazil, Pará).