New Pyraloidea Checklist

Hodges Numbers

I forgot to mention last spring that Greg Pohl did not follow the changes to the Hodges numbering system implemented by MPG. It's my understanding that he will revert to that system in the next revision so we should continue to follow MPG for now as far as that goes. Sorry for not mentioning it sooner.

I have P3, MPG and BugGuide lists in a single database. When I get the next P3 rev, I can easily check the Hodges number and fix any errors here at BugGuide. I can do that now for any other criteria, i. e. make lists of mismatched species, genus, family, etc. If anyone wants that, shoot me an email.

… Steve Nanz, 13 October, 2016 - 3:39am

Odontiinae now completed

Synonyms, literature, links to BOLD and MPG, and type localities added.

… Kyhl Austin, 17 May, 2016 - 7:55pm

Spilomelinae now completed

The 245 Spilomelinae species pages now have at least a complete list of synonyms, links to MPG and BOLD, and a list of all relevant literature. I will work on Odontiinae next.

… Kyhl Austin, 24 April, 2016 - 5:47pm

All species in Pyraustinae now have information on their pages

All 157 species in Pyraustinae have up-to-date guide pages with links to other sites, original, literature, and other important information including the 40 "empty" pages I added earlier this month. An additional 5 or so pages contributed by other editors had no information on their pages so I fill them in as well. I am going to start on Spilomelinae at some point this weekend. Bed time for me now!

… Kyhl Austin, 26 March, 2016 - 12:41am

Can they be moved slowly over time

in the other direction - to genus?

… john and jane balaban, 18 March, 2016 - 4:08pm

Goodbye to Tribes in Pyraloidea

I intend to remove all tribes in Pyraloidea in a few days unless I hear objections. The new check list intentionally omits them saying "...We have not included the taxonomic rank of tribe because so many are not based on characters, or the tribal structure breaks down upon study of the tribe in other regions of the world. We also list described subgenera as synonyms because they are not universally applied to most of the list." I don't think we currently list any subgenera.

… Steve Nanz, 18 March, 2016 - 2:36pm

I have mixed feelings about this.

On the one hand, I think tribes are extremely useful and should be left as is. On the other I want BugGuide to be as taxonomically accurate as possible. I'd be willing to go either way.

… Kyhl Austin, 18 March, 2016 - 4:29pm

You do realize...

that that will involve moving over 300 images from Crambini back up to Crambinae? I'm not looking forward to getting all those emails...

… Charley Eiseman, 18 March, 2016 - 3:37pm

No, I had not...

... grrr. Thanks for pointing that out. I like the Balaban suggestion.

If there are no further objections then, I'd like to eliminate tribes that are manageable as in say less than 20 unplaced images and only after making a reasonable attempt at moving images to genus. I had eliminated Spilomelini already in this manner for a slightly different reason. That tribe and Pyraustini were each elevated to subfamilies. We had whittled Spilomelini down to under 20 images.

Most and possibly all the images in Crambini are identifiable to genus. We can hold off until one of us has time to get to it.

Pyraustini however with 90 images may never get sorted out because unlike Crambini most of the unplaced images belong to genera that are so similar that generic assignment is very difficult to impossible. I had emailed John VanDyk to see if he could move them to Pyraustinae with an automatically filled comment of explanation. We have done that before. He hasn't gotten back. I can ask him to hold off if we think that makes sense. I'd prefer to get than one over with.

… Steve Nanz, 19 March, 2016 - 4:44am

Sounds good

Maybe those images that can't be moved to genus can be moved to No Taxon "x or y" type pages rather than being moved to the general subfamily sections.

… Charley Eiseman, 19 March, 2016 - 5:50am

Follow Up

I apologize but I think I messed up on this. I should not have made assumptions about what the authors intended. It does not specifically state that tribes as currently constituted are now invalid. I emailed Dr. Hayden who advised that we do whatever works best for us. As he did not mention whether tribes are valid, I now assume that some are but in general they are in flux. I did not think I should pester him for further explanation.

I see now that it might make more sense to just go by GLOBIZ. Spilomelini, Pyraustini and many others have been eliminated but many have been retained at least for now.

… Steve Nanz, 24 March, 2016 - 4:49am

I was considering creating a Helvibotys or Neohelvibotys page

Those are the only two I'm aware of it being necessary to dissect them to separate the genera. There may be more.

… Kyhl Austin, 22 March, 2016 - 11:08am

Yes

I think we do need a no-taxon Helvibotys or Neohelvibotys page. It appears that some of these can be separated but a lot cannot per our discussion here.

… Steve Nanz, 24 March, 2016 - 4:29am

Update from Brian Scholtens

"Based on the presence of photos for Lamprosema canacealis Wlk. and Diaphania elegans (Mösch.), I went back to the Texas checklist, and found that both of those were actually list[ed] there. I had neglected to go through that, probably because we had been in contact with Knudson and he hadn't indicated either of those as new records (and hadn't included either in the season summary). However, they definitely seem to be there. Thanks!

I also went completely through the Texas list and found a couple of more names that I will have to check. Neither has a photo on Bugguide, but Ed listed them for Texas. Those are Syllepte belialis Wlk. and Bocchoropsis pharaxalis (Druce). I'll contact Ed to see about documentation for those and the species that you found.

For Haimbachia gloriella, I can't find any documentation that it has ever been found in the US. If is not on any of the past lists, and Munroe (1995) doesn't indicate that it occurs in the US (nor does the revision by Capps - only in Mexico)."

Unless anyone objects, I will delete the Haimbachia gloriella page.

… Kyhl Austin, 8 March, 2016 - 9:27pm

Haimbachia gloriella & Hodebertia testalis

I deleted Haimbachia gloriella. We can always put it back.

Hodebertia testalis stays for now. Both James Hayden and Brian Scholtens agree that the tentative ID is reasonable.

… Steve Nanz, 18 March, 2016 - 2:42pm

Chris Grinter has two US records of H. gloriella

They were collected in "Badger, AZ" in 1924, but we can't find modern a place name that matches. Regardless, they are valid US records.

… Kyhl Austin, 22 March, 2016 - 11:11am

I've gone through all of Crambidae

and made all relevant changes. I think I've got everything, but please feel free to check and make changes if you catch anything I missed. There are a few species here on BugGuide that I cannot find on the checklist. Scholtens and Solis may not have been aware of these records. I'll I'll do Pyralidae when I get time.

… Kyhl Austin, 2 March, 2016 - 11:31pm

What are the missing species?

They may be other ones like Anania coronata that were dealt with in previous papers (misidentifications, synonymies, etc.).

… Charley Eiseman, 2 March, 2016 - 11:35pm

I noticed three - there may be more

Diaphania elegans - discrepancies in records?
Hodebertia testalis - possible misidentification on BugGuide
Lamprosema canacealis - possibly overlooked by Scholtens and Solis?

Lamprosema canacealis is the one that stands out most to me. I'll email Dr. Scholtens tomorrow about it. I'll also recheck everything tomorrow.

… Kyhl Austin, 2 March, 2016 - 11:55pm

Thanks for taking care of this. I was feeling bad I hadn’t gotten to it myself.

I think the three species you mention should all stay for now. Though not necessarily recognized in America north of Mexico, all three are valid species according to GLOBIZ. I’ll email Ed Knudson for follow up but will hold off until tomorrow in case you want to email him yourself or you already emailed Dr. Scholtens:

Diaphania elegans - The image in BG is shown at MPG on the “Aaron Cavosie's Moths of Puerto Rico” page. A comment references a Moth Forum post, “Non-informative posts”, here which explains the intention of having this page. Apparently the moth has been reported in Texas. There is an MPG example attributed to the Texas Lepidoptera Survey. Maury was working on this but he hasn’t been posting of some time now. I’ll send Ed Knudson an email about the TX record unless you want to take care of it. I need to follow up with him on the Hodebertia testalis anyway.

Hodebertia testalis - Definitely not currently recognized in America north of Mexico. The BG image is extremely tentative and could be a misidentification on my part. Ed Knudson contacted James Hayden about this last fall but I never heard back. I’ll send him a follow up email or I may just contact James Hayden directly. I can forward the email chain to you or anyone else interested in the back story. I would prefer this be left but would defer to the judgment of others.

Lamprosema canacealis - I’ll email Ed about this as well as the MPG page has an image attributed to the Texas Lepidoptera Survey.

… Steve Nanz, 3 March, 2016 - 4:12am

If you find the time, please do go through the two lists

we made here earlier. We just looked at the insequalis, subsequalis, plagalis pages for example and the last two are still here with all their images and info and the first one is just basically an empty placeholder page. Thanks

… john and jane balaban, 3 March, 2016 - 7:49am

Done

I've also double-checked everything in all 10 subfamilies so that all names are 100% up-to-date. I've also added placeholder pages for all Crambidae species on the checklist without representative images on BugGuide.

More changes I noticed:

Donacaula amblyptepennis is now considered a synonym of Donacaula longirostrellus

Eudonia alpina is recognized as the senior synonym of Eudonia lugubralis

Haimbachia gloriella is missing from the new checklist

Crambus alboclavellus is considered a synonym of Crambus agitatellus

Petrophila drumalis is now Argyractis drumalis.

We have 866 Crambidae species now listed on BugGuide. Scholtens and Solis list 861. When we account for the four species that we have on BugGuide that Scholtens and Solis don't include on their list (Diaphania elegans, Hodebertia testalis, Lamprosema canacealis, and Haimbachia gloriella), that makes 862. So there's still one species on BugGuide that isn't on their checklist. Anyone want to find it for me? :)

EDIT: I've also updated all Pyralid subfamilies except Phycitinae. The only significant changes are the synonymization of Pseudasopia (3 species) with Hypsopygia and moving Macalla glastianalis out of Macalla. It is now listed as Incertae sedis, awaiting a new genus description.

EDIT: All of Pyralidae is now up-to-date. We have 682 species listed here on BugGuide. Scholtens and Solis list 681. That means we have one species here that they don't list. Can anyone find it? Also there are 5 genera (Bethulia, Comotia, Phestinia, Scorylus, Utah) that I don't know which tribe to place them in.

… Kyhl Austin, 3 March, 2016 - 12:24pm

It's fine if you make the changes.

There are a number of genus pages to delete and we don't know how much of that information to save and move to other pages, so you will do a better job on that than we.

We looked at Spilomelinae and found the following. We will wait till you get a chance to work on these before looking at other sub-families.

Spilomelinae:

Blepharomastix aplicalis - Hodges#5188 - "Blepharomastix magualis, aplicalis, rehamalis, and differentialis were transferred to Hileithia in Munroe (1995a)."

Blepharomastix differentialis - Hodges#5190 - see note above
Blepharomastix rehamalis - Hodges#5189 - see note above

Species undescribed-species - Blepharomastix n. sp - Hodges#5193.99 - don't know what to make of this one. We don't see any new species on the list under either genus, but lots of new species...

Daulia arizonensis - Hodges#5296 - is now Pyraustinae
Species magdalena - Glittering Magdalena Moth - Hodges#5295 - Pyraustinae

Diaphania elegans - Hodges#5207.1 - don't see this one

Genus Epipagis - What does it mean that they have two different genus Epipagis?
Epipagis huronalis - Hodges#5147 - synonymized with E. fenestralis

Genus Hodebertia
Species testalis - Hodebertia testalis - didn't find either genus or species??

Genus Lamprosema
Species canacealis - Lamprosema canacealis - Hodges#5105.2 - did not find this species

Genus Lypotigris
Species fusalis - Lypotigris fusalis - Hodges#5251.1 - didn't find this species. Did find Lygropia fusalis

Genus Marasmia - found these two under Cnaphalocrocis
Species cochrusalis - Marasmia Moth - Hodges#5289
Species trapezalis - Trapeze Moth - Hodges#5288

Genus Mecyna - found these two under the second Epipagis
Species mustelinalis - Mecyna mustelinalis - Hodges#5137
Species submedialis - Orange-toned Mecyna - Hodges#5135
Species sp-one - Mecyna sp-one - Hodges#5138.97

Genus Palpita
Species gracialis - Gracile Palpita Moth - Hodges#5220 - found gracilalis replaced by atrisquamalis

Genus Stemorrhages
Species costata - Stemorrhages costata - Hodges#5216 - "Stemorrhages costata was transferred to Diaphania in Munroe (1995a), but its status as a new combination was not indicated; it was indicated as misplaced."

Genus Syllepis
Species marialis - Syllepis marialis - Hodges#5283.1 - did not find this species

Genus Sufetula
Species diminutalis - Sufetula diminutalis - Hodges#5120 - is now Lathrotelinae

… john and jane balaban, 20 January, 2016 - 5:41pm

Started in the Pyraustinae

We don't see Anania coronata - Crowned Phlyctaenia - Hodges#4953 in the new list. Not sure how to track it down.

Genus Eurrhypara - Looks like all these are now Anania hortulata

Gonocausta sabinalis - Hodges#5078.1 is now Spilomelinae

Helvibotys subcostalis - Hodges#4983 has been synonymized with Helvibotys pucilla

Genus Mutuuraia - "Mutuuraia and Nealgedonia were synonymized with Algedonia in Maes (2005)" and now seems to be part of Anania

Genus Nealgedonia - see above

Genus Phlyctaenia - some are Anania, some are Udea, one in Evergestis

Pyrausta plagalis - Hodges#5060.2 is a subspecies of Pyrausta insequalis

Pyrausta subsequalis - Hodges#5060 has been synonymized with P. insequalis

How do you want to go about making these changes? Do you want us to make them? If so, would you proofread them first to make sure we have read them correctly?

Once these are done we will move on to Spilomelinae

… john and jane balaban, 20 January, 2016 - 3:23pm

Up to you

I can take care of it in February or you can do it now. If you do it, I'll happily proofread it. As mentioned below, I'll take care of Anania, probably by tomorrow. Let me know what you want to do with the rest. Sorry for not jumping on the new list already and thanks for the wake up call.

… Steve Nanz, 20 January, 2016 - 4:06pm

Anania coronata

I'm not sure why this isn't mentioned anywhere in the new paper, but "Both molecular and morphological evidence establish that ‘Anania coronata’ is actually a complex of four species. Anania coronata is restricted to Europe, while three species are present in North America - Anania tertialis (Guenée, 1854) comb. nov., Anania plectilis (Grote & Robinson, 1867) comb. nov. and Anania tennesseensis sp. n.." (That's the conclusion at the end of this poster.)

… Charley Eiseman, 20 January, 2016 - 3:39pm

We added that note to the coronata species page

We see all three new species on the new list, but did not see anything that suggests how they differ in images. We may have to make a No Taxon page for those three species and move all the images there. Or maybe John VanDyk can change the coronata species page to a No Taxon Species group page which would be easier.

Oops, sorry, was writing this as you added your comments. So feel free to ignore if no longer relevant

… john and jane balaban, 20 January, 2016 - 4:15pm

Done (more or less)

I added the new species page and a species complex page. Feel free to check it over. I moved all images I could but there are still many left in A. coronata. You can have John either move them to the species complex page or turn the A. coronata into a No Taxon. Although it may be more work, moving would let contributors know about the change.

The A. coronata species complex page has notes on what I know as far as separating the species.

… Steve Nanz, 22 January, 2016 - 7:17am

Sent a note to VanDyk

Will see how he wants us to handle this. Thanks
EDIT - DONE

… john and jane balaban, 22 January, 2016 - 4:02pm

I'll take care of this one

Thanks for the references.

Anania tertialis, plectilis, and tennesseensis are included on page 13 with references on p. 107. I'm guessing that since coronata is now known to not occur in NA, it was simply dropped from the checklist. It does seem odd that it is not noted on p. 107 but the references would explain. Maybe they felt that would be sufficient.

I'll try to make sense of the images. Unless there is objection, I'll label tertialis as 4953, plectilis as 4953.1, and tennesseensis as 4953.2.

… Steve Nanz, 20 January, 2016 - 4:01pm