| 1 THE WEDGE ENTOMOLOGICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION
THE MOTHS OF AMERICA NORTH OF MEXICO
85253 RIDGETOP DRIVE
EUGENE, OR 97405-9535 USA
H: 5412 684-0484
STYLE FOR PREPARATION OF A MONA FASCICLE
The following material provides examples of style used for the MONA series. Note particularly the use of bold face and small caps. The examples are from Powell and J.
Brown’s Sparganothini fascicle. Each author likely will have a different set of emphases, dependent on available knowledge of the taxon. See fascicles 7.6 and 26.9 for different recent approaches. Please avoid verbosity. Be as concise as possible.
1. For all taxa attempt to define each taxon and associate it with and differentiate it from allies; this includes higher categories. Include characters to differentiate the taxon from close relatives that may be extralimital and/or those that are superficially closely similar.
2. Focus on succinct statements of characters, hosts, behavior, distribution, etc. Be consistent in presentation
3. Summarize data where possible but give specifics when significant to discussion or for poorly known species.
4. The readers represent a broad spectrum of backgrounds; try to write clearly, informatively, positively, and interestingly; avoid redundancy.
5. Prepare an index to animal names and an index to plant names. The draft should be double spaced with a single column per page. The editor and author(s) will insert page numbers when page proofs are in hand. They will collaborate to ensure accuracy and coverage.
6. Prepare a check list of taxa within fascicle as for recent fascicles.
7. Write out 'plate,' figure,' and 'text figure' in text, e.g., plate 2, figure 5; plate AA, figure 4; text figure 3 a.
7. Write out male and female in the text. Use the symbols (♂, ♀) in legends and types sections
8. Figures and plates are numbered consecutively through fascicle as with pagination. Use numbers for the larger number of kind of illustration; letters for the smaller number [e.g., color plates A–J, monochrome plates 1–32].
9. Type locality: give locality as stated in original description. If the locality is a guess or comes from another source, place in square brackets .
10. Use 'type species' for the type of a genus. Use 'monotypy,' 'original designation,' 'present designation,' and, in the case of 'subsequent designation,' use "designated by . . ., date, and full reference" to indicate the way the type species as selected. If the specific name of the type species is now considered to be a junior synonym, use 'Type species: Tinea zebrella Treitschke, 1845, now considered a junior synonym of Tinea sexpunctella Fabricius, 1794.'
11. Check List numbers to be given in (). If a species has been 'split,' use (RWH 2341, part); if synonymized, give both numbers (RWH 2344, 2346). If the species is not in the Check List, omit.
12. Common names: Use an asterisk '*' following a common name listed in a recent edition of Common Names of Insects & Related Organisms published by the Entomological Society of America. Use French-language common names listed in a recent edition of French Names of Insects of Canada published for the Quebec Society for the Protection of Plants by Department of Agriculture and Colonization, Quebec. Use 'm' for masculine and 'f' for feminine. Common names are printed in lower case for plant and animal names.
13. Use the following plant family names: Apiaceae [not Leguminosae], Arecaceae [not Palmae], Asteraceae [not Compositae], Brassicaceae [not Cruciferae], Clusiaceae/Hypericaceae [not Guttiferae], Poaceae [not Graminae],
1. Use “Times New Roman” font.
2. The first paragraph of an entry begins at the left margin; subsequent paragraphs are indented with no blank line between paragraphs,
3. Use tabs for indentations.
4. Use dot leaders—not periods—in the keys.
5. Use hyphens [-], em [—], and en [–] dashes appropriately.
. a. Numbers in series (e.g., Figs. 3–5, 23–29 mm) are separated by an en dash, not a hyphen.
b. An em dash (—) separates an inserted additional thought—like one we might put in parentheses—. Use also in Keys and after words such as “note— ”
6. Use: ¼ ¾ ⅕ ⅔ ⅖ ⅗ ⅘ ⅙ ⅚ ⅛ ⅜ ⅝ ⅞ instead of ¼, 3/4, etc.
7. Use the multiplication sign [×], not an X for “times.”
8. Insert a single space between sentences.
9. Punctuation goes inside the closing quotation mark ["like this," "and this?" and “this."]
10. Hyphenate a compound unit modifier (e.g., grayish-brown scales; dark-brown scales; spine-tipped process).
11. Do not hyphenate compound predicate adjectives (e.g., scales are grayish brown; scales are dark brown; process is spine tipped).
12. A colon (:) precedes a list. It amounts to an equals sign. A semicolon separates two full sentences that are attached because they are closely tied to a single issue.
13. Use a comma before the “and’ in a series [e,g., red, blue, and green are colors].
14. Species’ names should be preceded by the generic name or the letter representing the genus [Chionodes continuella or C. continuella.]
15. Abbreviations of authors’ names are used only in figure captions and check lists, (B. & McD. [use &]). In text spell authors’ names in full (Barnes and McDunnough [use and]). Abbreviations are in accompanying material.
15. Keep descriptions in singular (eye with spine). If written as plural, it would be “eyes with spines [plural]” and you could not tell how many spines each eye has.
16. The bursa copulatrix is the general term for the entire copulatory sac, and also is used when it is not differentiated into parts. If differentiated, the parts are ostium bursae, ductus bursae, corpus bursae, and sometimes an appendix bursae.
17. Give authors of plant and animal names not treated in the fascicle the first time they appear in the text.
18. Give Plant family names [see examples in Sparganothini text] for plant names.
19. In so far as possible give the county for localities. It is not necessary to place the county name in square brackets .
20. Look carefully at the format for the literature section.
21. Use dot leaders—not periods—in the keys.
22. The author of a scientific name is separated from date by a comma, but all other references are without a comma between author and year (Euxoa cana Lafontaine, 1976 was described in Lafontaine 1976)
23. Punctuate abbreviations as words. The words “for example,” always would be followed by a comma. Thus, “e.g.,” should be followed by a comma. The abbreviations “et al.,” “sic,” and “etc.” are not italicized.
24. Punctuation is not italicized with scientific names. Euxoa tessellata, E. rufula. Not E. tessellata, E. rufula. [comma and period are incorrectly italicized here].
25. The forewing lines are basal, antemedial, medial (not median), postmedial, subterminal, and terminal.
26. Numbers one to ten are spelled out [except when in range: 1–3]; 11, 12, etc are given as numerals
27. Use number symbols in figures (Figs. 1–3), measurements (1–3 mm), and structures (A1–3).
28. “Instars” are larvae; dunes are sand; and blue is a color; so, a “
sand dune” a fourth instar larva, and a blue colored spot are examples of redundant terms.
29. Include the author of species’ and generic names of plants and animals [not treated in the manuscript], the first time the name is used in the manuscript
30. Use square brackets if the date of publication was determined from external evidence (e.g., Euxoa Hübner, ; Dyar, l902 ).
31. Farther refers to distance, further to “additional.” A separation in usage is not completely accepted, but it is recommended by the major style manuals.
32. Family, subfamily, and tribal names are plural, unless used with the word family (the Noctuidae are a large family …; the family Noctuidae is large…), as you would say “the Smiths are coming to dinner,” and “the Smith family is coming to dinner.” Generic and subgeneric names are singular (e.g., Euxoa is a large genus…).
33. The word “which” usually begins a separate subordinate clause that adds additional optional detail. It almost always is preceded by a comma. The word “that” adds critical detail and is not preceded by a comma.
The caterpillars, which are found in July, are red. The caterpillars that are found in July are red, whereas those that are found in September are green, which is why they are difficult to identify.
34. Note in the example above that “whereas” emphasizes contrast, whereas the word “while” would imply time (i.e., two things happening simultaneously). Most uses of while are incorrectly used for “because” or “whereas.
35. Use format date, month, year, e.g., 6 July 1989.
36. Insert a comma when citing elevation, e.g., 3,800’ 2,400 m.
Toward, inward, not towards, inwards
38. Use small caps for combination; synonymy, new species etc.; pl. 1, fig. 5; authors’ names in Literature section: barnes, w., and j. mcdunnough, lafontaine, j. d. Note that the word “and” is not in small caps.
Treatment of a genus consists of
a) heading line;
b) synonymy (including type species designations);
c) numeric size and geographic distribution of taxon;
d) characterization of genus;
e) differential diagnosis;
f) summary of immature stages [document host associations or biological observations from the literature, personal unpublished data, or data from specimens examined];
h) key(s) for identification of adults [and immature stages where possible].
Treatment of a species consists of
a) heading line;
b) illustration line;
c) synonymy (reference to each name, type locality, location of type specimen, notes regarding synonymy, selection of lectotypes, neotypes, gender of new name, etc. (If desired, give citations to combinations);
d) differential characterization;
e) discussion of immature stages and hosts [when presenting new host data,
state “unpublished” to inform reader that the data are newly in the literature here];
f) geographic and temporal distribution of adults (distribution maps and/or reference to specimen label database). Give meaningful statements about distribution, particularly for areas that have great diversity within small distances;
[The following six pages appear in each fascicle. They are modified to reflect] the subject and author(s)
THE MOTHS OF NORTH AMERICA
THE WEDGE ENTOMOLOGICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION
The dates of publication of previous parts of this work:
Fascicle 21 Sphingoidea, 30 January 1971
Fascicle 20.2A Bombycoidea, Saturniidae (part)
31 December 1971
Fascicle 20.2B Bombycoidea, Saturniidae (conclusion)
28 April 1972
Fascicle 13.1A Pyraloidea, Pyralidae (part)
31 October 1972
Fascicle 13.1B Pyraloidea, Pyralidae (part)
11 December 1972
Fascicle 20.1 Mimallonoidea, Mimallonidae
and Bombycoidea, Apatelodidae, Bombycidae, Lasiocampidae
31 July 1973
Fascicle 13.1C Pyraloidea, Pyralidae (conclusion of part 1)
31 January 1974
Fascicle 6.2 Gelechioidea, Oecophoridae
1 July 1974
Fascicle13.2A Pyraloidea, Pyralidae (part)
16 September 1976
Fascicle 13.2B Pyraloidea, Pyralidae (part)
22 December 1976
Fascicle 22.2 Noctuoidea, Lymantriidae
25 March 1978
Fascicle 6.1 Gelechioidea, Cosmopterigidae
29 December 1978
Fascicle 18.1 Geometroidea, Geometridae (part)
25 May 1985
Fascicle 15.2 Pyraloidea, Pyralidae (part)
20 February 1986
Fascicle 7.1 Gelechioidea, Gelechiidae (part)
26 November 1986
Fascicle 27.2 Noctuoidea, Noctuidae (part)
22 October 1987
Fascicle 5.1 Sesioidea, Sesiidae
18 January 1989
Fascicle 15.3 Pyraloidea, Pyralidae (part)
27 June 1990
Fascicle 25.1 Noctuoidea, Noctuidae (part)
23 August 1991
Fascicle 26.1 Noctuoidea, Noctuidae (part)
30 March 1995
Fascicle 15.4 Pyraloidea, Pyralidae (part)
27 March 1997
Fascicle 27.3 Noctuoidea, Noctuidae (part)
24 September 1998
Fascicle 7.6 Gelechioidea, Gelechiidae (part)
29 December 1999
Fascicle 15.5 Pyraloidea, Pyralidae (part)
16 December 2003
Fascicle 27.1 Noctuoidea, Noctuidae (part)
22 December 2004
Fascicle 17,2 Geometroidea,Geometridae (part)
30 December 2008
Fascicle 26.9 Noctuoidea, Noctuidae (part)
9 October 2009
Check List of the Lepidoptera of America North of Mexico
30 May 1983
The Hawk Moths of North America
26 December 2007
THE MOTHS OF NORTH AMERICA,
SPARGANOTHINI AND ATTERIINI
JERRY A. POWELL
ESSIG MUSEUM OF ENTOMOLOGY
UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY, CA 94720
JOHN W. BROWN
USDA, ARS, PSI, SYSTEMATIC ENTOMOLOGY LABORATORY
NATIONAL MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY, WASHINGTON, DC 20013-7012
THE WEDGE ENTOMOLOGICAL RESEARCH FOUNDATION
Printed in the United States of America by Allen Press, Inc., Lawrence, Kansas
RONALD W. HODGES, EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
BOARD OF EDITORS
RICHARD L. BROWN PH.D.
DONALD R. DAVIS PH.D.
J. DONALD LAFONTAINE PH.D.
JERRY A. POWELL PH.D.
M. ALMA SOLIS PH.D
This work is to be cited as
Powell, J. A., and Brown , J. W., 2012. Tortricoidea, Tortricidae (part)
Tortricinae (part): Sparganothini and Atteriini
In Hodges, R. W., et al.,
The Moths of North America, fasc. 8.1
the wedge entomological research foundation
9417 Carvalho Court
Bakersfield, CA 93311 USA
321 Gladwick Street
Rancho Dominguez, California 90220 U.S.A.
entomological reprint specialists
P.O. Box 7724, Dockweiler Station
Los Angeles, California 90007 U.S.A.
antiquariat goecke & evers
Inh. Erich Bauer
pemberley natural history books
18 Bathurst Walk
IVER, SLO 9AZ
library of congress control number 0000000000
Printed in the United States of America by Allen Press, Inc., Lawrence, Kansas
THE DUKE OF EDINBURGH, KG, KT
OLIVER AND DEEDE DOMINICK
ERIC H. AND PATRICIA A. METZLER
MR.AND MRS. JOSEPH A. MIX
STEPHEN M. AND VICTORIA L. MIX
JOYCE C. QUAY
J. BOLLING SULLIVAN
THE ESTATE OF TATIANA DOMINICK
IN MEMORY OF ELAINE R. S. HODGES
THE ESTATE OF L. BRYANT MATHER, JR.
The Board of Directors of the Wedge Entomological Research Foundation is sincerely grateful to the late
of Mt. Salus, Mississippi who very generously bequeathed money to enable the Foundation to continue its research and publication programs.
The North American members of the tortricid tribes Sparganothini and Atteriini are revised. Eighty-three species in 12 genera are included in Sparganothini; a single representative of Atteriini reaches the region north of Mexico. Twenty-one new species are proposed: Amorbia vero Powell and J. Brown (Florida); Coelostathma placidana Powell and J. Brown (Florida); Sparganothis robinsonana Powell and J. Brown (Texas); Sparganothis tessellata Powell and J. Brown (Alabama); Sparganothis minimetallica Powell and J. Brown (Florida); Sparganothis boweri Powell and J. Brown (Wisconsin); Sparganothis sullivani Powell and J. Brown (North Carolina); Sparganothis lindalinea Powell and J. Brown (Mississippi); Sparganothis mcguinnessi Powell and J. Brown (New York); Sparganothis niteolinea Powell and J. Brown (Florida); Sparganothis azulispecca Powell and J. Brown (Alabama); Sparganothis richersi Powell and J. Brown (Arizona); Cenopis unicolorana Powell and J. Brown (Alabama); Cenopis eulongicosta Powell and J. Brown (New Jersey); Cenopis vabroui Powell and J. Brown (Louisiana); Platynota polingi Powell and J. Brown (Arizona); Platynota texana Powell and J. Brown (Texas); Platynota islameconae Powell and J. Brown (California); Platynota blanchardi Powell and J. Brown (Texas); Platynota zapatana Powell and J. Brown (Texas); and Platynota redingtonensis Powell and J. Brown (Arizona). The following new combinations are proposed: Cenopis matsudai (Yasuda), C. illustris (Razowski), C. ferreana (Busck), C. daphnana (McDunnough), and C. lamberti (Franclemont). The following new synonymies are proposed: Sparganothis salinana McDunnough with S. distincta Wlsm.; Sparganothis acerivorana MacKay with Cenopis pettitana (Rob.); Sparganothis albicaudana Busck with Cenopis mesospila (Zeller), the latter of which is a revised status; and Sparganothis scotiana McD. with Platynota exasperatana (Zeller). Keys to the adults of all genera and species are included. Adults of all species are illustrated in color, and male and female genitalia of all species are illustrated by line drawings or images.
Authors’ Acknowledgments 000
TORTRICIDAE (part) 000
History of the Classification of Tortricidae 000
Phylogeny of the subfamily Tortricinae 000
Materials and Methods 000
Tortricinae (part) 000
Life History 000
Description and Characters 000
Immature Stages 000
Key to Genera of Sparganothini 000
Key to Species 000
Key to Species 000
Sparganothoides (by James J Kruse and Jerry A. Powell 000
Key to Species 000
Key to Species 000
Key to Species 000
Key to Species 000
Atteriini Tortricinae (part) 000
Literature Cited 000
Table 1 000
Table 2 000
Monochrome plates 000
Color plates 000
Index to Animal Names 000
Index to Plant Names 000
This is the first fascicle of The Moths of North America that deals with the family Tortricidae. It is one of the largest moth families, exceeded in numbers of described species only by Noctuidae and Geometridae among Nearctic moths. Tortricidae represent 10–13% of the described moth species in North America and in state and local inventories, including numerous species of economic importance in agriculture and forestry. This fascicle provides a brief overview of the history of the systematics, phylogeny, and classification of the entire family and comprehensive treatments of the members of the tribes Sparganothini and Atteriini that occur north of the Mexican border. Both tribes attain their greatest diversity in the Neotropics; Atteriini are restricted to the New World, Sparganothini nearly so.
The 83 species treated (82 Sparganothini and one Atteriini) comprise a geographically widespread array of species and species complexes that range from southern humid tropical areas to northern boreal forests. Several are commonly encountered pest species; others are rarely collected, a few represented by specimens from the early part of the 20th century and unrecorded since. Many of the species conform to standard morphological concepts, exhibiting differences in forewing pattern that are corroborated by sometimes subtle differences in genitalia. In contrast, others have a bewildering array of forms that vary geographically with little or no difference in genitalia. The morphological circumscription of most species conforms to patterns illustrated by their DNA (cytochrome oxidase I, COI); however, for some species there is considerable conflict between these two data sources.
Although the classification of Tortricidae has remained fairly stable over the last few decades, our concepts of the phylogeny of taxa within the family have not. Regardless, Sparganothini and Atteriini are both well-defined groups, the monophyly of each is supported by numerous morphological and biological characters.
The nucleus of the revision of the Sparganothini was a Ph.D. thesis completed in 1950 at Cornell University by the late R. L. Lambert. The thesis was a worldwide revision of the tribe, then considered the subfamily “Sparganothidinae.” Subsequent to completion as his Ph.D. thesis, Lambert rewrote and modified portions of the text and figures, but his premature death in 1957 preceded completion of the revision for publication. The unfinished manuscript and specimens were transferred to T. N. Freeman, a tortricid specialist at the Canadian National Collection, Ottawa, and eventually to Powell at the University of California, Berkeley. In 1970–1971, while a visiting research fellow at the National Museum of Natural History (USNM), Smithsonian Institution, Powell studied the Neotropical species of Sparganothini, both the older material used by Lambert and more recent acquisitions at the USNM, as well as the type specimens at The British Museum of Natural History, London (now The Natural History Museum). The work resulted in considerable revision of Lambert’s concepts because he had not seen the type specimens of many of the older Neotropical species and had misinterpreted application of some names. In 1985 and 1986, Powell described three new genera of Nearctic sparganothines and several of Lambert’s new genera in order to create a more meaningful framework for the Neotropical fauna. However, little other progress was made on the Nearctic fauna, for which a reliable generic framework was already in place. Through support from the National Science Foundation, a PEET grant enabled postdoctoral and doctoral students, including Bernard Landry, Eugenie Phillips-Rodriguez, and James Kruse, to complete monographs of the primarily Neotropical genera Sparganothina and related taxa (2001), Amorbia (2007), and Sparganothoides (2009), respectively. Probably 90% of all specimens examined for those studies have been collected since Lambert’s time. Meanwhile, when Brown came onboard with the U.S.D.A.’s Systematic Entomology Laboratory, USNM, in 1997, he and Powell joined forces to complete a revision of the Nearctic members, the product of which is this MONA fascicle.
Identification keys are included, but often it is easier to compare a specimen in-hand with the color images in the plates. We have tried to include a range of phenotypes for the more variable species, but not always the full range of variation for both sexes. Although illustrations of the genitalia are provided for each species, the genitalia of many are so similar that they provide less than compelling characters for separating closely related species.
The label data used to generate the distribution maps from the specimens examined of previously described species are available on-line at the website of The Wedge Entomological Research Foundation [www.wedgefoundation.org]. Label data for the 21 species newly described are provided here.
EXAMPLE: AUTHORS’ ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
We are indebted to many individuals who added significantly to the value of this fascicle by allowing us to examine specimens in their care, for assistance with field and/or laboratory work, for preparation of graphics, for providing access to collecting localities, and for providing reviews of the manuscript.
The following allowed us to examine specimens in their care or provided material for our study: Paul H. Arnaud (CAS), George Austin (McGuire Center, Gainesville, FL; deceased), George J. Balogh (Portage, MI), Andre Blanchard (Houston, TX; deceased), Vernon A. Brou (Abita Springs, LA), Norris Bloomfield (San Diego, CA), Richard L. Brown (MEM), Charles V. Covell, Jr. (McGuire Center, Gainesville, FL), Terhune S. Dickle (Anthony, FL), Julian Donahue (LACM), David Faulkner (SDNHM), John D. Glaser (Baltimore, MD), John B. Heppner (FSCA), John G. Franclemont (CUIC; deceased), Edward C. Knudson (Houston, TX), Eric LaGasa (Olympia, WA), Jean-François Landry (CNC), Ronald H. Leuschner (Manhattan Beach, CA), Noel McFarland (Sierra Vista, AZ), Hugh McGuinness (Sag Harbor, NY), Ernest Mengersen (Olds College, AB), Eric H. Metzler (Alamogordo, NM), Raymond B. Nagel (Tucson, AZ), Paul A. Opler (CSU), Gregory Pohl (Northern Forestry Centre, Edmonton, AB), John Rawlins (CMNH), Kelly M. Richers (Bakersfield, CA), Frederick Rindge (AMNH), Steven M. Roble (Virginia Department of Conservation and Recreation, Richmond, VA), J. Bolling Sullivan (Beaufort, NC), Kevin Tuck (BMNH), James Vargo (Mishawaka, IN), David Wagner (University of Connecticut, Storrs, CT), J. Bruce Walsh (University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ), and Ronald Wielgus (Kneeland, CA).
Assistance with field work was received from James Adams, John A. De Benedictis, Norris Bloomfield, Soowon Cho, Douglas Ferguson (deceased), Jadranka Rota, David Wagner, and countless participants of bioblitzes and other faunal survey and inventory projects. The specimen database was enhanced by the efforts of Jon (Buck) Lewis, who assisted in compiling latitude/longitude for records. We thank Paul D. N. Hebert, Jeremy and Stephanie Dewaard, Evgeny V. Zakharov, and other staff of the Barcode of Life project at the Biodiversity Institute of Ontario for providing sequence data for nearly 700 specimens of North American Sparganothini. Specimens from which sequence data were derived were contributed by John De Benedictis, Jeremy Dewaard, Daniel and Louis Handfield, Jean-François Landry, J. Bolling Sullivan, David Wagner, and many others.
Images of the adults were skillfully captured by Jocelyn Gill (Canadian National Collection of Insects and Arachnids), and most drawings of genitalia with prepared by Kuniko Arakawa. Plates were arranged with the assistance of Marie Metz, Taina Litwak, and Lucrecia Rodriguez. Additional graphic support was received from Marie Metz, Diana Marquez, and David Adamski. Distribution maps were prepared by Mark Metz.
For helpful review of the manuscript we acknowledge the generous contributions of time and expertise of Richard Brown, Natalia Vandenberg, Thomas Henry, and two anonymous reviewers.
[EXAMPLE: INTRODUCTORY MATERIAL OF FASCICLE]