Molecular relationships of the Australian Ennominae (Lepidoptera: Geometridae) and implications for the phylogeny of the Geometridae from molecular and morphological data
Author
Young, Catherine J.
text
Zootaxa
2006
2006-07-17
1264
1
1
147
https://biotaxa.org/Zootaxa/article/view/zootaxa.1264.1.1
journal article
10.11646/zootaxa.1264.1.1
11755334
5065476
5E01F472-2A9A-4B56-8D73-DCF7C79F1861
Cidariini
and
Xanthorhoini
In this analysis, the linking of the Australian xanthorrhoine
Acodia pauper
and the Nearctic cidariine
Ecliptoptera
silaceata
as sister species is moderately well supported.
Acodia
Rosenstock
consists of three species that are widespread in Southern
Australia
.
A. pauper
is a moderately small, cryptically patterned moth with forewings pale brown with numerous, wavy, transverse fasciae coloured in different shades of brown. Hindwings are similarly patterned but paler. Larvae feed on
Coprosma
J.R. & G. Forst. The pairwise distance between the two species from the 28S D2 data is 7.8% (Appendix 6). The sister relationship between the
Cidariini
and the
Xanthorhoini
was suggested by
Forbes (1948)
,
McGuffin (1958)
,
Herbulot (1961
–62),
Vidalepp (1977)
,
Inoue (1982)
,
Hodges
et al.
(1983)
and more recently
Choi (1997)
.
In Choi’s morphological cladistic analysis of the
Cidariini
, characters generally shared by both tribes were as follows:
—frons projected ventrally; two accessory cells in forewing; sexual tufts on male forewings; hooked, sclerotised, thick and long uncus; small anellus lobes; hairs of costa absent or bunched; hairs on cucullus; large number of cornuti on the vesica.
Xanthorhoine (
sensu
Herbulot 1961
–62) species used by Choi were three species of
Xanthorhoe
Hübner
and
Catarhoe cuculata
Hüfnagel. The
morphological characters of
A. pauper
do not suggest a close relationship with the
Cidariini
and none of the above characters, apart from the last, is present in this species.
However a few genitalic characters unite
A. pauper
(Figs 18–20) and
E. silaceata
:
—an acute uncus (Fig. 18); a rounded aedeagal apex (Fig. 19); bursa copulatrix not clearly differentiated into ductus bursae and corpus bursae (Fig. 20).
The eggs of
Acodia orina
(Fig. 21) and
E. silaceata
(
Salkeld 1983
)
also show little similarity but both have broad cell walls, concave cells and small aeropylar openings.