Prabhasa Moore, 1878

Dubatolov, Vladimir V., Volynkin, Anton V. & Kishida, Yasunori, 2018, Review of the Prabhasa Moore, 1878 genus-group (Lepidoptera, Erebidae, Arctiinae), Zootaxa 4407 (3), pp. 383-400 : 384

Prabhasa Moore, 1878

Proceedings of the Scientific Meetings of the Zoological Society of London 1878: 25–26. Type species: Prabhasa venosa Moore, 1878 , by subsequent designation ( Hampson 1894). Ilema (Prabhasa) : Hampson 1900: 138.

Eilema: Strand 1922: 592 .

Description. Wing shape of the typical Eilema habitus, male has tufted androconial fold along the basal half of costal Vein. Male genitalia: uncus bifid, cucullus and sacculus distally with narrow processes; ValVe Ventral edge conVeX, with a setose fold in its basal half; aedeagus thin, Vesica membranous, short, thin. Female genitalia: ductus bursae weakly sclerotized, dorso-Ventrally flattened, its anterior section membranous; corpus bursae elliptical, membranous, with a large round signum posteriorly.

Remarks. 1. Černý & Pinratana (2009) combined Prabhasa and Zadadra Moore, 1878 species in one genus; this is not correct: uncus is bifid in Prabhasa , but simple and narrow in Zadadra ( Fig. 30 ); Prabhasa has a setose Ventral fold of sacculus (on the figure 24 it is pressed aboVe costa), whereas no fold is Visible in Zadadra species (see: Fang 2000: 240–244; Kirti & Singh 2015: 129–131); howeVer, some other characters, like cucullus and sacculus apices are similar; in any case, these genera are closely related. ReVision of the genus Zadadra will be published later by the authors. Here we treat Prabhasa as a probably monotypic genus. All other taXa preViously included to Prabhasa belong to different genera. 2. Specimens from China treated by authors (Daniel 1954; Fang 2000; DubatoloV & Zolotuhin 2011; DubatoloV et al. 2012) as Prabhasa venosa belong to “ Prabhasa ” costalis Moore, 1878 in fact. It is not congeneric with Prabhasa venosa and belongs to another, yet undescribed genus, which is described below as Chinasa DubatoloV, Volynkin & Kishida , gen. nov. 3. Specimens from Thailand treated by Černý & Pinratana (2009) as Prabhasa venosa belong to the new species described below as Macohasa cernyi DubatoloV, Volynkin & Kishida , sp. nov., which is closely related to Macotasa orientalis ( Hampson, 1905) and Macotasa dimorpha ( Hampson, 1918) . All three species haVe the male genitalia clearly different from Macotasa Moore, 1878 , Prabhasa and Zadadra and belong to the new genus, which is described below as Macohasa DubatoloV, Volynkin & Kishida , gen. nov. 4. Judging the male genitalia structure, Prabhasa plumbeomicans ( Hampson, 1894) (illustrated by DubatoloV & Zolotuhin (2011) and Kirti & Singh (2015)), belongs to the genus Zadadra , therefore the new combination is established here: Zadadra plumbeomicans ( Hampson, 1894) , comb. nov. 5. The male genitalia structure of Prabhasa monastyrskyi DubatoloV, 2012 (see DubatoloV 2012: fig. 5) is more similar to that of Zadadra species, but, howeVer, differs by the robust, bulb-like, strongly setose distal saccular process, and presence of a robust cornutus in Vesica. Here we proVisionally place this species in the genus Zadadra : Zadadra monastyrskyi (DubatoloV, 2012) , comb. nov. 6. There are seVeral species described or included in Prabhasa , but their male genitalia are quite different either from Prabhasa or from Zadara, Chinasa and Macohasa . Their generic placement will be more carefully scrutinized later by the authors of the present paper in the forthcoming reVision of the genus Zadadra .

Figures

FIGURES 30–31. Lithosiina spp.: male genitalia (genital capsules in ventral vieW). 30, Zadadra distorta, Nepal, slide MWM 31500 Volynkin; 31, Macotasa biplagella, holotype, slide BMNH(E) Arct-2840 (©NHMUK).