Eugraphe HÜBNER, [1821]
|
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.5281/zenodo.12587286 |
|
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/116D0279-FFAD-6629-FDCA-6518997BF88C |
|
treatment provided by |
Felipe |
|
scientific name |
Eugraphe HÜBNER, [1821] |
| status |
|
Eugraphe HÜBNER, [1821] View in CoL 1816
( Figs 18, 19 View Figs 18–23 , 44, 45 View Figs 43–49 , 50 View Figs 50–57 )
Type species: Phalaena Noctua sigma [DENIS et SCHIFFERMÜLLER], 1775.
Taxonomic remarks. A probably monotypic genus, its type species is Trans- Palaearctic. The genus is closely related to Anagnorisma RONKAY et VARGA, 1999 , Coenophila STEPHENS, 1850 (Holarctic), Eugnorisma BOURSIN, 1946 , and supposedly also to the Nearctic Eueretagrotis .
Diagnosis. The external appearance of the only known species of the genus ( Fig. 50 View Figs 50–57 )is rather different from those of the closely related Anagnorisma , Eugnorisma and Coenophila (see also FIBIGER 1997), resembling mostly certain species of Spaelotis BOISDUVAL, 1840 and also Graphiphora OCHSENHEIMER, 1816 .
The closest related genus of Eugraphe , owing to the genitalia features of both sexes, is Anagnorisma , one of the most ancient known groups of the Eugnorisma – Eugraphe phyletic line. Their male genitalia differ mainly by the size and structure of the subbasal cornutus which is much stronger, longer in Anagnorisma (see RONKAY & VARGA 1999, Figs 21, 22 View Figs 18–23 ), the presence/absence of the long zone of fine sclerotised ribs in the inner curve of the vesica (present in Eugraphe , absent in Anagnorisma )and the shape and size of the pollex which is much more lobate in Eugraphe than in the Anagnorisma species.
The female genitalia of Anagnorisma show a less homogeneous picture where the typical features of Eugraphe (e.g. the well-developed postero-lateral appendages of the ostium bursae or the medially folded ductus bursae)may appear but in different combinations, and a part of the species still have signa in the corpus bursae.
The main differences between the male genitalia of Eugraphe and Eugnorisma lie in the aedeagus and the vesica: the aedeagus of Eugraphe has a ventral sclerotised bar of the carina extending towards basal part of vesica, terminated in a strong, dentate bulb; the carina of Eugnorisma has generally a dorsal (dentated, hooked, etc.)projection, if there is a stronger ventral sclerotisation (in the E. chaldaica – E. spodia group), it is always very strong and pyramidal. Another generic apomorphy of Eugnorisma is the presence of a distal, smaller or larger, field
Acta zool. hung. 48, 2002
of minute cornuti in the vesica, covering often the surface of a subterminal diverticulum; this cornuti field is completely missing in Eugraphe .
The most conspicuous differential feature of the female genitalia of Eugraphe , as compared with Eugnorisma , is the presence of large, heavily sclerotised, terminally rounded postero-lateral appendages of the ostium bursae. The ostium bursae of Eugnorisma is also strongly sclerotised, but its caudal margin is more or less straight, except in certain species of the E. chaldaica lineage, but is much weaker, therefore the caudal edge of the ostium bursae is only slightly U-shaped. It is worth mentioning that Paradiarsia and Anagnorisma have such appendages, although those of Paradiarsia are considerably smaller and weaker.
Eugraphe differs from Coenophila , besides the external dissimilarity, by the presence of the subbasal cornutus of the vesica (it is absent in Coenophila ), the differently built apical part of the valva and the much longer, slenderer, curved harpe (see FIBIGER 1997, pp. 288–289, figs 193, 194)of the males, the different shape of the postero-lateral appendages of the ostium bursae (they are “bear-ear-shaped” in Eugraphe , “mouse-antler”-shaped in Coenophila )and the different proportion and shape of ductus bursae and corpus bursae ( Eugraphe has short but strong, flattened ductus and large, spacious corpus bursae while the ductus bursae of Coenophila is long, narrowly tubular since the corpus bursae is rather small, elliptical)of the females.
Redescription. External features ( Fig. 50 View Figs 50–57 ): Medium-sized moths with dark brown ground colour of both wings, forewing costal area suffused with some reddish or ochreous brown scales; orbicular and reniform stigmata sharply marked, blackish, with some reddish-brownish definition, all other markings rather obsolescent; hindwing concolorous dark brown.
Male genitalia ( Figs 18, 19 View Figs 18–23 ): Uncus long and thin, slightly spatulate apically. Valva without cucullus and corona, pointed with a tiny “pseudopollex” laterally. Saccular extension weakly sclerotised. Harpe long, falcate. Juxta shield-shaped with two parallel sclerotised crests apically. Aedeagus long, slightly arcuate, carina weakly sclerotised, with modified, bulbous, dentate ribbon. Vesica saccate, recurved, projecting ventrally; with a small bulbed cornutus in subbasal position.
Female genitalia ( Figs 44, 45 View Figs 43–49 ): Ovipositor rather short, weak; papillae anales finely conical, setose; posterior gonapophyses slender, fine. Ostium bursae large, sclerotized, its ventral plate quadrangular, with large, flattened, somewhat “bear-ear-shaped” postero-lateral appendages. Ductus bursae medium long, flattened, proximally slightly dilated and curved, most parts strongly, granulously sclerotized. Distal part with strong, straight, oblique dorsal crest running from postero-lateral end towards middle of opposite edge. Anterior third with relatively strong wrinkles and ribs, extending deeply towards apical part of bursa copulatrix. Appendix bursae ample, semiglobular, finely wrinkled; corpus bursae long, sacculiform, weakly membranous; signa absent.
Acta zool. hung. 48, 2002
No known copyright restrictions apply. See Agosti, D., Egloff, W., 2009. Taxonomic information exchange and copyright: the Plazi approach. BMC Research Notes 2009, 2:53 for further explanation.
|
Kingdom |
|
|
Phylum |
|
|
Class |
|
|
Order |
|
|
Family |