Reclassification of the Sack-bearer Moths (Lepidoptera, Mimallonoidea, Mimallonidae)

Abstract

A backbone molecular phylogeny of Mimallonidae, based on 47 species and 515 loci, was recently published. That study resolved some of the major relationships in the family, but taxon sampling was limited and a classification of the family was not formally presented for all species. Here morphological phylogenetic analyses in parsimony and maximum likelihood (ML) frameworks were conducted that included 192 species and 55 morphological characters. A phylogenetic analysis was also conducted on the morphological dataset with a topological constraint based on the 515 locus tree from the previous study. Results show that nearly all species can be confidently placed in a genus using morphological phylogenetics. The presence of a frenulum, a character that was historically used to distinguish major groups of Mimallonidae, varies within and among genera. Based on our phylogenetic results, the classification of Mimallonidae is revised, which now includes 291 species in 41 genera. Descriptions of three new genera are included: Fatellallagen. n., Citrallagen. n., and Lepismallagen. n. The following taxonomic changes were made in the present article: 43 new/revived combinations (in Aceclostria Vuillot, Arcinnus Herbin, Bedosia Schaus, Bedosiallo St Laurent & Kawahara, Cicinnus Blanchard, Citralla, Druentica Strand, Fatellalla, Lacosoma Grote, Lepismalla, Mimallo Hübner, Procinnus Herbin, Psychocampa Grote, Roelmana Schaus, and Thaelia Herbin), two new species-level synonyms (melini Bryk is synonymized with viemanda Schaus, jaruga Jones is synonymized with hamata Walker), one revived synonymy (roscida Dognin is resynonymized with externa Moore), seven new statuses (in Druentica, Macessoga Schaus, and Trogoptera Herrich-Schäffer), six revived statuses (in Aceclostria, Cicinnus, Druentica, Psychocampa, and Zaphanta Dyar), and one new designation of nomen nudum. In order to alleviate nomenclatural problems, twelve lectotypes are designated (for Tolypidaamaryllis (Schaus), Trogopteraalthora Schaus, Adalgisacroesa Schaus, Alheitapulloides (Dognin), LacosomabriasiaSchaus, Lacosomadiederica Schaus, Lacosomaraydela Schaus, Psychocampalacuna (Schaus), Cicinnuscorallina Dognin, Cicinnuslatris Schaus, Cicinnussolvens Schaus, Cicinnustuisana Schaus) as well as a neotype for Mimallodespecta Walker (= Cicinnusdespecta). This paper also provides apomorphies for each genus and a morphological key to genera. Annotations are given to aid researchers in understanding all changes made herein, and images of male and female and their genitalia are present for nearly all type species.

A new target capture phylogeny elucidates the systematics and evolution of wing coupling in sack‐bearer moths

“…is only known from female specimens, so for this species a female was coded]. Character 34 (frenulum presence/absence) of St Laurent & Kawahara () was used as the basis for scoring this trait. For each previously coded species, we confirmed the scoring scheme of these authors against additional museum specimens.…”

“…For each previously coded species, we confirmed the scoring scheme of these authors against additional museum specimens. We also scored the trait for species that were not originally included in the St Laurent & Kawahara () dataset. The frenulum in Mimallonidae is not strictly binary, as some taxa [e.g.…”

“…Later authors decried Schaus' classification scheme because frenulum presence varied within genera, and this character system was largely abandoned (Pearson, ; Franclemont, ; Minet, ; Lemaire & Minet, ). In conducting a morphological phylogenetic analysis of nearly 200 species of Mimallonidae, St Laurent & Kawahara () coded frenulum presence/absence for the majority of the species (albeit in that study only the obvious, nonvestigial frenula were considered ‘present’). However, these authors neither formally examined the evolution of the frenulum nor did they discuss it.…”

“…At the family level, the majority of higher classification changes took place in St Laurent et al . () and St Laurent & Kawahara (). These recent studies re‐circumscribed the two subfamilies of Schaus' classification, defined four additional subfamilies, and proposed several tribes based on phylogenomic and morphological data.…”

“…() did not assign names to the two clades of Cicinnus sensu lato (which together were not monophyletic). St Laurent & Kawahara () included additional species of Cicinninae in their morphological tree, but it remained unclear as to how to classify Cicinnus sensu lato properly, because many relationships within the group were weakly supported. Another genus, Gonogramma Boisduval, long considered a synonym of Cicinnus Blanchard, was thought to include the majority of Cicinnus sensu lato by these authors, but this has not yet been confirmed.…”