RESUMEN
Melitaea klili Benyamini, 2021 was recently described from Israel as a species closely related to M. telona Fruhstorfer, 1908, but different in phenology, ecological preferences and with an allopatric distribution. Here, based on comparative examinations of mitochondrial DNA-barcodes, male genitalia and larval behaviour under laboratory conditions, we synonymize M. klili with M. telona. The COI barcodes of M. klili were found to be identical to those of M. telona. Analysis of 658 bp fragment of the mitochondrial gene COI demonstrated that the minimum uncorrected p-distance between M. ornata and M. telona was 1.98%. This value is remarkably less than the 3% threshold traditionally accepted as a species boundary in DNA barcoding studies. The morphological differences between these taxa are minimal. In fact, M. ornata and M. telona represent two phylogenetic lineages, the taxonomic status of which (separate species or subspecies of the same species) is intermediate and debatable.
Asunto(s)
Mariposas Diurnas , Masculino , Animales , Mariposas Diurnas/genética , Filogenia , ADN Mitocondrial/genética , Mitocondrias/genética , Genes Mitocondriales , Código de Barras del ADN TaxonómicoRESUMEN
Two independent designations for a lectotype of Melitaea phoebe dorae Graves, 1925, are discussed and resolved. Errors of labelling in presentation of some Melitaea taxa in recent literature are identified. Synonymy of the name klili Benyamini, 2021, with M. telona Fruhstorfer, 1908, is confirmed; the name tzinensis Benyamini, 2023 syn nov., is discussed and placed in synonymy with M. telona Fruhstorfer, 1908.
Asunto(s)
Mariposas Diurnas , AnimalesRESUMEN
Morphological characters of value in distinguishing Melitaea phoebe from M. ornata are exemplified from photographs of specimens from sympatric and partially synchronic populations in the Russian Federation and Slovenia. Type material of a number of subspecies classified as M. phoebe have been examined and confirmed as being subspecies of M. phoebe or as subspecies of either M. ornata or M. telona. Larval and adult morphology of M. telona is very similar to those of M. ornata, making morphological separation difficult. Distribution of M. telona forms a major criterion for separation. Lectotypes are designated for amanica Rebel, 1917 and dorae Graves, 1925. The name enoch Higgins, 1941 is recognised as a distinct species and the names abbas Gross Ebert, 1975 and zagrosi Tth Varga, 2011 synonymised with Melitaea enoch.
Asunto(s)
Mariposas Diurnas , Animales , Larva , SimpatríaRESUMEN
Historical records of Melitaea cinxia (Linnaeus, 1758) and M. arduinna (Esper, [1783]) from the mountains of Central Asia, including named subspecies and forms, are reviewed with particular reference to the name heynei Rühl, [1893], which has been associated with both of the aforementioned species. It is concluded that the name heynei should be associated with M. arduinna and not M. cinxia. For the sake of nomenclatural stability, a specimen of M. arduinna from the southern slope of Alai Mountains (Kyrgyzstan, Daroot-Korgon) is designated as the neotype of Melitaea cinxia var. heynei Rühl, [1893]. The morphological features of M. cinxia and M. arduinna, including the subspecies of the latter, are compared and figured. The historic and recent misidentifications of M. cinxia as M. arduinna and vice versa are exemplified.