Lethe liae Huang, 2002
publication ID |
https://doi.org/ 10.11646/zootaxa.5092.4.5 |
publication LSID |
lsid:zoobank.org:pub:04AB9275-502A-4DC0-87C7-A1DBDC8F6CF0 |
DOI |
https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5887674 |
persistent identifier |
https://treatment.plazi.org/id/EB0F87CB-AD69-FF89-FF58-0DEEFC4AFD5D |
treatment provided by |
Plazi |
scientific name |
Lethe liae Huang, 2002 |
status |
|
Figs. 21–24 View FIGURES 21–28 , 29, 30, 33a View FIGURES 29–33
Type material examined. Holotype: Photos, male, altitude 2100 m, 29.VII.2002, Qiqi, Nujiang valley , Yunnan, leg. Hao Huang ( Figs. 21, 22 View FIGURES 21–28 , 30 View FIGURES 29–33 ). New material: 1 male ( Figs. 23, 24 View FIGURES 21–28 , 29, 33a View FIGURES 29–33 ), 27.VII.2021, Gongshan County, Nujiang Lisu Autonomous Prefecture, Yunnan, China, leg. Si-yao Huang, genitalia dissection number NJ4 ( CQMNH).
Remarks. For nearly two decades since its original description, the sole holotype specimen has been known. Male genitalia of the holotype were prepared in a permanent slide, thus its stereoscopic structures can hardly be restored. The second individual well agrees with the holotype in most features except for the four ocelli on the hindwing upperside instead of two in the holotype. Nevertheless, this difference is merely within individual variations, because, in a population of a relative species, viz. L. trimacula ( Leech, 1890) , from Zhejiang, the similar case was also found. Male genitalia of the second individual of L. liae are observed on stereoscopic vision, so more details can be examined. Judging from the two specimens known to us, Lethe liae should be more closely related to L. umedai albofasciata than to the other allied taxa. Moreover, it can be distinguished from L. umedai albofasciata by the combination of the following characters: 1) forewing underside, the whitish patches beyond the subapical ocellus are smaller, whereas they are larger in L. umedai albofasciata ; 2) hindwing underside, the zigzag postdiscal line is not attached the whitish ring surrounding the ocellus on veins 1b and 2, whereas it always touches the whitish ring in L. umedai albofasciata ; 3) male genitalia, the distal end of uncus is flat in dorsal view, whereas it is rounded in L. umedai albofasciata ; 4) the uncus in lateral view is more uniform in width and its dorsal margin is straight, whereas in L. umedai albofasciata it is broadened medially, significantly narrowing towards the tip, and with its dorsal margin concave. The recently described L. langsongyuni Huang, Wang & Fan, 2019 is also a close relative of L. liae in sharing the following features: forewing underside postdiscal line narrow; valva short, distal end elongate. Moreover, unci of these two species are rather similar in sharing straight dorsal margin, whereas in the other species within the trimacula -group the dorsal margin of their unci concave in different degree. Lethe liae , however, can be readily distinguished from L. langsongyuni by the combination of the following characters: 1) it is larger (FWL 31–31.5 mm in L. liae versus 27–30 mm in L. langsongyuni .); 2) forewing underside, the whitish area at the outer margin of postdiscal line is clearly defined and forming a narrow whitish line, whereas in L. langsongyuni it is diffused and expanded; 3) forewing underside, the postdiscal line is extending towards the termen in space 3, whereas the line is incurved and vertical to vein 3 in space 3 in L. langsongyuni ; 4) in male genitalia, the distal end of uncus in dorsal view is flat, whereas it is rounded in L. langsongyuni .
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 |
|
Genus |