Zischkaia amalda ( Weymer, 1911 )

Nakahara, Shinichi, Zacca, Thamara, Dias, Fernando M. S., Dolibaina, Diego R., Xiao, Lei, Espeland, Marianne, Casagrande, Mirna M., Mielke, Olaf H. H., Lamas, Gerardo, Huertas, Blanca, Kleckner, Kaylin & Willmott, Keith R., 2019, Revision of the poorly known Neotropical butterfly genus Zischkaia Forster, 1964 (Lepidoptera, Nymphalidae, Satyrinae), with descriptions of nine new species, European Journal of Taxonomy 551, pp. 1-67 : 20-22

Zischkaia amalda ( Weymer, 1911)

Figs 2 A–B, 4 A, 14

Euptychia amalda Weymer, 1911: 213 , pl. 48, fig. f[2] (Type Locality: Mapiri [La Paz, Bolivia]).

Euptychia amalda – Gaede 1931: 437 . — D’Abrera 1988: 789.

Zischkaia amalda – Forster 1964: 116–117 , fig. 124. — Lamas 2004: 223.

Material examined

Lectotype (here designated)

BOLIVIA • ♂; “//CoTypus Nr. Euptychia amalda (Stgr)Weymer Zoologische Staatssammlung München. // amalda Weym [er].// Mapiri [La Paz, Bolivia]// 521.// 261.// Original [i.e., Type]// Genitalic vial SN-17-21 S. Nakahara //”; ZSM.

Other material (12 ♂♂)

BOLIVIA – La Paz • 1 ♂; Coroico; [16°10′ S, 67°44′ W]; 1200 m; Fassl A.H. leg.; ZSM • 1 ♂; Río Zongo; [16°3′40″ S, 68°1′2″ W]; 1200 m; 1895–1896; Garlepp leg.; MNHU • 1 ♂; Zongo [= Río Zongo ]; [16°7′ S, 68°2′ W]; Garlepp leg.; MNHU • 1 ♂; same collection data as for preceding; BMNH ( E)-10247952; NHMUK .

PERU – Huánuco • 1 ♂; Tingo María; [9°18′ S, 76°0′ W]; 800 m; 7 Aug. 1979; FLMNH-MGCL- 1036040; FLMNH . – Junín • 1 ♂; Chanchamayo; [11°4′ S, 75°19′ W]; 1000–1400 m; Jun.– Aug. 1901; W. Hoffmanns leg.; BMNH ( E)-1718080; NHMUK. – Not located • 6 ♂♂; “ Peru ” [most likely from Bolivia]; USNM .

Identification and taxonomy

The male of Zischkaia amalda is distinguished from Z. baku sp. nov. and Z. chullachaki sp. nov. by the VFW submarginal line not undulating (the VFW submarginal line is undulating in Z. baku sp. nov. and Z. chullachaki sp. nov.), with the area of dorsal androconia rather reduced and the androconia not as prominent as in those two species. Furthermore, the male genitalia can be used to distinguish this species from Z. baku sp. nov., with the winglet of the aedeagus being developed ( Fig. 4A ) (reduced in Z. baku sp. nov.), and the anterior margin of the tegumen being concave in dorsal view in Z. amalda , whereas it is rather straight or convex in Z. baku sp. nov. and Z. chullachaki sp. nov. The male of Z. amalda is distinguished from that of Z. pacarus by the dorsal androconia being more prominent (dorsal androconia somewhat inconspicuous in Z. pacarus ), in addition to its smaller adult size ( Z. amalda : FW length 22– 23 mm (n = 3); Z. pacarus : 25 mm (n = 5)). The male genitalia of Z. amalda is distinguished from that of Z. pacarus by having a subtriangular apical process of the valva (apical process of valva somewhat rectangular with a convex distal margin in Z. pacarus ). Zischkaia amalda is perhaps most similar to Z. arctoa sp. nov., but see the relevant section of Z. arctoa sp. nov. for diagnostic characters to separate these two species. Also, see the relevant section of Z. arenisca sp. nov. for diagnostic characters to distinguish Z. amalda from Z. arenisca sp. nov. and Z. chullachaki sp. nov.

Euptychia amalda was described by Weymer (1911) based on an unstated number of specimens from Mapiri, La Paz, Bolivia. The original description is accompanied by a ventral surface illustration ( Weymer 1911: pl. 48, fig. f[2]), but the description and illustration alone cannot be used to confidently identify this species due to the fact that wing patterns of species of Zischkaia are often similar. The syntype male, located in the ZSM, has androconia on the DFW and DHW, which is implied in the original description (“The basal and median areas of the forewing above are velvety dark brown, the costal and distal margins lighter brown”), indicating that the description did indeed apply to a species in the “ pacarus clade” of Zischkaia . Forster (1964), examined the abovementioned syntype, in addition to another male specimen from Coroico, La Paz, Bolivia (collected by A.H. Fassl), and stated that “this species is apparently widespread in the Yungas, this rare species is similar to the common southern Brazil [Z.] fumata [i.e., Z. pacarus ] and it is so similar that it can be seen as subspecies of a single species. In genital apparatus no differences can be observed, however, [Z.] amalda is smaller with lighter brown color of the dorsal side of the wings so that the androconial spot of the males emerges more clearly”. Forster (1964: 114, fig. 124) correctly identified Z. pacarus (referred to as Z. fumata ), but we disagree with his claim of a lack of genitalic differences between Z. amalda and Z. pacarus , having observed slight differences between the male genitalia of these two species (see Fig. 4A, G ). Nevertheless, the specimens of Z. amalda deposited at the ZSM examined by Forster were not dissected and the origin of the specimen he dissected is unknown. It is therefore not possible to verify whether he dissected Z. amalda or some other similar species, such as Z. chullachaki sp. nov., which has similar genitalia. Due to resemblance of this taxon to congeners described in this study, we designate as lectotype of Euptychia amalda Weymer 1911 the male syntype, illustrated by Warren et al. (2018) and deposited at the ZSM, in order to settle the nomenclature (lectotype designation).

Variation

The curvature of the VHW median line below M 3 is apparently variable; the curvature of the phallobase is also apparently variable.

Distribution ( Fig. 14 )

This species is currently known from the foothills of the eastern Andes, from Tingo María, Huánuco, Peru to Coroico, La Paz, Bolivia.

Figures

Fig. 2. Zischkaia “pacarus clade”, wing plate. A–B. Z. amalda (Weymer, 1911), lectotype, ♂, dorsal and ventral views. C–D. Z. arctoa Nakahara, sp. nov., paratype, ♂ (in RFC, collected in 1975), dorsal and ventral views. E–F. Z. chullachaki Nakahara & Zacca, sp. nov., holotype, ♂, dorsal and ventral views. G–H. Z. chullachaki sp. nov., paratype, ♀ (DZ 36. 508), dorsal and ventral views. I–J. Z. baku Zacca, Dolibaina & Dias, sp. nov., holotype, ♂, dorsal and ventral views. K–L. Z. baku sp. nov., paratype, ♀ (DZ 36. 404), dorsal and ventral views. M–N. Z. arenisca Nakahara, Willmott & Hall, sp. nov., holotype, ♂, dorsal and ventral views. O–P. Z. arenisca sp. nov., paratype, ♀ (FLMNH-MGCL 297320), dorsal and ventral views. Q–R. Z. argyrosflecha Nakahara, L. Miller & Huertas, sp. nov., holotype, ♂, dorsal and ventral views. S–T. Z. pacarus (Godart, [1824]), neotype, ♂, dorsal and ventral views. U–V. Z. pacarus, ♀ (DZ 36. 909), dorsal and ventral views. W–X. Z. abanico Nakahara & Petit, sp. nov., holotype, ♂, dorsal and ventral views. Scale bar: 1 cm.

Fig. 4. Zischkaia “pacarus clade”, male genitalia. A. Z. amalda (Weymer, 1911), lectotype, ♂, lateral view, with phallus separated (winglet on aedeagus shown inside rectangle) (Genitalic vial: SN-17- 21). B. Z. arctoa Nakahara, sp. nov., ♂, lateral view, with phallus separated (Genitalic vial: SN-17-9). C. Z. chullachaki Nakahara & Zacca, sp. nov., ♂, lateral view, with phallus separated (Genitalic vial: DZ 21. 235). D. Z. baku Zacca, Dolibaina & Dias, sp. nov., ♂, lateral view, with phallus separated (Genitalic vial: DZ 5. 573). E. Z. arenisca Nakahara, Willmott & Hall, sp. nov., ♂, lateral view, with phallus separated (Genitalic vial: SN-17-16). F. Z. argyrosflecha Nakahara, L. Miller & Huertas, sp. nov. ♂, lateral view, with phallus separated (two winglets on aedeagus shown inside rectangle) (Genitalic vial: M-9142 ♂, Lee D. Miller). G. Z. pacarus (Godart, [1824]), ♂, lateral view, with phallus separated (Genitalic vial: DZ 5. 578). H. Z. abanico Nakahara & Petit, sp. nov., ♂, lateral view, with phallus separated (Genitalic vial: 575/19.07.2017, J. Lorenc-Brudecka, MZUJ).

Fig. 14. Distribution maps for taxa of Zischkaia Forster, 1964.